5 ms·

I think its a mistake to fight datacenters and AI. Taking a step back, if the US unilaterally stops producing AI will other countries stop? The answer is clear

by vmg12 4mo ago

I think its a mistake to fight datacenters and AI. Taking a step back, if the US unilaterally stops producing AI will other countries stop? The answer is clearly no. Datacenters and ai can be built and trained anywhere. If you want control over AI you should want it to be built in your own country where you have political representation. All preventing datacenter buildout will do is ensure that the price remains high and only really rich organizations can access it.

conartist6 4mo ago
You could say the same of human intelligence and competence and social trust. I think it's a mistake to stop producing those things.
- bpodgursky 4mo ago
  Uh yes you could but what's your point. If we make ourselves dumber, it doesn't make China dumber, human intelligence will just leave us behind.
- Abh1Works 4mo ago
  Fair point, but you dont produce intelligence, competence and social trust. Essentially a society earns it. Is the reason that competence and social trust are declining because of AI? Maybe, but not only that.
catigula 4mo ago
There's no such thing as 'control over AI'; that goes double for someone who is a complete nobody plebian with a little baby stock portfolio. You know, basically everyone except for a select few.
- goatlover 4mo ago
  The industry can be regulated and taxed like anything else.
  - UtopiaPunk 4mo ago
    Yeah, and it should be. But the USA, at least in this current moment, builds regulations catering to corporations and the rich over people's general needs. So the regulations that are on the table at the national level are ineffective. It's easier for normal people to influence local regulations, but local regulations just push the problem somewhere else. However disdain for AI is so widespread that this is actually kind of effective.
    - riversflow 4mo ago
      disdain for dumping industrial sludge into rivers is quite high too. if you don’t demand regulated domestic production it will just get moved to the least regulated place with the best underlying economics, I imagine you know this though…
      - UtopiaPunk 4mo ago
        Yeah, I agree with you! Regulation of that kind of environmental problem works better the more land is covered. National is best, statewide is meaningful (if you are in a geographically large state). Local is better than doing literally nothing, but it does have the nasty side effect of pushing the problem out of people's sight :(
3sk_ask8 4mo ago
Yes, it is vital to create more slop and Anime figures. We need to win that race at all costs. So urgent that Andreesen has a Super PAC to push the dangerous China narrative.
gensym 4mo ago
For people worried about their livelihoods, there's value in slowing AI adoption to give our economy time to transition rather than just throwing a lot of people out of work all at the same time.
- vmg12 4mo ago
  Did slowing down factory build-outs stop globalization from gutting the midwest? I think there are direct parallels here. We either automate ourselves or someone else will automate us and we will have no control.
  - gensym 4mo ago
    I grew up in Illinois in the 80s and 90s, so I had a front-row seat to that gutting. Watching my dad move from factory to factory, go to night school to learn tool-and-die and then see all the tool-and-die jobs move overseas. So no, it didn't stop it. But the fact that it didn't happen overnight did allow my dad to feed his family and make sure my brother and I had better opportunities. If that gutting had happened over a couple years rather than a couple decades, we would have starved, and the knowledge that we did it "ourselves" rather than have it forced upon us by globalization wouldn't have stocked our pantry. So, yes, there are direct parallels here. I want to give US families a chance to adapt.
UtopiaPunk 4mo ago
You're starting with an assumption that AI is, on the whole, a net positive for society. A lot of people would disagree.
- gyanchawdhary 4mo ago
  It’s great for society. It may not be working for you, but don’t project that on the rest of the world.
  - npinsker 4mo ago
    That’s so far from obvious. The most concerning possibilities for me — like kids not learning how to struggle or problem solve on their own — won’t be resolved for many years.
- aspenmartin 4mo ago
  Of course and a lot of people disagree that vaccines work, why does this negate any hard evidence?
  - kami23 4mo ago
    I am unsure what you mean by hard evidence in the context of AI then, what is the evidence we are negating in your view?
  - goatlover 4mo ago
    We could have had this same argument about social media 15 years ago before hard evidence showed it's not quite the net benefit to society it was touted as.
  - jameslars 4mo ago
    Is the hard evidence of AI being a net improvement for society in the room with us now?
    - rickydroll 4mo ago
swatcoder 4mo ago
Even if you do want datacenters built in your country, you probably don't want them built at the maximally explotative locations that their developers pursue. They don't provide appreciable community value and they effectively mine limited local resources (power, grid capacity, land, water) and sell it as compute, immediately diverting the profit back out of the local economy and into very distant business accounts instead. Builders choose their targets specifically by how well they can strong-arm weak/vulnerable communities into letting them build these mines through political influence and misrepresentation. It's bad. What you probably want is to leverage their global market value to establish new power and grid capacity in undeveloped areas, perhaps to someday become a seed for new communities that grow around the infrastructure development work. But that's much more expensive than bullying and seducing a weak city council so it won't happen with regional/state/federal regulatory protections or incentives that push them away from the exploitative opportunities and towards the constructive ones.
Henchman21 4mo ago
Counterpoint: Only C-suite members and billionaires have political representation in the US.
nancyminusone 4mo ago
Why should I think that I "own" or control a datacenter built in my town compared to one built in another country? It's pretty unlikely anything I do will have any effect on what goes on inside one even if I work there. The greatest control I have is probably to have it not get built, though even that is minimal as it has failed to stop the one that is indeed being built in my town.

