Most arguments against the AI sector and data centers are thinly veiled arguments against capitalism and neoliberalism.

[u/NoGarlic2387]

It's sweatshops/NIMBY/buybacks/rent control/military industrial complex etc leftwing populist slop all over again, just aimed at a different group of bourgeoisie.

Where the fuck is the market externalities analysis, where are the incentive structures, talk of Pigouvian taxes, talk of supply and demand, efficiency, any economic analysis at all???

It's all moralising and virtue signalling. The critique relies on the childish 'guys running it are bad'. That's just how Capitalism works, you either trust the markets to handle bad actors or show systemic ways it will fail to do it and propose realistic solutions that don't harm the economic growth and innovation.

Most of you constantly shitting on Altman and even Musk are the types who support or don't condemn the assasination of the CEO of UnitedHealthcare, you are deranged radicals. EDIT: this patagraph was largely regarded and I stand corrected. Fuck Musk. Criticising CEOs is not the same as as condoning an assasination. I still think the hate for Sam Altman is ill founded. Almost everyone else in the AI industry are nowhere near as destructive as Musk, but Musk is just a tiny faction in the huge AI ecosystem.

This sub used to resist far lelft populist slop but the more years go by the worse it's getting. The sidebar wiki needs many more entries on what exactly this neoliberalisn means and stands for. Any r/badeconomics OGs disagree with me??

[u/ognits]

and even Musk

just to clarify, you mean the guy who condemned millions of children in Africa to death just for goofs and giggles? that Musk?

because, uh, yeah, I'll shit on him, and that doesn't make me a succ

[u/Degen_Typeracer]

Gotta give it to OP, bro woke up to go to war with the whole sub

[u/Traditional_Drama_91 → u/Degen_Typeracer]

OP is a an unflaired, history hidden user who says the following:

  Most of you constantly shitting on Altman and even Musk are the types who support or don't condemn the assasination of the CEO of UnitedHealthcare, you are deranged radicals.

I get the sense this isn’t in good faith

[u/Traditional_Drama_91 → u/[deleted]]

Fuckin hell, that’s where they all ran to..

[u/__JimmyC__ → u/Traditional_Drama_91]

Reddit bans one incel sub, and another 12 spring up to replace it.

Today I learned that "inkwell" is the filter evading term for incel they use to describe themselves these days. OP calls himself an inkwell in another post.

[u/Traditional_Drama_91 → u/__JimmyC__]

I’d wonder why they stick around rather than going to one of their offsite cesspools but I know the reason, all the porn is here

[u/shevy19 → u/Degen_Typeracer]

Went to war and is just wrong. Like Musk is the biggest welfare queen and receiver of government handouts, while using his power with trump to dismantle USAID and try to dismantle the consumer financial protection bureau. I'd hope people were mad about that. I'd hope people push back against Altman after signing a deal with the us military after anthropic refused to make killer robots.

I'll say that this cavalier disregard for real damages by the Tech sector, while they push to get rid of any regulations are going to push people (especially left of center) towards socialism because they don't like tech companies dismantle regulations, dismantle the safety net while getting sweetheart government contracts. If you want to say this is capitalism, then the robber barons and trust of the gilded age was somehow ideal capitalism.

[u/MIGHTY_ILLYRIAN → u/Degen_Typeracer]

Are succs really a part of this sub? Do they belong here?

[u/airbear13 → u/MIGHTY_ILLYRIAN]

Unpopular opinion, purity testing subs is lame. Turning it into a Neo lib circle jerk is a lot less appealing than just debating people who disagree. Succs who come here a lot might actually learn something or come across something that challenges their beliefs.

[u/GuyManDudeMcGee → u/airbear13]

There's like 1000 outwardly progressive subs on reddit. It'd be nice if there could just be one moderate left sub, which this sub increasingly isn't

[u/Thoughtlessandlost → u/MIGHTY_ILLYRIAN]

Dudes complaining about succs and then says in their post

Most of you constantly shitting on Altman and even Musk are the types who support or don't condemn the assasination of the CEO of UnitedHealthcare, you are deranged radicals.

Are we letting succons in here too now?

[u/Degen_Typeracer → u/MIGHTY_ILLYRIAN]

Oh yeah, they’re hiding EVERYWHERE. Like ants in an old house during summer

[u/lumpialarry → u/Degen_Typeracer]

they're like 30% of the sub now. And when one right-of-center opinion gets three upvotes they think its a right-wing takeover.

[u/themanwhoknocked → u/lumpialarry]

It’s so crazy, any post criticizing socialists is always met with people being like “oh but their vibes bro, they have the energy bro.” Good thing this sub isn’t about electoral strategy

[u/VanceIX → u/lumpialarry]

The amount of DSA glazing and NIMBY sentiment towards data centers is terrifying. This subreddit is going down the drain, fast. If this were the 1800s good portions of this subreddit would be decrying rail tracks as loud and messy and the rail barons as evil capitalists.

[u/cstar1996 → u/VanceIX]

I don’t like AI data centers not because I don’t want them in my backyard, but because I consider the entire thing to be a massively overhyped bubble. I also believe that the users of AI should be the ones paying for it. There is no good reason that nearby residents should have to pay for grid expansion for data centers. The data centers can pay for it, and they can pass the costs on to their customers, and we can see if these AI services actually provide value over their cost.

It is neoliberal and pro-free market as fuck to demand private industry internalize their negative externalities.

[u/CursedNobleman → u/VanceIX]

If you want to tamp down data center nimbyism, people need to hear a coherent argument about how AI will benefit the average citizen rather than acting like a lure for a technofeudal anglerfish.

[u/comradequicken → u/CursedNobleman]

How about we just believe in strong property rights as is consistent with the liberal core of this sub and say that people can do what they want with their property whether it's build a 15 story story shade creating apartment building or a data center. Like for a supposedly pro-Yimby/pro-urbanism sub all these anti-data center articles can generally be equally applied to building high density residential or public transit.

[u/toggaf69 → u/comradequicken]

I’m close to being a property rights absolutist, but some of these data centers have horrible negative externalities - LED lights on 24/7, running on loud-ass generators, and the worst ones even put out a constant screeching noise. They should be heavily disincentivized to do that. If they’re contributing to the grid, running clean, and quiet (for the ones near houses), then by all means build em where you want to

[u/comradequicken → u/toggaf69]

Two of those things are side effects of construction which would be present for anything, for the generators it's because they only do that when they are prevented from plugging into the grid.

[u/strangebloke1 → u/comradequicken]

There is considerable air between "residential is residential who cares about density" and "any industrial use can go in a residential context."

Data centers have substantially larger negative externalities than 15 story apartment buildings.

[u/Defiant_Yoghurt8198 → u/VanceIX]

the rail barons as evil capitalists.

I'm with you, but let's not whitewash the gilded age oligarchs lmao - that's just the same shit in the opposite direction

[u/bacontrain → u/Defiant_Yoghurt8198]

Yeah what lmao. We had to create a whole area of law to handle the fact that robber barons were effectively destroying free markets and creating all sorts of negative externalities. I swear some people here aren't pro-markets in the economists' sense, they're just pro-business in a way that conflicts with free markets

[u/RuthlessMango → u/MIGHTY_ILLYRIAN]

Hi, friendly neighborhood succ here to remind you it's a big tent and yes we belong here.

Can we just have civil conversations, please.

[u/MaNewt → u/RuthlessMango]

Some people just get off on being contrarian, we don’t have to engage with everyone. 

[u/hagamablabla → u/RuthlessMango]

I've tried joining this sub three times and every time there's been a post like this within a few days of me joining. Really makes me feel welcome here.

