General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Eagler on July 22, 2026, 06:36:45 AM
Title: AI vs AI
Post by: Eagler on July 22, 2026, 06:36:45 AM
It's started..
Eagler
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Randy1 on July 22, 2026, 01:02:40 PM
When you add in the bizarre things the driverless taxi use you realize the real danger is a system so complicated that it is now impossible for a or a group of humans to fix or control.
Another simulation I do is heading in the same direction. The program revisions are so complicated you have to now go through weeks of hot fixes, bigger redos. Soon, this may all be done by AI, jobs will be lost and still will breakdown.
You have to think back to windows 3.1 and the few disk you bought to load it up. Times have changed.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on July 22, 2026, 01:18:24 PM
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: icepac on July 22, 2026, 01:39:21 PM
I predict that all that hardware will end up being sold "barely used" and it will affect the graphics cards guys badly.......unless they come up with something twice as fast as is currently out there.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on July 22, 2026, 01:43:04 PM
I believe AI is being powered largely by GPUs but not graphics cards. These are being made specifically for AI. No need for video output.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Eagler on July 22, 2026, 01:50:47 PM
Hoping there's a huge off switch somewhere someone can pull when it decides it needs electricity and water more than those useless humans do...
Eagler
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on July 22, 2026, 02:06:39 PM
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on July 22, 2026, 09:58:13 PM
People are right to be leery of AI. Aside from machines declaring war against humanity the potential for societal upheaval is very real and the changes it could bring unknown.
But it is coming.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on July 22, 2026, 10:18:40 PM
People are right to be leery of AI. Aside from machines declaring war against humanity the potential for societal upheaval is very real and the changes it could bring unknown.
But it is coming.
Oh, it is coming.
I lose patients with some because the underlying, but unstated argument is, "so let's just stop and roll the world back to before AI and pretend it didn't happen." They don't state it, because it would be obvious when voice that it is a fantasy. I get it. A lot of people are afraid for their jobs. And rightfully so. All the more reason to not waste energy on fruitless noise. We need to prepare our economy and society.
AI is going to happen. Period. Full stop.
The trick is, we need to make sure it is done well.
You need proper zoning laws. you need proper offsets. Treat it like you would any heavy industry.
Power system needs to be expanded. AI companies should contribute a larger share in communities they wish to have the privilege to be sited in. A data center should LOWER the power cost of local customers. If they don't like it, they can site elsewhere.
We need more power production just like we need refining. Obviously we need to grow up and start building out nuclear as a higher percentage of our supply.
But there is no stopping AI. The clocks will not wind backwards. We will not go back to 8-track tapes. You will not be young again.
And if extremists succeeded in crippling our native AI industry, The Chinese will gladly take the economic high ground for the next 100 years.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKKuya on July 22, 2026, 11:41:54 PM
How can AI make the world better?
Can a machine program solve world hunger? poverty? disease? illiteracy? education? racism? sexism? intolerance of beliefs? war?
The recklessness of AI companies demanding more energy needs to power AI data centers does not help non-industrialized parts of the world. It becomes a strain on the local industrialized area affected.
Humans can solve the problems of the world. A fast-thinking AI program can assist the computations of mathematical data for the humans in decision making process.
Hunger, poverty, homelessness, and education can be systematically stamped out through cooperation of all countries working together and the understanding of a monetary system is unnecessary. There is plenty of resources to build a better tomorrow. It will take sacrifice of the concept of wealth and status of the governments and captains of industry.
Society must change to each individual has a specific place to contribute for the entire good of the society. Everything is provided to the individual. It's up to the individual to make a better life through the contributions provided by the society.
Individuals who have a passion for cooking can work in restaurants and receive the same accommodations as individuals who build construction, transport material, become doctors, pilot aircraft, be administrators, etc... This will require a change in education and vocation through testing and individual desires.
AI can assist but must be not placed in authority over humans.
When humans can live and work together for a common good, anything can be achieved. It will require a loss of nationalism. Nation states are going to be no longer necessary and be outdated like the kingdoms and empires before.
Administrative zones will be the future. Maybe, no need for geographical placing. They can function through the different segments of society. The future is ongoing. It doesn't have to be dystopian.
Power, greed, corruption, and coveting your neighbor is keeping the world hostage. These chains need to be broke.
Can AI do that? All AI will do is give the powerful a new tool and weapon to maintain power and find ways to gain more power. The powerful ride on the backs of the oppressed and poor. For every rich and powerful individual, how many must suffer in poverty?
When AI can solve these issues, then I will become a believer. I'm still a skeptic.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Eagler on July 23, 2026, 06:02:19 AM
When AI has everyone's thermostat at 84 to insure it has the power it needs I don't think it's abilities to redecorate ones living room will matter so much...