by vmg12 4mo ago

conartist6 4mo ago

You could say the same of human intelligence and competence and social trust. I think it's a mistake to stop producing those things.

bpodgursky 4mo ago
Uh yes you could but what's your point. If we make ourselves dumber, it doesn't make China dumber, human intelligence will just leave us behind.
Abh1Works 4mo ago
Fair point, but you dont produce intelligence, competence and social trust. Essentially a society earns it. Is the reason that competence and social trust are declining because of AI? Maybe, but not only that.

catigula 4mo ago

There's no such thing as 'control over AI'; that goes double for someone who is a complete nobody plebian with a little baby stock portfolio. You know, basically everyone except for a select few.

goatlover 4mo ago
The industry can be regulated and taxed like anything else.
- UtopiaPunk 4mo ago
  Yeah, and it should be. But the USA, at least in this current moment, builds regulations catering to corporations and the rich over people's general needs. So the regulations that are on the table at the national level are ineffective. It's easier for normal people to influence local regulations, but local regulations just push the problem somewhere else. However disdain for AI is so widespread that this is actually kind of effective.
  - riversflow 4mo ago
    disdain for dumping industrial sludge into rivers is quite high too. if you don’t demand regulated domestic production it will just get moved to the least regulated place with the best underlying economics, I imagine you know this though…
    - UtopiaPunk 4mo ago
      Yeah, I agree with you! Regulation of that kind of environmental problem works better the more land is covered. National is best, statewide is meaningful (if you are in a geographically large state). Local is better than doing literally nothing, but it does have the nasty side effect of pushing the problem out of people's sight :(

3sk_ask8 4mo ago

Yes, it is vital to create more slop and Anime figures. We need to win that race at all costs. So urgent that Andreesen has a Super PAC to push the dangerous China narrative.

gensym 4mo ago

For people worried about their livelihoods, there's value in slowing AI adoption to give our economy time to transition rather than just throwing a lot of people out of work all at the same time.

vmg12 4mo ago
Did slowing down factory build-outs stop globalization from gutting the midwest? I think there are direct parallels here. We either automate ourselves or someone else will automate us and we will have no control.
- gensym 4mo ago
  I grew up in Illinois in the 80s and 90s, so I had a front-row seat to that gutting. Watching my dad move from factory to factory, go to night school to learn tool-and-die and then see all the tool-and-die jobs move overseas. So no, it didn't stop it. But the fact that it didn't happen overnight did allow my dad to feed his family and make sure my brother and I had better opportunities. If that gutting had happened over a couple years rather than a couple decades, we would have starved, and the knowledge that we did it "ourselves" rather than have it forced upon us by globalization wouldn't have stocked our pantry. So, yes, there are direct parallels here. I want to give US families a chance to adapt.

UtopiaPunk 4mo ago

You're starting with an assumption that AI is, on the whole, a net positive for society. A lot of people would disagree.

gyanchawdhary 4mo ago
It’s great for society. It may not be working for you, but don’t project that on the rest of the world.
- npinsker 4mo ago
  That’s so far from obvious. The most concerning possibilities for me — like kids not learning how to struggle or problem solve on their own — won’t be resolved for many years.
aspenmartin 4mo ago
Of course and a lot of people disagree that vaccines work, why does this negate any hard evidence?
- kami23 4mo ago
  I am unsure what you mean by hard evidence in the context of AI then, what is the evidence we are negating in your view?
- goatlover 4mo ago
  We could have had this same argument about social media 15 years ago before hard evidence showed it's not quite the net benefit to society it was touted as.
- jameslars 4mo ago
  Is the hard evidence of AI being a net improvement for society in the room with us now?
  - rickydroll 4mo ago

swatcoder 4mo ago

Even if you do want datacenters built in your country, you probably don't want them built at the maximally explotative locations that their developers pursue. They don't provide appreciable community value and they effectively mine limited local resources (power, grid capacity, land, water) and sell it as compute, immediately diverting the profit back out of the local economy and into very distant business accounts instead. Builders choose their targets specifically by how well they can strong-arm weak/vulnerable communities into letting them build these mines through political influence and misrepresentation. It's bad. What you probably want is to leverage their global market value to establish new power and grid capacity in undeveloped areas, perhaps to someday become a seed for new communities that grow around the infrastructure development work. But that's much more expensive than bullying and seducing a weak city council so it won't happen with regional/state/federal regulatory protections or incentives that push them away from the exploitative opportunities and towards the constructive ones.

Henchman21 4mo ago

Counterpoint: Only C-suite members and billionaires have political representation in the US.

nancyminusone 4mo ago

Why should I think that I "own" or control a datacenter built in my town compared to one built in another country? It's pretty unlikely anything I do will have any effect on what goes on inside one even if I work there. The greatest control I have is probably to have it not get built, though even that is minimal as it has failed to stop the one that is indeed being built in my town.