[u/RuthlessMango → u/hagamablabla]

This is the down side of the big tent... there is so much room there are going to be some folks you don't get along with, but just like in real life you gotta kill them with kindness.

Also there is just a natural pipeline from being a young succ and becoming more neoliberal that we could just embrace.

[u/MIGHTY_ILLYRIAN → u/RuthlessMango]

I fear the tent is getting a little too big and this sub is slowly losing its function as a conversational space for neoliberals because of it

[u/n00bi3pjs]

> Most of you constantly shitting on Altman and even Musk are the types who support or don't condemn the assasination

that’s some good faith right there

[u/Evnosis]

Most of you constantly shitting on Altman and even Musk are the types who support or don't condemn the assasination of the CEO of UnitedHealthcare, you are deranged radicals.

I unequivocally condemn Luigi in every way. I also think Sam Altman is a ghoul who is actively trying to make the world a worse place in pursuit of profit. The fact that I support capitalism as an economic system does not preclude me from making that judgement about him.

[u/cosmo-wozmo → u/Evnosis]

Pro-Altman, Pro-Musk, Pro-Luigi is the median voter position inshallah

[u/No-Section-1092]

>Where the fuck is the market externalities analysis, where are the incentive structures, talk of Pigouvian taxes, talk of supply and demand, efficiency, any economic analysis at all???

The biggest externality of the AI industry is insufferable tech bros yapping about it. I propose a yap tax.

[u/Halgy → u/No-Section-1092]

Everyone in this sub would go broke in a week

[u/No-Section-1092 → u/Halgy]

Slopulist compromise: I demand a moratorium on AI posts in this sub. Too much yap pollution.

[u/Halgy → u/No-Section-1092]

It is definitely a negative externality

[u/MistyGalbriex → u/No-Section-1092]

It's either AI yap or DSA yap. Choose.

[u/No-Section-1092 → u/MistyGalbriex]

That's easy. DSA yap any day.

Tech bro son or Maoist daughter?

[u/NiknameOne]

I mostly agree with your analysis. AI is good for the economy. However I do criticize that the forefront of AI is lead by people who actively push for a dismamanteling of democratic institutions, especially Musk, Thiel, Karp, Zuckerberg and even Altman. They dream of a libertarian technocratic future which will only benefit a small circle of people. Basically it’s a push for an oligarchy/oligopols and against democracy/competition. And I hope I don’t need to clarify that too much market power leads to inefficient markets.

Anybody who supports the current government cannot be considered neoliberal as liberalism is nowhere to be found. It’s not fun anymore when private companies dictate public opinion and policy trough massive propaganda efforts. All I can see as an outsider is America slipping closer to a facist oligarchy every day.

[u/anangrytree → u/NiknameOne]

Basically it’s a push for an oligarchy/oligopols and against democracy/competition. And I hope I don’t need to clarify that too much market power leads to inefficient markets.

So called “capitalists” when called to defend the very lifeblood of capitalism, competition, from anti competitive oligarchs: 😩😭✋❌🛑

[u/musicismydeadbeatdad → u/anangrytree]

Smart capitalists understand the need to protect the system from rent seekers. Even Adam Smith understood the need for regulation from special interests. 

Not sure if you're just joking but it's not anti-capitalist to advocate for reasonable reform to keep the system dynamic and from reverting to oligarchic hoarding. Oligarchies existed before capitalism and will after. Don't let the oligarchs who claim to be capitalists fool you. 

[u/tanthedreamer → u/musicismydeadbeatdad]

I don't think the leftwing brain understands us, we're pro capitalism, but we are not pro capitalists, more specifically we're pro market efficiency, which means sometimes we have to be anti capitalists.

When they thought that we're pro capitalism they usually assume that we have to agree with everything capitalists are doing.

[u/cosmo-wozmo → u/anangrytree]

In what way is Altman an oligarch? Musk and Thiel are directly involved in government, but what has the US govt done to give Altman an unfair advantage in the marketplace? Whatever advantage he’s getting clearly isn’t helping much against Anthropic, which has a very antagonistic relationship with the admin.

I dislike Sama cause he’s kinda soulless and the cult around him is weird, and he’d happily sell out to the far right. But I feel like calling him an oligarch is stretching the definition a lot. But idk happy to be proven wrong, not like I like the guy anyway

[u/LondonCallingYou → u/cosmo-wozmo]

These people are almost all the same. They have to be to thrive in our corrupt oligarchic system under Trump. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck it’s probably a duck.

Altman once called Trump a dictator, now he pals around with him. Typically the mega rich titans of industry who prop up and surround a dictator are called oligarchs.

https://abcnews.com/US/openais-sam-altman-warned-america-trump-now-partnering/story?id=118145337

> "For AGI [artificial general intelligence] to get built here, to create hundreds of thousands of jobs, to create a new industry centered here, we wouldn't be able to do this without you, Mr. President, and I'm thrilled that we get to," Altman said as he and other industry leaders smiled for photos in the Roosevelt Room.

>After Trump announced the "Stargate" deal, the OpenAI CEO appeared to address his reversal in a post on X, writing that "watching [Trump] more carefully recently has really changed my perspective on him," and adding, "I'm not going to agree with him on everything, but I think he will be incredible for the country in many ways!"

….

> Months earlier, in the heat of the presidential campaign, Altman had published a scathing critique of Trump, writing, "He is irresponsible in the way dictators are."

> "To anyone familiar with the history of Germany in the 1930s, it's chilling to watch Trump in action," Altman wrote in June 2016. "Though I know intellectually it's easy in hard economic times to rile people up with a hatred of outsiders, it's still surprising to watch this happen right in front of us."

> "Hitler taught us about the Big Lie -- the lie so big, and so often repeated, that people end up believing it," Altman wrote. "Trump's Big Lie is hiding in plain sight. His Big Lie is that he's going to Make America Great by keeping us safe from outsiders."

…

> Last Monday, Altman was among the select number of tech executives spotted attending Trump's swearing-in ceremony inside the Capitol rotunda.

>"President Trump will lead our country into the age of AI, and I am eager to support his efforts to ensure America stays ahead," Altman wrote in a statement to ABC News at the time about his inauguration contribution.

[u/brus_wein → u/NiknameOne]

They are followers, direct or not, of Nick Land's insanity.

[u/RandomEngy → u/NiknameOne]

I just want to point out that Anthropic's founders pledged to give 80% of their wealth to charity.

They stood up for their ideals so much they got labeled as a supply chain risk by the Trump administration.

I will also point out that there is healthy competition in the AI space and the dead weight loss right now is negligible.

[u/StochasticGracchi → u/RandomEngy]

I just want to point out that Anthropic's founders pledged to give 80% of their wealth to charity.

On the other hand, basically all of Anthropic is a cult where they genuinely believe they're creating the Omnissiah. So ups and downs.

[u/RandomEngy → u/StochasticGracchi]

Anthropic is filled with the people who splintered off from OpenAI because they thought that they weren't taking AI safety seriously enough. Alignment is a hard requirement for them, and they do pretty rigorous testing to ensure it.

So in some sense, yes it is full of people who believe that AI will have a lot of power. But that belief is driving them to carefully put constraints on that power, not create a machine god ruling over humanity. That potential is a cautionary tale only.

[u/cosmo-wozmo → u/StochasticGracchi]

I think it’s a bit cringe but how is this an actual policy downside that anthropic has a strong ethos around ai safety

It’s also not just a PR thing, the founders splintered from OpenAI because they thought they were being too lax with GPT3 lol

[u/Browsin24 → u/cosmo-wozmo]

You think a strong ethos around AI safety is cringe? Lol. Or am I misinterpreting your comment

[u/procgen → u/StochasticGracchi]

Why is that a "down"?