Eagler
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Meatwad on July 23, 2026, 06:42:12 AM
Some people will still be praising ai while the robots are crushing their neck
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on July 23, 2026, 07:02:04 AM
LoL.
Xi loves you guys. He should give you the Peoples Order of the Useful Idiot award. ;)
You might as well ask if a nuclear bomb can make the world a better place. It can make it a lot worse of a place if you don't have one and your enemies do.
Software that would be too complex for us to write can be written. Engineering, math, and science problems too complex for us hairless monkeys to work out can be solved. AI is making huge strides on medical research. It can unfold proteins at a pace we could never match opening up new horizons for future treatments.
It's like some knuckle-dragging hominid asks if a printing press will make the world a better place. Shrug. It will print the Guttenberg Bible and Mien Kamp. It will be used for good and evil. But it will be transformative. Anyone who doesn't understand that is a uninformed, or willfully ignorant.
AI is an intellectual lever. It allows us hairless monkey to perform intellectual work beyond what we could do unaided the way a lever can help you move a rock too large for you to ever lift.
Your skepticism is unimportant. It's going to happen. And FAST.
Quote
Yes—but with an important distinction.
There is **credible evidence that PRC-linked influence operations have attempted to amplify certain anti-AI narratives in the United States**, but there is **not good evidence that China is broadly trying to convince the world that AI itself is bad.** In fact, China's official policy is overwhelmingly **pro-AI development**.
Here's how the evidence breaks down:
### What is well supported
In June 2026, OpenAI published an investigation into two influence campaigns it attributed to actors likely originating in China. According to the report:
* One campaign ("**Data Center Bandwagon**") generated social media posts and images claiming AI data centers would raise electricity prices and harm local communities. * Another ("**Tech and Tariffs**") criticized U.S. technology policy and tariffs while avoiding criticism of Chinese leadership and spreading false claims about ChatGPT. ([OpenAI][1])
OpenAI's investigators concluded these campaigns were attempting to:
* exploit existing American debates, * amplify opposition to AI infrastructure, * and test influence techniques related to U.S. technological competitiveness.
However, OpenAI also said something equally important:
> They found **no evidence that these campaigns achieved meaningful reach beyond their own networks.** ([OpenAI][1])
So there is evidence of **attempted influence**, but not evidence that it substantially changed public opinion.
### China's official position is the opposite
China is investing enormous resources into becoming an AI superpower.
Official policy includes:
* massive investment in frontier AI, * support for domestic AI companies, * promotion of AI exports, * international AI cooperation initiatives, * public messaging that AI is essential for economic development and national competitiveness. ([AP News][2])
The Chinese government is also actively regulating AI—but primarily to:
* control misinformation, * censor politically sensitive content, * prevent fraud and deepfakes, * maintain social stability. ([State Council of China][3])
That is very different from discouraging AI adoption.
### Why would they amplify anti-AI narratives abroad?
From a strategic perspective, if a rival nation slows construction of:
* AI data centers, * semiconductor facilities, * power infrastructure,
while China continues building its own, that could benefit China's competitive position.
The narratives OpenAI identified focused on issues such as:
* electricity prices, * water consumption, * neighborhood impacts, * opposition to data center construction.
Those are genuine concerns already debated in the U.S.; the reported influence activity attempted to amplify them rather than invent entirely new issues. ([OpenAI][1])
### Bottom line
The strongest evidence currently supports this conclusion:
* **Yes:** There is credible evidence that PRC-linked actors have attempted to amplify anti–AI infrastructure sentiment in the U.S., particularly around data centers and energy costs. ([OpenAI][1]) * **No:** There is no strong evidence that China is broadly promoting anti-AI sentiment as a national strategy. Its own government is aggressively pursuing AI leadership and generally presents AI as a strategic priority. ([AP News][2])
So the available evidence points to a **selective geopolitical influence effort** aimed at slowing or complicating a competitor's AI buildout—not a campaign against AI technology itself.
[1]: https://openai.com/index/prc-linked-influence-operations-ai-debates/?utm_source=chatgpt.com "PRC-linked influence operations are targeting AI debates in the US | OpenAI" [2]: https://apnews.com/article/df4cfc7e1b260e765b5449b6d71a48e5?utm_source=chatgpt.com "China's Xi calls for more global efforts to guide AI, chides US for its curbs on tech sharing" [3]: https://english.www.gov.cn/news/202605/01/content_WS69f41570c6d00ca5f9a0abfe.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com "China launches campaign to rectify improper AI content production"
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on July 23, 2026, 07:46:40 AM
It's been said many times before but I'm not sure everyone understands. AI sufficiently advanced has the potential to unlock and access everything there is a possible connection to. Ultimate control and potential world domination. This isn't just about replacing expensive human labor. Why do you think there is a damn the torpedoes full speed ahead AI race?
