If an employee is getting their work done, with or without AI, why does it matter? Is it just the idea that if an employee is keeping up, without using AI, how much work could they get done if they were?
According to the manifesto, it seems to be that hopping aboard the AI train has inexplicably not materialized exponential revenue growth, and since it can impossibly be that AI has been oversold, the only conclusion must be that employees are dragging their feet and must be forced to go full send with vibecoding for the destined profits to arrive.
Agreed. And I'd add that some managers/execs think abuse is fun, or at least necessary. They're always looking to pick up a new stick to beat people with. Their peers and superiors frequently mistake it for competence and toughness.
If you're a start up especially in silicon valley, it doesn't matter how well something is built if you can't get to market, which creates a toxic culture of build fast at all cost, that small detail will be a "good problem to have", and AI has thrown jet fuel on the dumpster fire.
I feel like this is an internal bias I’ve actually built up over time. If I see another company providing a service come out after something I already am using, I subconsciously gravitate toward it.
If they’re coming to market when there’s already a dominant player, they must have improved something, right? Not saying it’s logical.
It doesn't matter but CEOs are dumb fucks. Ask this guy how HE uses AI and you'll see he most likely doesn't. They don't understand how anything their company develops works.
Usually that would be fine if reporting lines were healthy, but in the AI age with top-down mandates they're not.
I question the premise. In fact most of the religious fanatics I see these days are the ones willing to sacrifice their skills and their ability to think to the machine god.
I run by the locks a few times a week and while I don't usually see fish, the presence of sea lions the last few weeks tells me that at least some salmon are running right now.
There were a number of sea lions hanging out there! It's entirely possible they were snacking on whatever salmon were going by. Not all was lost though, I got to enjoy watching some boats go through the locks.
I'm assuming it was out of season because in talking with the Uber driver afterwards he said we'd missed the end of the season. I'm assuming his "local model" was up to date and accurate.
You can advocate for changes to a system while living and existing within the system. In fact, that's probably required to actually make any changes. No one is going to listen to some crazy kook in a cabin in Montana
You can't without making an effort to reduce your dependence on it. The most anti DC people I see are chronically online blasting their shit all over social media. Typically influencers, who make a living using said DCs, all day long. Social media directly supports what they are against. There are other ways to spread your message and when they choose the one method that directly goes against the message they are trying to put out, I'm not going to take them seriously, and will also assume they don't know what they're talking about.
The most anti DC people are not chronically online, if at all. Just because Youtube influencers exist doesn't mean they're anything close to the average concerned citizen.
See also, how many people here in France were jailed for sabotaging 5G antennas during their buildout.
So what? It's good to have people question the status quo. Shut the stupid AI craze down before it finishes destroying whatever's left of our planet.
Or are you not concerned that AI companies are now the n°1 fossil fuel lobbyists in EU/USA? That they are consuming insane amounts of concrete and electricity for 0 gains for citizens (but enormous gains for the elites)?
> Shut the stupid AI craze down before it finishes destroying whatever's left of our planet.
I think a lot of the protestors are using data center protests as a proxy for some other belief like this. They think slowing down a data center is going to stop the future from occurring, which is an illogical fantasy on many different levels.
I think that’s how DCs mark an exponential growth in NIMBYism and its acceptance - we’re already seeing city-wide, county-wide, even state-wide bans, even in states where much of the state is very low density. If this kind of NIMBYism becomes accepted, I expect to see similar broader bans against multi-family housing, mass-transit, etc.
Based on what? Slippery slope fallacy? There are real reasons why people don’t want their community to have a DC, which are wildly different than the entitled NIMBYism that isn’t against multi-family housing and mass transit.
Put a data center in Atherton and I’ll change my mind.
Many of the same reasons used against dense housing, mass transit, and solar/wind turbines are used against DCs -
such as claims:
* That it would be too much for the existing grid to handle
* That it would be too much for existing other utilities to handle
* That it would be too close to x other thing (zoo, etc)
* Some say it won't be visually appealing
* That it would change the nature of the existing area
* That there isn't enough groundwater
* etc.
> Put a data center in Atherton and I’ll change my mind.
Wouldn't the complaints then be that a DC there would spoil the area's natural beauty (and would be too much for the electric grid there, etc)? Or if the DC were located similarly to how this one is, there would be the same complaints as OP case - see the photo at the very top of the OP article - it shows a very low-density area. If someone was expecting to see urban-type density, it isn’t in the location shown in the photo.
>> even state-wide bans, even in states where much of the state is very low density
> Put a data center in Atherton and I’ll change my mind.
1. You say you would change your mind in that particular place, but are you arguing that others wouldn't NIMBY against Atherton if one were proposed there? Everyone has different ideas about where they believe should be NIMBYd, including because people have different 'backyards'? And I presume your 'backyard' is tens, hundreds, or thousands of miles from the OP DC location?
2. With state-level bans already existing in states where much of the state is very low-density, the evidence seems to show the opposite of your claim that if a very low-density area were picked then it wouldn't face a ban.
>we’re already seeing city-wide, county-wide, even state-wide bans, even in states where much of the state is very low density
Are we actually though? I bet you heard about the Maine datacenter moratorium that passed our state legislature. It generated tons of conversation here on HN.
Did you also hear that our Democrat governor vetoed it, and it did not become law?
How many of these moratoriums are actually getting into the law?
New York also enacted a moratorium, and in recent days Texas stopped any new data center from being connected to the grid (the Texas one was done through the governor’s power over the grid).
The Internet we are talking on didn't require the current unsustainable data center build-out. This is like saying that people complain about companies dumping toxic waste when they themselves poop. Scale matters.
https://apple.fandom.com/wiki/Alpha_Xenon_Development_Kit
reply