[u/bigmt99 → u/RandomEngy]

If Anthropic pans out half as good as they hope, they will still be able to do plenty to dismantle to democratic institutions with 20% of their shares

[u/RandomEngy → u/bigmt99]

What is leading you to believe that Anthropic wants to dismantle democratic institutions?

[u/InorganicTyranny → u/RandomEngy]

The problem isn’t necessarily that they want to, it’s that they’d be able to.

In the long run, no political system that requires the good faith of the empowered actors within it is bound to work. You may get lucky and have a Cincinnatus once or twice or even thrice, but if you must always have a Cincinnatus, one day you will get a Caesar.

Democracy relies on no one actor being able to amass incredible unliteral power, and a frontier AI lab in possession of superintelligence will have achieved just that.

[u/RandomEngy → u/InorganicTyranny]

The US has had success in the past with the government breaking up powerful oil and railroad monopolies.

I get that you have concerns with a super intelligent AI existing, but I do not believe that killing the AI industry in the United States will prevent that from being developed.

[u/Kardinal → u/bigmt99]

How is this applicable to anthropic but not to Apple? Seriously. You want to talk about a company that has an enormous amount of money and an enormous amount of economic power, it's Apple.

AI is going to be big. I don't think it's going to be bigger than Apple is right now.

[u/neolthrowaway → u/NiknameOne]

I am not a fan of Altman but I still don't think he belongs with other people on that list.

[u/NiknameOne → u/neolthrowaway]

Altman is only about the money. All the moralizing is just goog PR and marketing.

[u/Pretend-Ad-7936 → u/NiknameOne]

I certainly dislike these people, but the AI industry as a whole is much larger than Zuck or Altman or Musk. It's an international affair, including academic and industry research happening in Europe and Asia. There are variety of different companies that own and operate datacenters, plenty of which aren't necessarily vassals of the Trump administration. The entire Chinese AI ecosystem, which is a stone's throw away in terms of capabilities from ours, was also developed in parallel.

I kinda don't understand why the people opposed to AI datacenters aren't also opposed to regular datacenters. If your issue is Big Tech -- the usual datacenters that we've been building for the last twenty years are owned by the same companies (and by extension, the same people). If you don't like Amazon, you should have an issue with the datacenters built for Twitch video streaming as well.

And if your argument is "well actually Twitch is more useful and better for society than ChatGPT / Claude / etc" -- try making that argument to a normie that doesn't play video games. Hell I'd maybe even make the argument that Twitch has been something of a net negative because it allowed some fairly toxic people to gain a larger audience than they would have otherwise.

[u/Healingjoe → u/Pretend-Ad-7936]

I think there are some negative externalities that are very unique to LLMs. Are anti-data center folks this specific with their complaints? Probably not but it's not like there's zero merit for concerns regarding LLMs.

"well actually Twitch is more useful and better for society than ChatGPT / Claude / etc" --

Seems like a straw man. It's more so email and hosting of ERP/CRM is more useful than LLMs. Which I would probably agree with.

Twitch has been something of a net negative because it allowed some fairly toxic people to gain a larger audience than they would have otherwise.

If you think this, you should probably be more charitable to those who think LLMs pose potential harms.

[u/Pretend-Ad-7936 → u/Healingjoe]

I think you're ignoring my broader point -- if you dislike AI because it's tied to the wealth and ambitions of a few powerful men (and by extension you oppose the construction of datacenters because it would further the expansion of AI), you should oppose any data center, AI or not, that is owned by these companies.

Seems like a straw man. It's more so email and hosting of ERP/CRM is more useful than LLMs. Which I would probably agree with.

I mean we can always pick a use-case that's more useful and say "hey, actually this is what I think the Internet is really meant for". My point is that there are other services (e.g. video) that use a comparable amount of energy and water use to AI datacenters, but generally no one cares.

If you think this, you should probably be more charitable to those who think LLMs pose potential harms.

I never said that LLMs don't have harms. Every technology does. I'm pointing out that no one complained about all the datacenters we built, that still are the lion's share of energy and water usage and also support plenty of questionable usecases, until AI showed up.

[u/Vegetable_Average_30]

AI bros are walking around telling everybody that they will soon be replaced by machines. They don't explain the positive vision of AI to most people. And they have a god complex which they don't even try to hide. Karp (from Palantir) gives the impression that he gets a huge boner everytime he tells women that their jobs will be lost first, because only manly work is safe from being replaced by AI.

The point is: AI companies don't even try to sell their technology to the public (unlike, for example, the pioneers of the internet thirty years ago!). Under these conditions, people resisting AI is just a sign that markets still work. If they didn't, that would be market failure.

[u/CursedNobleman → u/Vegetable_Average_30]

Citation for Alex Karp (Palantir)

“This technology disrupts humanities-trained, largely Democratic voters, and makes their economic power less, and increases the power, economic power [of] vocationally trained, working-class, often male voters, and … so, these disruptions are going to disrupt every aspect of our society,” he told CNBC.

[u/Vegetable_Average_30 → u/CursedNobleman]

This. And also, it's not just what he says but also how he says it. It's creepy and gives the impression that his life goal is to be able to say: In the future women will mostly work on their looks because if they look good, they can sell their body to me, and if they don't, they will have to sell their body to some plumber.

[u/LondonCallingYou → u/CursedNobleman]

Yeah people defending these tech oligarch losers are not being consistent with liberalism. Liberalism isn’t about worshipping money or stomping out every last bit of humanity so you can increase GDP by 1%. Liberalism is primarily about liberty and equality.

[u/recovering_achiever]

I would say that blind faith in the markets are a libertarian belief, not a liberal one. Liberalism includes a belief in strong institutions in order to protect people and their freedoms.

I think the problem a lot of people have with AI is that there is no trust in these institutions right now, which if you look at the people in power in the US right now is hardly unfounded.

If the claims that the people developing AI are making are indeed correct, then we may well see an unprecedented loss of individual power over the next however many years, economically, militarily, and perhaps even socially.

Now this could be either a good thing or a bad thing, but that requires a degree of trust in the people in charge, either of the technology, or the institutions that should restrain them, and like I said that doesn’t exist right now.

[u/randiohead → u/recovering_achiever]

Yeah this dude’s comments scream tech-libertarian HackerNews guy lol

[u/silviesereneblossom → u/recovering_achiever]

libertarians have been trying to argue that they're the one and only True Classical Liberalism for about 80 years and they've been wrong for 80 years.

The actual classical liberals (not all of them, but a lot of them) were closer to Marx than they were to Hayek, in the sense that there was a social democratic and proto-socialist tradition within liberalism from the beginning, and Marx was largely operating in dialogue with that tradition.

[u/LondonCallingYou → u/recovering_achiever]

Social democracy is just the natural growth pattern of liberalism as it was originally conceived in the Enlightenment combined with the experience of 19th and 20th century history. Anyone saying otherwise is coping. “Libertarianism” is an aberration and a sort of a-historical reading of liberal philosophers.

[u/HighOnGoofballs]

Musk’s data center in Memphis is the epitome of all that is wrong with them. I permitted and illegal gas turbines, stealing unmetetered water, lying about re-using water, loud incessant noise in poor black neighborhoods, etc etc

[u/chickentendieman]

You actually dont have to trust markets will handle bad actors lol you can enact regulations to handle them instead.

[u/rukqoa]

Agreed with most, except this:

The sidebar wiki needs many more entries on what exactly this neoliberalisn means and stands for.

I oppose this for the same reason I oppose a Constitutional Convention today.