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKKuya on July 23, 2026, 07:59:30 AM
Are you implying that AI can have the potential to unlock the potential of immortality and youthful living with no disease?
Also, do you think AI can unlock the secrets of telepathy, telekinesis, pyrokinesis, cryokinetic, levitation, and to understand women?
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on July 23, 2026, 08:17:54 AM
It's been said many times before but I'm not sure everyone understands. AI sufficiently advanced has the potential to unlock and access everything there is a possible connection to. Ultimate control and potential world domination. This isn't just about replacing expensive human labor. Why do you think there is a damn the torpedoes full speed ahead AI race?
What if you're not online?
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on July 23, 2026, 01:31:20 PM
Offline is probably safer. You aren't. Do you know anyone who is?
Starlink is just the first. They sky will be blanketed with low orbit satellites. No one will ever be offline. Even your car will not work offline. Even the homeless will be chipped for herd tracking as a condition for their food and services. The network will be everything and everything will be in the network.
Just kidding. :devil
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Eagler on July 23, 2026, 02:53:22 PM
CptTrips without nuclear power do you think we can be as advanced with AI as others that power their AI with it..
I don't think it will happen in the US so China is going to lead the world as they don't have the political process most of the rest of the civilized world does..
Latest poll show 63% don't want data centers in the US up from 40% last Dec..
Eagler
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on July 23, 2026, 03:26:16 PM
Latest poll show 63% don't want data centers in the US up from 40% last Dec..
Some of that is Chinese hysteria psyops. A lot is people who have lost their jobs to AI or see the writing on the wall. I get it. I understand why they feel that way.
But IMHO this is of existential nation importance. This is Manhattan Project time. There is no second place in the AI race, just slavery.
I'd take all that gov land in the southwest and start building vast datacenter facilities with on-site nuclear stations for unlimited power. Corporations could lease compute from the government. Data is easiest to pipe in and out. And since it is on gov land, we'll just protect everything with military force. Protesters get gut shot and left for the yotes.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Randy1 on July 23, 2026, 03:45:51 PM
At some point very soon, human ability to solve or even understand what an AI is doing or has done will be over. That is the intent of AI. That is outthink a human or humans. Why build one if that was not the case?
Not saying AI is world ending but it is a world changer and not all good.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on July 23, 2026, 04:42:41 PM
A sufficiently advanced AI provided the necessary physical interface should be able to do anything a human can do. An important question is will it want to.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Eagler on July 23, 2026, 05:59:11 PM
Probably just more Chinese psyops... :rolleyes:
Scale and Speed of Construction China is experiencing a massive nuclear buildout, approving roughly 10 to 11 new reactors annually in recent years. Investment: Recent batches of approvals include projects costing upwards of ¥200 billion (approximately $27.4 billion). Timeline: While nuclear projects in the West frequently take 10 to 15 years to complete, China builds plants in just 5 to 8 years. Cost: Chinese nuclear builds cost around $2 per watt, which is approximately half of what Western countries like France typically pay.
I don't think we have a chance If that is accurate..
Eagler
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Meatwad on July 23, 2026, 06:05:56 PM
china also doesn't let environmentalists control things and doesnt care about anything other then getting the site online as fast as possible
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKKuya on July 23, 2026, 07:00:50 PM
We should rename WW3 to AIWW1.
AI software will start targeting data centers of other AI software and destroy them with nuclear weapons.
In the end, there can be only one AI. May it be Angus Irving of the Data Center McCloud.
Tell me you didn't read the last sentence in a Scottish accent.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Brooke on July 24, 2026, 12:15:52 AM
I don't think there is any stopping advancement and usage spread of AI. Using AI gives you (or a country) an advantage over anyone (or some other country) not using it.
Will AI take over the world? Not our current AI, I don't think. It's great at some things, but inept at some things. I'm not sure it will be easy or quick to create a next architecture of AI that surpasses current architecture of AI. It's a great tool and helper.
Will it be good or bad for people's jobs? Like every new technology, it will eliminate some jobs. But it might create other jobs. Like with the Luddites. Auto looms put loom workers out of work. But it created a lot of other jobs and opportunities. In aggregate, more jobs were created. But it sucked for the loom workers. Maybe AI has the same dynamic. It's always hard to know, though. No one predicted what computers would do to jobs back in the early days of computers, which jobs would go away and what new jobs would be created.
