The last paragraph has the explanation: explanation:
This means that datacentres – and the AI boom – carry a disproportionate share of US growth, and a large part of why the world’s largest economy, despite significant headwinds, still looks healthy. Any dent in this expenditure could have economic, and thus political, consequences.
AI lets people be lazy. Anyone not heavily invested in magic machines that let people be lazy are wasting a huge opportunity. People are soooo lazy.
how much of a chief executive or senior manager’s job can be safely outsourced to a bot?
All of it. Probably more successfully since it’s based on research and facts, not emotional speculation. Cheaper, too.
That is a lot of words that did not mention surveillance state or distopian shit kabob.
I don’t think that was a point of the article though.
Why are governments and business so keen on getting us to accept AI? Every article that doesnt mention the end goal is survalence state is just a fluff piece to normalize it.
Hey, I agree with you with the surveillance. :)
I think the point of the article is showing in numbers other aspect of why AI is pushed so hard, and its simply money; how the costs of AI shaped and what can we expect in next years, or maybe even months. The surveillance aspect is widely known and where I agree it should be mentioned, there are different, more important parts that will have bigger impact on our future lives than just lack of privacy.
Oligarchs put too much money in AI and now they have only one choice: to just go all in with AI to the end. The question is, what will be the end?
When does the private data market just get saturated and the novelty die?
Fair, I am pissed. I read the whole article and the question, for what hangs very heavy. All this money is moving hands. Its a financial mcguffen. Its whatever you think it is.