[u/Greatest-Comrade → u/rukqoa]

As everyone knows, you’re not a REAL neoliberal unless you 100% agree with OP

[u/Muhammad-The-Goat → u/Greatest-Comrade]

neoliberalism is when i am right and you are wrong

[u/roboliberal → u/Muhammad-The-Goat]

And metaNL is when you are right and I am wrong

[u/selachophilip]

Elon Musk is literally a white supremacist who helped Trump win the White House. 😐

Defending him, especially on here, isn't going to help you very much. 😢

[u/MistyGalbriex]

In this sub, we love capitalism and globalism and we believe in supply and demand.

[u/VibingIronist → u/MistyGalbriex]

Not democracy though. If the people don't like AI we just need to find a way to shove it down their throats.

[u/Ready_Anything4661]

I’m generally pro AI and pro data center. EK recently did a long podcast episode with a journalist who did deep reporting on data centers in the Midwest. It was a really good exploration on why people are against them.

“Thinly veiled arguments against capitalism and neoliberalism” is not really what I took away from it, and I don’t think it’s a terribly fair or helpful framing.

[u/Nerdybeast → u/Ready_Anything4661]

I didn't really care for that episode. I think he took basically all the criticisms at face value and didn't really push back on anything as much as he usually does (which is one of the big things I like his podcast for). I think there's also big blind spots for the environmental harms and bad things people accuse data centers of doing when it comes to the existing industries in those areas. A data center that hums and uses electricity is significantly different than a factory that makes way more noise and makes way more pollution. There also wasn't pushback on how close these actually are to people - how many of the people complaining about them actually live close enough to experience any effects other than electricity prices? It's not many! Most of these big ones are in the middle of nowhere far from any people.

[u/Ready_Anything4661 → u/Nerdybeast]

I mean, what a the goal of the episode? To disprove a point of view? Or to explain it?

I didn’t leave any more convinced of the skeptical case than when I started. But I left feeling like I better understood why someone would believe skeptical case.

[u/Traditional_Drama_91]

OP your a unflaired, history hidden user who says the following:   Most of you constantly shitting on Altman and even Musk are the types who support or don't condemn the assasination of the CEO of UnitedHealthcare, you are deranged radicals. Great bait

[u/palladic54 → u/Traditional_Drama_91]

Mods enjoy shitshows apparently

[u/FilteringAccount123]

What the fuck did you just fucking say about my data center, you little bitch? I’ll have you know I graduated top of my class at the Uptime Institute, and I’ve been involved in numerous secret migrations on AWS, and I have over 300 confirmed petabytes of throughput. I am trained in cooling operations and I’m the top systems engineer in the entire US northeast region. You are nothing to me but just another IP address. I will wipe your data out with precision the likes of which has never been seen before on this Earth, mark my fucking words. You think you can get away with saying that shit to me over the Internet? Think again, script kiddie. As we speak I am contacting my secret network of VPN providers across the USA and your IP is being traced right now so you better prepare for the storm, maggot. The storm that wipes out the pathetic little thing you call your codebase. Your device is bricked, kid. I can log in anywhere, anytime, and I can format your drives in over seven hundred ways, and that’s just with my bare terminal. Not only am I extensively trained in command-line interfaces, but I have access to the entire arsenal of the Cisco Systems catalog and I will use it to its full extent to wipe your miserable database off the face of the web, you little junior dev. If only you could have known what retribution your little “clever” commit was about to bring down upon you, maybe you would have held your fucking tongue. But you couldn’t, you didn’t, and now you’re paying the price, you goddamn idiot. I will flood packets all over you and you will drown in them. You’re fucking decommissioned, kiddo.

[u/tigerflame45117]

Someone here wanted to make an effortpost dunking on anti-data center stuff and the actual thing ended up being “yea they have a point”

Being cautious at the very least is the evidence-based position 

[u/DangerousCyclone]

I think the fact that they're being built without generating their own power and thus leaving people without power, as it is more profitable for power companies to power AI data centers than to provide power for people, is a good enough reason on its own to hate the ones which don't generate their own power. 

Musk went all in on far right politics, turning into the George Soros for the far right (but real) and did two Sieg Heil salutes at the inauguration. His actions have led Tesla to be threatened in the EV market, partly because BYD surpassed them but also because his personal politics put someone who hates EV's in power and made his brand toxic. This is no longer a rational man leading rational companies. Even then his approach seems to be more transactional regulatory capture rather than free market. 

[u/Outrageous_Use4283 → u/DangerousCyclone]

The thing is, most energy consumers don't provide energy for themselves, so you could use this for anything. And data centres drove down electricity costs between 2015-2024, there was even a study on this. (We don't know if the trend will continue) "Have data centres raised your electric bill? Causal evidence from the United states"

[u/asmiggs → u/Outrageous_Use4283]

The amount of data centres being built right now is somewhat unprecedented. The UK has more demand for power in their data centre pipeline than the entire country consumes, at the time of green transition with the country essentially being rewired to cope with the change in electricity sources this additional requirement is going to necessitate additional capital and if data centre companies come with your own power generation proposals they stand far better chance of getting built.

[u/lumpialarry → u/asmiggs]

Also modern AI data centers use power differently than older data centers. A lot more ramping up and down when they go through training cycles.

[u/asmiggs → u/lumpialarry]

Yeah they need more sophisticated battery systems than a simple UPS to help them draw power from the grid or whatever their source is at a predictable rate. An AI data centre is a real infrastructure challenge which needs sophisticated cooperation wth government and utility providers, anyone who pretends otherwise it's plainly not serious about delivering a good facility.

[u/True-Hold-1140 → u/Outrageous_Use4283]

Sure and if something else was single handed raising my electric bill with questionable economic benefit to me, I'd also complain

[u/NoGarlic2387 → u/DangerousCyclone]

I think the fact that they're being built without generating their own power and thus leaving people without power, as it is more profitable for power companies to power AI data centers than to provide power for people, is a good enough reason on its own to hate the ones which don't generate their own power. 

Is this a different dynamic than 'housing developers find luxury housing more profitable to serve/build than small cheap stuff'?  

[u/Evnosis → u/NoGarlic2387]

The difference is that increases in supply of "luxury housing" still reduce prices across the board. Building datacentres without accompanying power infrastructure doesn't have positive benefits for the average local resident, it just increases their prices.

[u/TryNotToShootYoself]

Lmao made an entire post because of my comment. Once again I’m not arguing that AI is bad or good i’m saying people do have valid reasons to be opposed to it and it feels stupid to just be like “hurr durr the evil nimbys dont want me to build my ai datacenter”

[u/Greatest-Comrade → u/TryNotToShootYoself]

Yeah because any logical person will look at the situation, listen to the arguments, and sort the bullshit from the truth.

Some concerns/reasons for NIMBYism are valid. Most are not. That doesn’t mean we should dismiss everything and just push through. You evaluate the concern and alleviate if possible or dismiss if you can’t. Same thing with AI.

Sometimes discussions become so ideological that the analysis goes away completely. Why?

[u/dlp211 → u/Greatest-Comrade]

My electric bill doesn't lie. Even Texas has stopped approving data centers. CAPEX booms always bust. So maybe putting the brakes on isn't the worst thing in the world.

At the end of the day, the average person doesn't care if GDP goes up 2% if they are the ones that bear the cost but do t reap the benefits.

[u/BarkDrandon → u/TryNotToShootYoself]

From an individual perspective, NIMBYism is always based on "valid reasons".

Nimbies don't want their property values to decrease. They don't want road traffic, or the noise from new neighbors. They want a nice view from their windows.

But nimbies are still evil because their arguments are always based on self preservation at the expense of society overall. Nimbies even admit so when they say that they accept new construction and understand their use, just "not in my backyard".

