AI job apocalypse and electrical bill nightmare. Does the current admin even care?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I”m not sure AI is the real issue here. It is a handy bogey man for the trump admin to hang a poor economy and lower employment rate on. Yes, SOME jobs are to AI, but tariffs and horrible economic policies (cutting government jobs, people scared to buy) are also hurting the economy.

AI isn’t the only issue in our economy, but it IS an issue Trump isn’t directly responsible for.

I tend to agree in fact Biden's AI executive order which Trump rescinded is more to blame.

https://bidenwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2023/10/30/executive-order-on-the-safe-secure-and-trustworthy-development-and-use-of-artificial-intelligence/

The title is safe a trustworthy AI development, but in practice it imported as many AI professionals as possible accelerating AI. Biden directly ordered the agencies to find ways to import AI talent. Made AI a schedule AI occupation where they didn't have to do labor searches to get green cards etc.

I am so thankful that Trump eliminated that EO.

EG he has done something, and I think he is likely the right guy to oversee this process for American interests.

I've been saying this for years we never had to come this fast in technology. We didn't need to import hundreds of thousands of software engineers each year.

This is what Democrats asked.

Ok, but try to follow me here. I’ll make it easier for you, since you went off on a tangent and I would like to know your opinion:

What effects are TRUMPS tariffs having on the economy and job market?

What are the effects of TRUMPS mass government layoffs on the job market and economy?

What are the effects of people slowing down spending once Trump was elected because of economic concerns on the job market?

You keep on harping on Trump! Trump
and Biden and everyone in Washington is to blame for this! No one gave a damn that AI would take everyone’s jobs and that it could maybe in a worse case scenario lead to AGI exterminating humans because everyone in Washington is paid off by Big Tech.

Now it is too late. The fox is in the hen house. We are literally all doomed. They have companies that are literally making robots that will have AI built into them. How do think that will end for humanity?

The U.S. doesn’t regulate industry. They let it happen organically. You also have really bought into the AI hype. AI isn’t very good right now. It’s in its infancy. The training models are meh and they haven’t solved the hallucinations yet. I work with AI and am taken aback at the hype surrounding it. Much of it is from Silicon Valley because they need to secure future investment. AI isn’t going to be replacing folks soon. In the future, yes. But don’t look to the government for technology policy. They barely can use a cell phone.

It still is creating a ton of data centers that are driving up household.energy costs and depleting water resources. It is still a "now" problem for which the admin wants to avoid even environmental regulation while the average joe pays the price.

[Anonymous]

I don't understand why the data centers aren't paying for the electricity they use. I have a meter on my house that determines my electric bill. Why isn't it the same for data centers? I am truly befuddled by this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why the data centers aren't paying for the electricity they use. I have a meter on my house that determines my electric bill. Why isn't it the same for data centers? I am truly befuddled by this.

I believe it is the infrastructure cost that gets passed to the consumer. The demand from the data centers prompts a need for the power supplier to increase their infrastructure and they pass the infrastructure cost to individual consumers. Meanwhile, the Trump administration is not interested in expanding cheaper renewable forms of electricity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I”m not sure AI is the real issue here. It is a handy bogey man for the trump admin to hang a poor economy and lower employment rate on. Yes, SOME jobs are to AI, but tariffs and horrible economic policies (cutting government jobs, people scared to buy) are also hurting the economy.

AI isn’t the only issue in our economy, but it IS an issue Trump isn’t directly responsible for.

It is directly responsible in that employers can now layoff due to AI and preset that as innovation without in anyway demonstrating that they are experiencing efficiencies. This is exactly the revenge tech has been looking for. They were angry at the gains employees made during COVID, and want to take everyone down a peg.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why the data centers aren't paying for the electricity they use. I have a meter on my house that determines my electric bill. Why isn't it the same for data centers? I am truly befuddled by this.

The data centers do pay for electricity. But what they do is, they buy in bulk once a year at a rate negotiated with the regional utility provider. Because they buy in bulk, they end up paying less than average residential customers per kilowatt hour. The generating capacity for electricity has not kept up with the increase in demand. So now you have the same fixed amount of electricity, but there’s a lot more demand. Basic economics tells you that the price has to go up and the household buyer is the one who really gets screwed because they do not buy in bulk and they have to pay seasonal rates. That’s why there’s now a lot more focus on trying to ramp up nuclear generating facilities. But those are still 5 to 10 year projects. In the meantime, it would be a lot quicker to install masssolar installations, not only in industrial size in rural fields, but also in urban areas on as many rooftops as possible. That’s much quicker to scale up than building a nuclear power plant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why the data centers aren't paying for the electricity they use. I have a meter on my house that determines my electric bill. Why isn't it the same for data centers? I am truly befuddled by this.

I believe it is the infrastructure cost that gets passed to the consumer. The demand from the data centers prompts a need for the power supplier to increase their infrastructure and they pass the infrastructure cost to individual consumers. Meanwhile, the Trump administration is not interested in expanding cheaper renewable forms of electricity.

Again, it's the data centers that are driving that infrastructure cost. They should be footing the bill for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why the data centers aren't paying for the electricity they use. I have a meter on my house that determines my electric bill. Why isn't it the same for data centers? I am truly befuddled by this.

