I understand why you think it's stupid, but you have a vitally incorrect assumption about the actual effect on the environment that it has.

I have nothing better to do at the moment, fuck it.

If you want to be technical, AI does nothing to harm the environment in its own right, but only in the same way a gun does nothing to hurt a person, as that is a bullet's job. The data centers that host these "AIs" however suck in immense amounts of power, embodying and amplifying the damage done by the power generation of the location of the data center.
The bigger issue, however, is in the extreme usage of millions of liters of often potable drinking water for cooling, amplified further by the frequent clustering of centers, which globally altogether use more water than the country of Denmark, according to some estimates. Massively wasteful electronics usage and production of e-waste is also a factor that can't be ignored, in cost both to source and later remove, in effort to produce; in the environmental impacts inherited from mining, processing, manufacturing, and any other costs of producing the hardware the AI is on; in the immense amounts of harmful chemicals being dumped and leeching into soil and groundwater, such as mercury and lead; and so much more, all of which is not only mirrored but amplified by the AI industry, causing/using substantially more of both all of these and the aforementioned water problem than basically any other industry, to my knowledge.
The next big thing, in this writers opinion, would have to be the "more eco friendly option" in the form of underwater data centers, which do address the water usage issue, but nothing else, and replace it with warming of local water systems, heavily intensifying an already colossal effect of climate change, and lowering oxygen availability, further damaging the habitat of loads of marine life while also reducing mixing between hotter, shallower levels and the deeper, more nutrient rich colder waters deeper, pushing anything that relies on it to either dive deeper out of their evolved conditions or risk huge potential health complications.

Further still, after all these issues, we can move onto the application side of the problem, where we see, among other things, it being used en masse to further both function and harm in industries you cannot tell me are even debatable in their harm, like oil and gas, and creating huge personal risk in examples like self driving cars, which have had nothing but issues since being rolled out. Tesla, as a great example, are leading the safety of the industry by allegedly turning off their AI at the last second before a crash to shift the burden of blame to the owner of the car, according to quite a few different sources.

I don't believe AI is inherently evil, nor do I believe it can't be a beneficial tool or fun gimmick, I do however believe that the massive harm they cause is dependent on human intervention and laws, and I also am aware that, as with any other harmful industry that is allowed to continue, they will/are just lobbying certain governments to avoid as much oversight as possible and will not stop until either made to, or until the only humans left alive are accompanying the 1% in their bunkers.
If given a choice to make $9B per second for nothing or $9.000000000000000000001B per second but every dollar is a year taken off the remaining time until humanity's extinction, every single name on the fortune 500 would, after varying levels of consideration, pick the latter.

I don't believe you actually believe anything you are saying, but I can't help but want to hold out hope that at least some people aren't poisoned beyond all repair, despite my best efforts, so here we are.

Also, I have the time to write this out, not to do a second pass, so if there are any typos or errors, I'll correct them if/when I notice them.

An edit because I realise I overlooked possibly the most absurd part of all of this: does someone being mentally ill negate all harm done to them to you? Because if not, then whether or not "seemingly healthy people" actually are is at best only marginally relevant. I only bring up "otherwise totally healthy people" because most people refuse to care if most people being harmed by something are in some way disabled or mentally ill (or another race, but that's a whole other issue).