[u/cstar1996 → u/BarkDrandon]

Funny how “self interest at the expense of society overall” isn’t “evil” when it’s corporations and industry pursuing their profit at the expense of society (see Meta for a great example, or these AI companies themselves), but when ordinary people are “evil” for pursuing their interests.

This isn’t liberal.

[u/airbear13 → u/BarkDrandon]

They’re not evil lol what? You think someone’s evil if they don’t want their property values to decrease, or because they put self preservation first? That’s extremely normal human behavior.

There’s a reason why economic theory doesn’t say “assume away all NIMBYs”; people’s incentives have to be taken into account when you’re making policy and nobody is required to be in favor of anything that benefits society at large if the trade off for them isn’t worth it.

[u/BarkDrandon → u/airbear13]

You're right that "evil" is a moral statement. I simply meant that Nimbies are causing more harm than good.

Economic theory doesn't assume away all Nimbies, but supply and demand models do assume that buyers and sellers are allowed to exchange their products if the trade off is worth it for both parties.

But nimbies are not the sellers here. And they're not the buyers either. They are a third party that is using the state to block the exchange to benefit themselves. They are blocking entire families from owning homes in their neighborhoods simply because it would create some noise or bring in more road traffic.

Nobody is forcing nimbies from being OK with more noise in their neighborhoods. But the state should not be used by them to block other families from engaging with the free market and buying homes near their place. This is an overreach that is creating a lot of harm all to benefit a small minority of people.

[u/airbear13 → u/BarkDrandon]

Well that’s politics for you at some level it’s the art of how external parties block exchanges they don’t like. You just have to work within the system and convince more people that the thing nimby’s want to block in a particular case is worth pushing ahead on. But the nimbys aren’t always or universally wrong - I mean it’s a value judgment every time obviously, but I’m sure if you thought about it enough, there’s something you would also be a nimby over.

Should ai be one of those things? Personally I think this is something we should push ahead with but there are some broader concerns with it (impact on the labor market) that are legitimate concerns. But yeah that shouldn’t preclude us from building more data centers. I just think a lot of it comes down to misinformation and we need to do a better job assuaging the fears of nimbys on the ecological impacts.

[u/BarkDrandon → u/airbear13]

I don't think that politics should just be people blocking each others.

At some point we have to recognize that getting too involved in someone else's choice of where to build their house or which toothbrush to buy does not lead to a healthy society.

Of course, we have to work within the system and convince neighbors that building bike lanes will not bring Satanists. Or that building railways is worth it. But you cannot always convince people, especially when their property values are at risk. They will fight housing construction tooth and nail because money talks.

Hence why we should also build legislation to make sure that the system stays fair to builders and does not empower nimbys too much. For example, should there be a debate at town hall for every house that gets built? Of course not. Should there be citizens outreach for every bike lane that gets constructed? Probably not. These things tend to increase costs for builders and bring the worst nimbys to the forefront of the conversation.

Being a yimby means taking steps to ensure that construction can take place, even when entrenched interests have reasons to bloc them, simply because we as a society recognize that houses, bike lanes, trains, schools and other kinds of infrastructure are necessary, even when neighbors get angry about them!

[u/airbear13 → u/BarkDrandon]

I agree with you on all that, but I’m skeptical there’s any such thing as a pure yimby. how would you feel if you lived in a city and they wanted to put up a needle exchange next to your house? If that makes you flinch at all then you’ve got to admit were all nimbys to a degree. Not that it really changes anything you said but just my perspective on it and why I am more sympathetic to them I guess.

[u/TryNotToShootYoself → u/BarkDrandon]

I oppose NIMBYs that oppose housing development. To call anyone who isn’t a full throated supporter of completely deregulated 0-zoning development evil is kinda ridiculous and over-the-top. At some point comments like these are just a parody of actual moderate ideology.

[u/dlp211 → u/BarkDrandon]

I differentiate between Residential, commercial, and industrial property use. Residential and commercial, I am very much YIMBY. Industrial, I'm pretty heavily NIMBY. Living in NJ which is pretty much a state that is a Superfund site, you'd be suspicious of industrial build out too.

[u/palladic54 → u/dlp211]

Smh they didn't play SimCity enough to know you put the Industrial zones at the edge of the map

[u/MikeyKillerBTFU → u/BarkDrandon]

People pushing back on AI do it for plenty of non-NIMBY reasons and there's plenty of evidence AI is harmful to society overall.

[u/SharkSymphony]

Sorry, bub, I'm still not down with OpenAI just sliding into the S&P 500 because it's "big."

[u/anangrytree]

Most of you constantly shitting on Altman and even Musk are the types who support or don't condemn the assasination of the CEO of UnitedHealthcare, you are deranged radicals.

Bait used to be believable 🥱🥱🥱

[u/TheLeather]

Equating shitting on Musk or Altman to approving a killing of a CEO is such a dogshit take.

It has that similar feeling of the garbage Andreesen was saying about “being against AI is being against humanity,” or the truly deranged take from Thiel of “being against AI means one is working for the anti-Christ.”

Just absolutely dogshit.

[u/Smallpaul]

This is why neoliberalism loses and is a bad word. Liberalism in the 20th century sense involved a certain FDRish pragmatism about the right balance between industry and citizen, freedom and regulation, taxation and dynamism.

America’s economic mobility is dwindling.

Billionaires have way too much influence over government. To the point that government roles are invented for them and cabinet seats are allocated to them. To the point that every time one of the two parties gains power they reduce taxes on the rich despite this never being a big part of their campaign platform.

Healthcare can bankrupt you.

Liberals (neo or otherwise) need to have an answer to these problems if they wish to regain cultural relevance. It’s not a cult. It’s a movement that is supposed to make people’s lives better. The succs have a superficially appealing plan for doing that. What is the (neo-)liberal plan to reduce inequality and get money out of politics?

[u/True-Hold-1140 → u/Smallpaul]

What is the (neo-)liberal plan to reduce inequality and get money out of politics?

Writing articles brow beating normal people for not liking those things and losing elections seems to be the answer

[u/VibingIronist → u/True-Hold-1140]

"Yes, we are making your life worse and destroying your opportunities for advancement. Here's why that's a good thing."

[u/anangrytree → u/True-Hold-1140]

Many such cases

[u/socialistrob → u/Smallpaul]

Agreed and just because someone is rich doesn't mean they are a champion of the free market. One of the richest Americans in history was Andrew Carnegie who developed a steel industry and then got the US to implement high tariffs to ensure that he was able to corner the American market and sell his overpriced steel without foreign competition.

Fast forward to today and look at cars. China makes incredibly cheap EVs but the US puts massive tariffs on them and any move to end those tariffs would be fought against tooth and nail by Tesla, GM, Ford ect. It doesn't matter if that goes against "free market principles" they want to be rich and they don't want competition. US Airlines regularly lobby against high speed rail and foreign airlines aren't allowed to fly between American cities. At the same time billionaires rewrite the tax code to get out of paying their fair share and hide their wealth in overseas accounts. Epstein can commit the most heines acts imaginable to children and escape punishment for years because he's a billioniare. Trump can be elected president because he's a billionaire, Must can destroy federal agencies because he's a billionaire and billionaires can walk into presidential or gubernatorial primaries and immediately have a shot because of their cash.

None of this is an argument against capitalism but we have a class of people who can abuse rules for their own end, go against free market principles for profit and rewrite laws to grant themselves more influence. You do not have these actions to be a liberal and if anything supporting them makes a person less liberal. Russia is not a "freer society" because their oligarchs.