The data centers do pay for electricity. But what they do is, they buy in bulk once a year at a rate negotiated with the regional utility provider. Because they buy in bulk, they end up paying less than average residential customers per kilowatt hour. The generating capacity for electricity has not kept up with the increase in demand. So now you have the same fixed amount of electricity, but there’s a lot more demand. Basic economics tells you that the price has to go up and the household buyer is the one who really gets screwed because they do not buy in bulk and they have to pay seasonal rates. That’s why there’s now a lot more focus on trying to ramp up nuclear generating facilities. But those are still 5 to 10 year projects. In the meantime, it would be a lot quicker to install masssolar installations, not only in industrial size in rural fields, but also in urban areas on as many rooftops as possible. That’s much quicker to scale up than building a nuclear power plant.

If this is the case then either the utility companies are failing on their projections or the data centers aren't adequately informing the utility companies. Either way, the residential ratepayers should not be the ones left holding the bag on the delta.

[Anonymous]

No, the current administration doesn't care. These are all extra features for Republicans to make more and more money from the rest of us.

[Anonymous]

No. They will let Americans go thirsty and starve if they make $$$$ off AI.

[Anonymous]

It seems to me AI is cheaper and uses less electricity than powering a bunch Teslas.

I'm all for making sure the AI are efficient and does not impact the environment, but when you consider the impact of a white collar worker.... It's like what they said about horses vs. cars. You don't have to feed them when you aren't using them.

I think it still remains to be seen whether AI is all that efficient, considering they can't seem to afford to manufacture them in the US. Just moving one labor category to another.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The economy is built on consumption. AI doesn't consume anything other than massive amounts of electricity. Job losses can only be hidden through layoffs and efficiency for so long before the entire economy shts it's pants. These tech oligarch bros are super smart in one narrow field but they're absolutely not experts in everything and can't see what's coming with too many layoffs. The few that can have pushed for a UBI for years now but the chances of that happening with a Republican emperor is pretty much zero.

They know the detrimental affects it's having on the environment and the affects it will inevitably have on the economy, but they don't care. They are in an arms race to true artificial intelligence. They believe this intelligence will be God-like, and the person who controls the God-like intelligence gets to be God. They do not care who or what they have to destroy to get there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It seems to me AI is cheaper and uses less electricity than powering a bunch Teslas.

I'm all for making sure the AI are efficient and does not impact the environment, but when you consider the impact of a white collar worker.... It's like what they said about horses vs. cars. You don't have to feed them when you aren't using them.

I think it still remains to be seen whether AI is all that efficient, considering they can't seem to afford to manufacture them in the US. Just moving one labor category to another.

It seems? Why do you people open your mouths to speak before even checking to see if what you're saying is true? The environmental impact of AI is absolutely MASSIVE.

[Anonymous]

What will end up happening is that small nuclear reactors will be setup next to each data center

https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/sustainability/amazon-smr-nuclear-energy
Small nuclear power plants, specifically small modular reactors (SMRs), are being developed to power data centers by providing a reliable, low-carbon, and 24/7 energy source. Their smaller, modular design allows for easier and faster deployment, potentially reducing land use and transmission costs, which makes them a good fit for high-energy demands, especially with the rise of AI. Companies like Microsoft, Google, and Oracle are exploring this technology, with projects in various stages of development https://www.upsite.com/blog/the-nuclear-powered-data-center/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why the data centers aren't paying for the electricity they use. I have a meter on my house that determines my electric bill. Why isn't it the same for data centers? I am truly befuddled by this.

The data centers do pay for electricity. But what they do is, they buy in bulk once a year at a rate negotiated with the regional utility provider. Because they buy in bulk, they end up paying less than average residential customers per kilowatt hour. The generating capacity for electricity has not kept up with the increase in demand. So now you have the same fixed amount of electricity, but there’s a lot more demand. Basic economics tells you that the price has to go up and the household buyer is the one who really gets screwed because they do not buy in bulk and they have to pay seasonal rates. That’s why there’s now a lot more focus on trying to ramp up nuclear generating facilities. But those are still 5 to 10 year projects. In the meantime, it would be a lot quicker to install masssolar installations, not only in industrial size in rural fields, but also in urban areas on as many rooftops as possible. That’s much quicker to scale up than building a nuclear power plant.

If this is the case then either the utility companies are failing on their projections or the data centers aren't adequately informing the utility companies. Either way, the residential ratepayers should not be the ones left holding the bag on the delta.

Sure, what is Trump's plan here? His head is in his Lincoln bathroom toilet, certainly doesn't seem like he cares about us peons while he gets richer every day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why the data centers aren't paying for the electricity they use. I have a meter on my house that determines my electric bill. Why isn't it the same for data centers? I am truly befuddled by this.

The data centers do pay for electricity. But what they do is, they buy in bulk once a year at a rate negotiated with the regional utility provider. Because they buy in bulk, they end up paying less than average residential customers per kilowatt hour. The generating capacity for electricity has not kept up with the increase in demand. So now you have the same fixed amount of electricity, but there’s a lot more demand. Basic economics tells you that the price has to go up and the household buyer is the one who really gets screwed because they do not buy in bulk and they have to pay seasonal rates. That’s why there’s now a lot more focus on trying to ramp up nuclear generating facilities. But those are still 5 to 10 year projects. In the meantime, it would be a lot quicker to install masssolar installations, not only in industrial size in rural fields, but also in urban areas on as many rooftops as possible. That’s much quicker to scale up than building a nuclear power plant.

If this is the case then either the utility companies are failing on their projections or the data centers aren't adequately informing the utility companies. Either way, the residential ratepayers should not be the ones left holding the bag on the delta.

Sure, what is Trump's plan here? His head is in his Lincoln bathroom toilet, certainly doesn't seem like he cares about us peons while he gets richer every day.

this issue is already solved, the private sector starting w/ amazon is in the process of building small nuclear reactors to power each data center. its a win win