Consider the original post I responded to. It asked two questions.

>are you skeptical xai would wiggle around regulations and pollute a city?

But they were responding to I'm incredibly skeptical of any claim that xAI's power use is putting a dent in the local environment which makes no claim as to whether they might obey or disobey regulations, the words "putting a dent" in the local envionnent*

The data from the article does not sufficiently address this, it uses satellite data and a short time frame. Without specifying the resolution of their data (which could be kilometer sized pixels) their claims about locality is in doubt. In short term measures, trends are harder to spot, a rise over months could just mean it is less windy in the nollowing season. Without a ground level meadurement of the air quality and a evaluation of the total local emission from all sources, you cannot hope to measure the health impact of a single cause.

None of that says that they are not polluting. What it says is that this is not evidence of it. Someone expressed skepticism based on the proportional emission of one of many of their ability to move the dial, and was challenged based upon the likelihood of what they might do. Claiming skeptasism that a thief could rob Fort Knox, is not a claim that the thief is honest

>by “agenda pushing” do you mean those who have an agenda to have breathable air?

I simply cannot believe that this is a reasonable interpretation of what they said.

That's the thing that motivated me to post on this thread. That the first post I responded to here was attacking the player, not the ball.

I continue to post replies here out of my own sense of duty to fully explain my position to promote understanding, I'm not trying to win anything here, I only want people to see a honestly held perspective.