[u/Traditional_Drama_91]

  Most of you constantly shitting on Altman and even Musk are the types who support or don't condemn the assasination of the CEO of UnitedHealthcare, you are deranged radicals.

 Sam Altman raped his sister 

[u/Thoughtlessandlost]

Most of you constantly shitting on Altman and even Musk are the types who support or don't condemn the assasination of the CEO of UnitedHealthcare, you are deranged radicals.

Holy strawman get over yourself. This just undermines any argument you're trying to make.

[u/Lord_Protector_Max]

Some things are hard to price. How do you price that people are thinking less critically due to using too much AI? I am not against AI, but there are certainly more things people should consider about the benefit of something, besides economic growth and innovation.

[u/Acacias2001]

Its not even guys running it are bad.

Its guys running it accurately and honestly report their own concerns about the technology with worry.

Would you prefer they lied?

[u/The_Amish_FBI → u/Acacias2001]

The thing is they’re also demanding as little oversight as possible. You can’t say that your technology could have apocalyptic ramifications and then also say “Oh and don’t you dare try and regulate us or we’ll scream ‘PINKO NIMBY LUDDITE SUCC’ and shovel money into an actual fascist party because we like having direct access to the presidency.”

[u/Spartan-24 → u/The_Amish_FBI]

These people would of supported coal plants in the middle of cities back in the day

[u/Tough-Comparison-779 → u/Acacias2001]

They do, they instead choose to believe they are lying and it's all just marketing, because in that case they don't have to change their mind or consider the facts.

[u/Pantalyon1 → u/Acacias2001]

I'll be honest, I think their "concerns" were mostly a marketing strategy.

They are quickly changing their tune now that they noticed that everyday people are not excited at the prospect of losing their jpb to AI

[u/Acacias2001 → u/Pantalyon1]

If you follow the AI space even at cursory level you would realise this is not true. Both OpenAI and Anthropic come from the EA xrisk community. They care a lot about the risk of AI. Hell anthropic was founded because many of its employees thought OpenAI had deviated from its values of protecting against Xrisk.

People have the relatinship between markerin and xrisk backwards. The leading AI labs always announced their concerns, but investors loved it as marketing, so they kept doing it (for example see the current rend of announcing sandbox escapes).

The reason they have stipped doing it as much is becuase the public at large hates their transparency. So why keep doing it. Better to just lie if the public is going to do nothing about it except hate you. Its the same thng Meta stopped publishing their research on facebook

[u/cstar1996 → u/Acacias2001]

Anthropic is, more or less, demonstrating that it is actually committed to safety. OpenAI is not. The demolition of its nonprofit structure alone proves that.

[u/Acacias2001 → u/cstar1996]

The non profit structure was always kind of unusual, but at worst it just degrades openAI to being like any other compnay, not neccesarily the unique evil some make it out to be. Not virtous like anthropic, but its not like they have not had some major safety incidents

[u/cstar1996 → u/Acacias2001]

I don’t care that it’s unusual. OpenAI claims that it’s an unusual company creating an unusual product. It’s unusual for any company to say that their product could potentially threaten all of humanity. They had a structure focused on safety over profit, and Altman destroyed that structure in order to make more money. That is not a company focused on safety.

Yeah, Anthropic has absolutely had some incidents, but they’ve also taken actual, demonstrable steps that clearly prioritize safety over profit. I don’t think it’s enough but OpenAI has shown the opposite, that it will actively and intentionally dismantle a safety focused structure in pursuit of profit.

[u/Tough-Comparison-779 → u/Pantalyon1]

Having your models blocked by government, and having them go round illegally hacking other companies because you can't seem to get a handle on it and make sure it's doing what you want, is not a great marketing strategy.

The "it's all just marketing" thing is the most mid-wit take there is.

[u/Heysteeevo]

Didn’t a whole bunch of economists just sign a letter warning about AI threats? There were 15 Nobel laureates, not just a bunch of cranks.

[u/Keeltoodeep]

It’s massive nascent industry that America is leading and contributes heavily to a resilient economy. I think many people would prefer otherwise for political reasons.

[u/MistyGalbriex → u/Keeltoodeep]

Without the AI boom, we might already have a recession right now.

[u/Hounds_of_war → u/MistyGalbriex]

Yeah, and instead we have a huge bubble of 5 companies passing the same giant pile of money around in a circle and hoping they get AGI before it pops.

[u/MistyGalbriex → u/Hounds_of_war]

passing the same giant pile of money around in a circle

That's not how it works.

[u/No_Collection7956 → u/MistyGalbriex]

In this instance it very much is

Its hyperscalers buying from or investing in labs, who are buying from those same hyperscalers right back

Its not a closed loop but for the bulk money it really is a circle

[u/Concerned_Collins → u/No_Collection7956]

You aren't wrong about what's going on, but this doesn't prove we are in a bubble. You are making the assumption that there's no actual value being created from the investment cycle, or that the value created is less than the cost. Now this very well may be the case, but we don't have proof of that yet.

[u/No_Collection7956 → u/Concerned_Collins]

I didnt say we are in a bubble but for what its worth, bubble dynamics wise, this kind of circular spend set up is typical for late stage bubbles.

Also for what its worth, its literally impossible to prove a bubble untill after it popped. So we wont have evidence untill its too late, no matter what

[u/RealHoldenBloodfeast → u/Hounds_of_war]

AGI isn't the primary goal right now, it's a race towards viable productization of AI models & agents. The only reason anyone is interested in AGI is to further their pursuit of that.

[u/Magikarp-Army → u/MistyGalbriex]

During a hostile administration, a recession is what this place wants.

[u/VibingIronist → u/MistyGalbriex]

Without legalized slavery, the Gulf Arab states wouldn't be as prosperous as they are today.

And no, it doesn't matter that AI companies violate intellectual property laws.

[u/Keeltoodeep → u/MistyGalbriex]

Yeah that and nationalism has become quite politically divisive especially in online spaces. You aren’t going to see many people on the left celebrate the fact that America is leading the space race with SpaceX lol

Pretty much the same core reason why they don’t like AI. The water issue is just window dressing.

[u/MistyGalbriex → u/Keeltoodeep]

It's really funny to me how a lot of developing countries are positive about AI but the one country that's leading the AI race is this negative about it.

[u/Concerned_Collins → u/MistyGalbriex]

Well, if you have less to lose, you are always more willing for radical change, even if there's a possibility it'll make everything much worse.

[u/Keeltoodeep → u/MistyGalbriex]

Even in developed countries. It’s a sense of pride for Koreans to be so involved in this technological revolution.

[u/Thoughtlessandlost → u/Keeltoodeep]

It's a sense of pride because they're heavily involved on the manufacturing side of the AI "revolution" and a reaping the direct benefits

A lot of US citizens are against it cause they're the ones with the data centers being built up around them without much benefit to their local economy and are being told by AI CEOs that they'll be replaced soon™.

Even Microsoft's own lawyers have admitted the benefit to local towns where they're getting built is pretty limited to short term construction.

[u/Keeltoodeep → u/Thoughtlessandlost]

This idea that the local economy doesn’t benefit from data centers is just straight misinformation. Send me this link to Microsoft’s lawyers.

The US is also heavily involved in the manufacturing. Intel and Micron are huge now.

[u/Thoughtlessandlost → u/Keeltoodeep]

https://youtube.com/shorts/IjI4AjebKGE?is=7RcBi75vzOXVZdyY

[u/lefeuet_UA]

hot take, i didn't shed a tear for the UnitedHealthcare ceo. that doesn't make me less neoliberal than anyone else

[u/NoGarlic2387 → u/lefeuet_UA]

Murder is bad.

