Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AI will be transformational, but not in the way people expect. Instead, it will cause an economic crash when AI never generates the promised revenues because it can't fully replace humans for most jobs. Data centers will have been built but will be unneeded, and massive capital will have been wasted. Big tech, hedge funds, and banks will suffer huge losses from pouring too much money into AI.

Could have written this in 1999 about the internet.

No you couldn’t. No one was claiming in 1999 that the internet would replace most jobs.

Anonymous wrote:AI will be transformational, but not in the way people expect. Instead, it will cause an economic crash when AI never generates the promised revenues because it can't fully replace humans for most jobs. Data centers will have been built but will be unneeded, and massive capital will have been wasted. Big tech, hedge funds, and banks will suffer huge losses from pouring too much money into AI.

Could have written this in 1999 about the internet.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not worried about the job component of AI. AI uses SO much water. The enviro aspect is so much more concerning. We won’t need jobs if we’re all fighting for drinking water.

You sure about that?

https://blog.andymasley.com/p/the-ai-water-issue-is-fake

Who is this person whose blog you linked and why should anyone believe them or care what they have to say?

Yes, random DCUM anonymous commenter with no substantive arguments has more credibility......

I’m not the one making an argument. You are. You’re citing some rando high school teacher’s blog to support it. I’m asking you why his opinion has any merit. The fact you still haven’t explained is pretty telling.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not worried about the job component of AI. AI uses SO much water. The enviro aspect is so much more concerning. We won’t need jobs if we’re all fighting for drinking water.

You sure about that?

https://blog.andymasley.com/p/the-ai-water-issue-is-fake

Who is this person whose blog you linked and why should anyone believe them or care what they have to say?

Andy is who anyone tracking this would point you to. I was going to do it but PP got there first.

You still haven’t explained who this person is or why they have any authority on this topic.

Spoiler: he is a random physics teacher from Fairfax who suddenly became an “independent researcher” and writer of articles about AI in 2026 after working at “Effective Altruism DC.”

So why exactly should anyone listen to this person? The fact he tells you what you want to here doesn’t mean he knows one iota what he’s talking about.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not worried about the job component of AI. AI uses SO much water. The enviro aspect is so much more concerning. We won’t need jobs if we’re all fighting for drinking water.

You sure about that?

https://blog.andymasley.com/p/the-ai-water-issue-is-fake

Who is this person whose blog you linked and why should anyone believe them or care what they have to say?

Andy is who anyone tracking this would point you to. I was going to do it but PP got there first.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not worried about the job component of AI. AI uses SO much water. The enviro aspect is so much more concerning. We won’t need jobs if we’re all fighting for drinking water.

You sure about that?

https://blog.andymasley.com/p/the-ai-water-issue-is-fake

Who is this person whose blog you linked and why should anyone believe them or care what they have to say?

Yes, random DCUM anonymous commenter with no substantive arguments has more credibility......

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a prosecutor, which feels pretty AI-proof.

The AI would want to get convictions, it takes a live person to let criminals walk free.

You think we should have AI prosecutors then? Can you explain why?

Anonymous wrote:I am a prosecutor, which feels pretty AI-proof.

The AI would want to get convictions, it takes a live person to let criminals walk free.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not worried about the job component of AI. AI uses SO much water. The enviro aspect is so much more concerning. We won’t need jobs if we’re all fighting for drinking water.

You sure about that?

https://blog.andymasley.com/p/the-ai-water-issue-is-fake

Who is this person whose blog you linked and why should anyone believe them or care what they have to say?

Anonymous wrote:I’m not worried about the job component of AI. AI uses SO much water. The enviro aspect is so much more concerning. We won’t need jobs if we’re all fighting for drinking water.

You sure about that?

https://blog.andymasley.com/p/the-ai-water-issue-is-fake

Anonymous wrote:AI will be transformational, but not in the way people expect. Instead, it will cause an economic crash when AI never generates the promised revenues because it can't fully replace humans for most jobs. Data centers will have been built but will be unneeded, and massive capital will have been wasted. Big tech, hedge funds, and banks will suffer huge losses from pouring too much money into AI.

+100000000

Also how would smaller companies even afford this technology on a broad scale?

The math doesn’t add up.

AI is starting to creep into my work and it is not good.
For example. My boss, who is super lazy, used AI to generate a template he wanted me to use to generate a report. Problem is, 3/5 of the template had nothing to do with anything that would be relevant. So we then had to waste another hour on emails and meetings for clarification that would not have been needed if he had just thought it through and done the work himself. Sure, maybe he could have used better prompts or spent time with it to finesse the details, but he could have just spent 5 minutes doing it himself and had a better template, but he prefers easy and quick and “look at me, I know how to use AI!”

Then later this week, someone started distributing a poster another office generated using AI that contained some stats and looked very slick. Our leadership asked “Can you make something like this?”
Our answer: sure, but let’s verify the data first. We checked it. It was full of errors, errors by omission, misrepresented information, and slop. But leadership, not having that much familiarity with the actual data, got sucked in by that slickness, and now that is what they want. Fast and slick. Accuracy being optional.

This is exhausting.

I’ve been resisting AI as much as possible, but I keep hearing people at work talk about how they used it for this or that, so I used it for a particularly arduous task that it seemed well suited for. And while it performed the initial ask accurately, the conclusion that it drew was just flat out wrong. I had to go back and check multiple times to verify who had it backwards, and it wasn’t me.

And a human could have drawn the wrong conclusion, too, but it’s concerning how reliant some seem to be on assuming superior accuracy or correctness when using AI.

I’m not worried about the job component of AI. AI uses SO much water. The enviro aspect is so much more concerning. We won’t need jobs if we’re all fighting for drinking water.

OP. AI may not be able to take your job but it can alter the processes around your job.