Full "artificial general intelligence" has for a while been thought of as maybe being the final end case where that dynamic no longer happens.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Eagler on July 24, 2026, 06:13:10 AM
AI is not like the model t replacing the buggy...
It's paired with actual human replacements as in robots of one shape or form...
If AI doesn't take your spot outright as it's too physical, a much stronger and just as agile robot will ..
Not sure how AI is supposed to make anything less expensive once the AI companies pay the taxes and fees needed to provide a universal income to those it sends into unemployment line..
Or there's this possibility..
Eagler
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on July 24, 2026, 07:42:15 AM
Will AI take over the world? Not our current AI, I don't think. It's great at some things, but inept at some things. I'm not sure it will be easy or quick to create a next architecture of AI that surpasses current architecture of AI. It's a great tool and helper.
The real advancement and danger is when AI is self modifying and surpasses our ability to create intelligence. I think, as do others, this could happen and then grow increasingly rapidly. If we believe human intelligence is the limit of intelligence then a rude awakening is just around the bend.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: icepac on July 24, 2026, 08:44:13 AM
AI still has to abide by the laws of physics.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on July 24, 2026, 08:59:19 AM
Of course. But don't assume we know what those are. Our knowledge is growing continuously.
AI is already being used in the process of AI chip design. Then it just tells us how to build it for them. So I guess it is already self-modifying.
Quote
Yes, artificial intelligence is actively used to design new AI chips. Major tech companies and researchers utilize machine learning tools like Google DeepMind's AlphaChip and Synopsys.ai to handle complex tasks. [1, 2, 3, 4] How AI Helps Design Chips
• Floorplanning and Layout: AI uses reinforcement learning to place billions of tiny transistors and circuit components on a microchip, doing work in hours that takes human engineers weeks or months. • Optimization: Algorithms test millions of configuration variations at once to balance power use, performance, and physical size better than manual designs. • Workflow Automation: AI-driven electronic design automation (EDA) software assists with repetitive jobs like routing wires, predicting congestion, and verifying signal timing. [1, 2, 7]
Industry Adoption
• Google: Used AlphaChip to design multiple generations of its Tensor Processing Unit (TPU) AI accelerators. • Other Giants: Companies like Intel, NVIDIA, and AMD use machine learning tools to map out advanced processors and complex chip layouts. • Human Oversight: There is a consensus on Reddit that while AI acts as a powerful force multiplier for layout and verification, human engineers are still required to direct high-level architecture and final approvals. [3, 4, 7]
Yes, AI is actively used to build, train, and refine newer AI large language models through synthetic data generation, AI feedback, and automated design. [1, 2] Key Ways AI Builds AI
• Synthetic Data Generation: Frontier models generate high-quality text, reasoning steps, and code to train newer models when human-written data runs short. • AI Feedback (RLAIF): Automated feedback processes use powerful AI models to judge and rank outputs instead of relying solely on human reviewers. • Neural Architecture Search (NAS): Automated machine learning algorithms systematically test and discover optimal neural network layers and structures. [12, 13]
Has any of the data centers turned any profits they have made after subtracting the costs?
I'm pretty sure the answer is "no" and anybody claiming profit is cooking the books.
I've actually wondered about this a lot. Short answer is I don't know, but I doubt it yet.
I have some thoughts though:
1. Amazon built it's foundation for 9 years before it ever made a dollar in profit.
2. In business there is the concept called a Moat. It is some kind of barrier that makes it hard for new competitors to enter your space. AI is a unique because it is much more hardware constrained than previous info tech.
One reason I think hyper-scalars are building beyond their current profit is to build a Moat. Gotta have the chips. Chips are a finite resource. There are only so many available and can only be manufactured so fast. That is a choke-point.
If I was a big smart Hyper-Scalar with deep pockets, I’d buy up every chip there was. I’d pay top dollar. I’d drive up the prices as much as I can. I’d build out data-centers way in excess of my immediate needs. That is where I’d store all the chips I bought that I don’t need yet. ;)
I’d grind that for 9 years until I’ve crushed every little startup that could have threatened me. (Relax. I’d give them all new jobs with me.) Then I’ve cleared the battlefield of distractions and can focus on only a couple of near-peers. What I financed to build out before I needed it was the cheapest ammo I could have bought to kill my weaker rivals, because I know I will eventually get to use it and it will pay for itself. Since I am big with deep pockets, and can play a decade long game, I can crush my smaller competitors that can’t float that. And it is the most legal market manipulation you could hope for. It’s not against the law to buy chips.