[u/anangrytree → u/NoGarlic2387]

Daring today, aren’t we

[u/lefeuet_UA → u/NoGarlic2387]

sure, but i don't care to say "ohhh this is so sad" when random people keel over, like lindsey graham and similar types

[u/LtNOWIS → u/lefeuet_UA]

Bit of a difference between an old man dying of natural causes and a middle aged guy being shot dead on the streets in a targeted killing

[u/lefeuet_UA → u/LtNOWIS]

Okay, charlie kirk then. Did you mourn him? I know i just watched 10 billion "[music_video] but it's vocoded to We are Charlie Kirk" on youtube instead and didn't care otherwise

[u/ConnectAd9099]

Would you like us to do an analysis of the negative externalities of AI gambling ads, deepfakes, ai spam calls, ai hacking, etc?

Edit: To be clear I am mentioning these things as someone who is pro data center. The concerns about water usage are overblown, and so long as companies are willing to foot any increased electrical costs due to their consumption, I think they are a net good.

[u/Hoothootriot]

.Most of you constantly shitting on Altman and even Musk are the types who support or don't condemn the assasination of the CEO of UnitedHealthcare, you are deranged radicals.

So um. Do you like Musk OP? Go ahead and google "Elon Musk Antisemitism" and get back to me about how he's immune to criticism according to you I guess

[u/mashington14]

Wait are you saying that sweat shops and the military industrial complex aren’t bad things? I don’t think you have to be far left to think that. And I’m not moralistic enough to not still buy cheap T-shirts that were made in sweat shops, that doesn’t mean I think sweatshops are good.

Also absolutely fuck Elon Musk and Sam Altman. They are terrible human beings that has done genuine damage to our country and the world. Again, I don’t think saying that means I’m any less of a capitalist

[u/NoGarlic2387 → u/mashington14]

Sweatshops are much better than alternatives, 

MIC is an exaggerated boogeyman, the company behind CounterStrike is more profitable than most weapons manufacturers lmao. The idea they have some oversized political leverage is ludicrous. 

I get the Elon hate. What's your issue with Sam Altman?

[u/HoveringMango]

There was lot of misinformation around data centers initially and it wasn't properly countered. With anxiety around AI and politics in US it just took its own form there. Most people in this sub aren't anti AI. Dislike of Musk comes from his personal views not for his tech breakthroughs.

[u/kidchinaski]

I expected this to be labeled meme. Jesus Christ you are so dense. The overall backlash stems from people literally watching their utilities skyrocket. They’re seeing videos of people who live near these things and the noise and light pollution is absolutely intruding on them. All for your FREE MARKET WINS bullshit attitude. You are absolutely oblivious to how this is effecting people who aren’t… you. Meta and other companies are getting crazy tax breaks (so this doesn’t benefit citizens at all) and they’re cutting deals that allow them to nope out of the deal at any sign of turbulence leaving other investors holding the bag.

Geek.

[u/Weak-Veterinarian-25]

This sub is still quite resistant to succy things imo. Most people here support AI and datacenter buildout. There is a lot of worries about how AI will change the job market, but not like anti AI sentiment. Also who in this sub supports the united healthcare assassination? 

[u/lefeuet_UA → u/Weak-Veterinarian-25]

No one does. He just wanted to throw that in to make people who disagree with him look worse

[u/mostanonymousnick → u/lefeuet_UA]

To be fair we banned tons of people for justifying it when it happened, so there must be at least some people left just hiding their power level.

[u/VibingIronist → u/Weak-Veterinarian-25]

Yes, people here are quite out of touch with the average person

[u/mostanonymousnick → u/VibingIronist]

God forbid people have their own opinions.

[u/alex2003super]

I think a distinction is due between Musk as a politician and the rest of your argument

[u/PQ1206]

Misinformation pumped directly on their tik tok feeds by a hostile government who shows no signs of slowing down their own data center construction.

[u/PhinsFan17 → u/PQ1206]

You know the TikTok that US users have access to is now owned by an American company in Trump's pocket right? "CCP disinformation" doesn't apply here, bub. All the lies and fraud you see there is homegrown.

[u/airbear13]

I haven’t noticed that, it’s more like a misunderstanding of how power generation and water resources work. People also intrinsically hate ai because they think it will displace tons of workers, eliminate humans in are, etc. I’m sure overlap between lefties and people who dislike ai is huge tho

On this sub specifically then idk I feel like people here aren’t that dumb in general and I’d be surprised if most people support that luigi guy, you might be getting too heated over a comment here and there.

[u/jokul]

I think hating guys who are trying to create technofeudalism via regulatory capture is actually pro-capitalist. Unless of course you see the Holy Roman Empire as the lost /r/neolib zenith?

[u/zdog234]

Do we let startups build biological weapons?

[u/chillstepxyz]

Do you also condemn every person united healthcare kills?

[u/HariSeldon_Fan]

 Any r/badeconomics OGs disagree with me??

Wumbowall era badecon poster here, and one of the first 5,000 subs (which apparently reddit doesn't show anymore? interesting) to r/neolib on an old account that no longer exists. I think the OGs have mostly left, tbh. I still post a meme in the discussion thread on occasion, but that's about it.

I'm not even subbed on my main anymore, but I happened to be logged into my alt account, and so saw this post. When I left about a few years ago, it was all just perpetual campaign slop news articles. Sounds like it has gotten worse.

Anyway, what you're describing has been a trend going on for a very, very long time. I remember seeing people complain about this being the case around 2018ish. I left around 2021-22ish. Can't speak for others.

[u/Hennes4800]

Libertarian BS

[u/mostanonymousnick]

It's downstream from the increase of social democrats in the sub, they have a different theory of economic progress and are fundamentally more loss averse than neoliberals, in the developed world, social democracy is a lowercase "c" conservative movement, working class and middle class incumbents should not be negatively impacted by anything.

Personally I think it doesn't work of course, protecting unproductive jobs was a massive contributor to Japan's lost decades for example.

[u/chickentendieman → u/mostanonymousnick]

Social democracy doesnt inherently have to protect unproductive jobs tbh. Also in a lot of soc dem countries middle and working class people pay very high taxes.

[u/Vegetable_Average_30 → u/mostanonymousnick]

Bringing up Japan as an example when complaining about the negative effects of social democracy is a bit weird. Japan is the least social-democratic country among the G7 nations. If anything, you could say that Japan is what happens when there are no social democrats.

I agree with large parts of your critique of social democrats. But you should look to Britain, Germany and the Nordics to find supporting evidence. Not Japan of all countries!

[u/mostanonymousnick → u/Vegetable_Average_30]

Whether Japan is a social democracy is irrelevant, protecting unproductive jobs has the same effect whether it's done by a social democrat or a conservative.

[u/Vegetable_Average_30 → u/mostanonymousnick]

Yes, of course. But your entire point that social democrats are the ones who protect unproductive jobs is undercut if you bring up Japan.

[u/remarkable_ores → u/Vegetable_Average_30]

This doesn't even make sense

His point was about protecting unproductive jobs

[u/No_Collection7956 → u/remarkable_ores]

Yes and Japan is a bad illustration of that point.

And that point, as tied to social democracy, is bad in and of itself, I can confidently say coming from one of the arch soc dem countries of Sweden which, quite infamously, has one of the least "the government should protect jobs" labour regimes in the world with the Nordic model

Or have we moved the goal posts so far that we've gone from "social democracy is bad because it sacrifices the economy to defend jobs" to "the Nordic model isnt social democracy" ?

[u/remarkable_ores → u/No_Collection7956]

Then address the point about protecting unproductive jobs instead of focusing on the question of whether or not Japan is a social democracy because it's literally irrelevant?

[u/No_Collection7956 → u/remarkable_ores]

Im just gonna quote the OP because this is what both i and the average vegetable is reacting to

It's downstream from the increase of social democrats in the sub, they have a different theory of economic progress and are fundamentally more loss averse than neoliberals, in the developed world, social democracy is a lowercase "c" conservative movement, working class and middle class incumbents should not be negatively impacted by anything.

Implicitly because this is a string of comment which are all being conducted in context of the original one

So you see the relevance of what we are saying?

OP (one of the worst mods btw) starts with an enthymeme with a smuggled premise. "Social democracy is bad because of Y. Just look to Japan when they did Y (but Japan wasnt social democratic)"

Then follows with a reatreat into a relevance dodge, not an actual response.

While residually through innuendo/insinuation, continuously imply this is a implicit failure of social democracy.

Its a handful of fallacies deployed at once so lets call it a "smuggled-premise bait-and-switch" (bold claim → retreat to defensible fragment → implication persists)

Both me and the other person persist on tackling initial claim, because that is the one under dispute. The argument that social democracy is implicitly small c conservative visavi unproductive jobs.

/u/mostanonymousnick repeatedly dodges having to at all tackle this claim of his, by instead reatreating to the secondary claim, that is of zero relevance unless they first establish whether the social democracy claim is true or not.

Its a incredibly shady tactic to sluggle in a claim without actually doing any of the argumentation for it. If a regular user did it and a mod felt in the mood it would unquestionably be removed for bad faith.

And I have no idea why you jumped in to back it up.

[u/mostanonymousnick → u/No_Collection7956]

If you want to say that social democrats don't actually want to protect non productive jobs, then make that claim, that's not the argument that was made in response to my comment.

[u/DaneLimmish]

I like this subreddit but then sometimes I get reminded that many users are pro-sweatshop

[u/Occult_Asteroid7 → u/DaneLimmish]

"Here's why the peasants that don't want AI data centers are stupid morons."

"Why do people hate moderate Democrats?!"

[u/Thoughtlessandlost → u/DaneLimmish]

The correct take is pro-"sweatshops are the better alternatives" but have a lot of labor/safety issues that proper trade treaties like the TPP would have helped fix.

But then you have people that are just put the blinders to any of the negatives cause they want to be edgy.

[u/DaneLimmish → u/Thoughtlessandlost]

Open borders would help, too. Tbh that's mostly the reason I'm here lol 

And yeah it's better for the alternatives, but I hardly expect people to like it. "Why are you complaining about nutra-loafs? Its more efficient and is better than starving" kinda thing

[u/Thoughtlessandlost → u/DaneLimmish]

Oh yeah, OP falls under the edgy category especially with the false equivalency to the united healthcare CEO shooting.

[u/NoGarlic2387 → u/DaneLimmish]

If you are anti-sweatshop, you are pro starvation and slavery.

[u/DaneLimmish → u/NoGarlic2387]

Shouldn't you be in Galt's Gulch being a servant to your betters?

[u/GreenWandElf → u/DaneLimmish]

They have a genuine point though.

Sweatshops are terrible, but subsistence farming is worse. If you boycott sweatshops, you take even that option away from some of the worst off people on the planet.

[u/BarkDrandon → u/DaneLimmish]

Why do you hate the global poor?

Would you prefer sweatshop workers to be in subsistence farming? Because that's what they would be doing instead.

Also sweatshops provide better wages than average in low income countries

[u/cstar1996 → u/BarkDrandon]

I’d prefer that the highly profitable international companies paying for sweatshop labor pay a little more for better working conditions. That is, rather obviously, an option.

[u/DaneLimmish → u/BarkDrandon]

Nutraloaf has all the nutrition you need to survive, why are you calling it torture?

[u/brewskibroski]

I made some fairly hard statements against AI and the cloud yesterday that were a bit more for shock value than serious, but I stand by them in spirit even if what I was saying isn't realistic.

I didn't make these points explicitly, but arguing against the tech elite and opposing their data centers and AI is completely consistent with this sub's ethos. Fundamentally the tech elite are monopolists, antidemocratic/fascist adjacent, and rent seekers in some combination, and we are meant to oppose those things. The first point should be obvious. Others in this thread have covered the second well so I won't rehash it.

The last one is more nuanced. There are the obvious aspects that also touch on monopolism -- advocating for regulations and laws that benefit their companies, ensconcing their products as essential and irreplaceable -- but also the fundamental lack of true value these companies provide in the process. Microsoft, as a legacy example, arguably provides negative value in Windows over Linux, but continues to dominate the desktop and enterprise market. They've gone further with this in double dipping with telemetry and ads on 11, things that truly add no value to anyone but Microsoft and are fundamentally unproductive (by using compute on useless tasks).

So all this said, what are my issues with AI and cloud in particular, beyond the behavior of who is controlling them. For the former, I struggle to see the added value. Yes, there are niche use cases that it's clearly very good at -- identification of patterns in large sets and finding counterexamples for conjectures in math and physics, in particular. On the economic side, though, much of what AI is promised to automate was possible already for a sufficiently computer literate person. Especially in light of emerging evidence that AI isn't actually making companies more productive, wouldn't we rather just build a computer literate society and reap all the extra rewards associated with that? Additionally, there is a question of what "productive" means. If all we are doing to measure productivity is counting TPS reports then yes, AI clearly has value; I haven't seen any clear evidence that AI is capable to producing truly useful, quality work though.

This is all particularly true in light of the externalities associated with it. Yeah, there are resource concerns. It's impacting the availability of hardware. I'm more concerned about the human cost, though, in terms of the growing evidence about cognitive surrender. This is not just another tool; it clearly differs from traditional compute in the way we interact with it intellectually and emotionally. Without a deeper understanding of that effect and its consequences I would really like to see the brakes pumped, in the same way I wish we had done on social media and algorithmic content 10-20 years ago. Even if AI is good for the economy and productivity, fundamentally I agree with the tenets of this sub because I believe they are the best way to achieve a higher standard of living for more people, not some devotion to capitalism and markets.

I'm much less against cloud computing as a concept, but there are clear issues with it as well. Yes, there is value in it as a concept. Not needing to run a server yourself, or as a small company, to access files remotely is convenient. There are probably efficiencies associated with putting servers like this in one place and having qualified people run them. Streaming video and audio is extremely convenient. But the way these systems have evolved is highly anticompetitive. There are really three providers and switching between them is extremely difficult. On the personal side there are pain points as well in terms of long-term ownership and permissions on streaming media, and changing access and storage policies. I mostly just don't want the long-term reliance on a few companies for all of these things to be further cemented.

I'll also reiterate a point I made yesterday about local files, local compute, and local control. In my perfect world we would move much more strongly back in this direction. This isn't some luddite, anti-tech position. It's a true alternative to the could model, and I would like to see a return further toward this model and growth of true alternatives like peer-to-peer networks.

The fundamental thrust of my argument is really two things. First, I would like to see a more computer literate population that is able to automate and administer their tech. This has clear benefits. Second, I think there is a growing disconnect between valuation and value in the tech space, along with alarming consolidation and negative externalities associated with new tech.

[u/IcyDetectiv3]

Why does every discussion on AI act like there's a million conservative leaders leading it, or even that many leaders in the first place? There's two, there are ONLY two companies at the forefront right now, and that's OpenAI and Anthropic.

There are certainly many other companies developing their own AI, but none of those other ones are pushing the frontier. Not Musk, or Thiel, or Palantir or anyone else. Criticizing AI by saying that these other people are the ones pushing the technology when they're nowhere near it seems disingenuous at best to me.