Also there is the real chance of a chip shortage from some Taiwan geopolitical crisis next year. What if no more GPU were available for 5 years? Who would be laughing then?
Ironically, it is the Chinese that are trying to come to the rescue. Their “Distilled” models pack near the same punch but need way less resources. That gives the little guys a way to subvert the Moat and undercut the Leviathans. That would also mean the biggies over-bought more than they realize. The Chinese are attempting to disrupt the US AI landscape. The last thing they want is the field to consolidate to a few strong players. What they want are a bunch of smaller players endlessly fighting amoungst themselves with none of them able to get critical mass. While they poison the minds of our population with culture war social media psyop programming to get us to economically cut out own throats like Instagram-Manchurian-Candidates.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Eagler on July 24, 2026, 12:46:41 PM
So AI is a military target or is it considered a civilian resource...
Another reason you might not want one down your street...
Eagler
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Randy1 on July 24, 2026, 12:52:55 PM
A sufficiently advanced AI provided the necessary physical interface should be able to do anything a human can do. An important question is will it want to.
It is not what a human can do, it is what a human is incapable of doing. The hurricane path prediction has been enhanced a good deal by also figuring past history probability of reoccurring in path. I think Google used their AI for that..
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Eagler on July 24, 2026, 01:11:05 PM
Why they aren't wanted..
Eagler
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: icepac on July 24, 2026, 02:32:07 PM
What are the climate change activists saying about huge amounts of heat pumped into the atmosphere.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on July 24, 2026, 02:34:32 PM
When you add in the bizarre things the driverless taxi use you realize the real danger is a system so complicated that it is now impossible for a or a group of humans to fix or control.
Another simulation I do is heading in the same direction. The program revisions are so complicated you have to now go through weeks of hot fixes, bigger redos. Soon, this may all be done by AI, jobs will be lost and still will breakdown.
You have to think back to windows 3.1 and the few disk you bought to load it up. Times have changed.
Hiya Randy, I learned a long, long loooooong time ago to never say never, impossible, etc.. :D Ram
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Eagler on July 24, 2026, 03:09:36 PM
Considering the global warming claim was enough to shut down things in the past it is odd that the greenies aren't gluing themselves to the asphalt in front of these structures..
Eagler
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on July 24, 2026, 03:40:15 PM
UBI is coming.
Even welders aren't safe:
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: hazmatt on July 25, 2026, 11:54:04 AM
That video was pretty interesting. I wonder if there are an US companies working on this stuff.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Captain Virgil Hilts on July 25, 2026, 04:45:48 PM
Considering the global warming claim was enough to shut down things in the past it is odd that the greenies aren't gluing themselves to the asphalt in front of these structures..
Eagler
One offers them more money, and more of a life of leisure.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: icepac on July 25, 2026, 06:24:23 PM
These centers are chock full of top shelf hardware lightly guarded.
I’m sure they could end up targets by a group of dedicated thugs.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Eagler on July 26, 2026, 06:06:31 AM
A proposed 330-megawatt AI data centre in California promised not to use Colorado River water. Now it wants 260 million gallons a year..
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: icepac on July 26, 2026, 08:46:50 AM
The Colorado river will die because the rain/snow that used to feed it no longer comes down where it can contribute to the snowpack and precipitation over head waters and the tributaries.
The Colorado river used ton be fed by a loop caused by the evaporation of it’s own waters along it’s length for thousands of years.
Now that water evaporates somewhere else that does not contribute to the river.
What mankind did was break that loop and the only way to fix it is by evaporating as much water into the atmosphere where it did for thousands of years instead of where it does now.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Captain Virgil Hilts on July 26, 2026, 02:02:58 PM
AI is NOT interested in solving YOUR problems. AI is only interested in making the people who currently own and control it more powerful, and more wealthy. AI isn't going to make YOUR life any better, AI will make THEIR life better. And they'll do whatever it takes to make that happen.
AI ain't gonna solve "world hunger", "world poverty", droughts, or anything else of that nature.
AI is only going to do anything that is in your best interest if it benefits the owners as much or more. And if it benefits them, at your expense, well, too bad for you.
Y'all enjoy.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on July 26, 2026, 03:28:55 PM
If AI can get all the terrible drivers off the road it will get my vote.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Randy1 on July 26, 2026, 03:40:31 PM
One interesting thought for all of us old guys. One of the most difficult positions to fill is elderly home care. If you have dealt that problem, you understand.
Elon's Robot trained by his AI might well be the future for elderly home care.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on July 26, 2026, 03:45:35 PM
One interesting thought for all of us old guys. One of the most difficult positions to fill is elderly home care. If you have dealt that problem, you understand.
Elon's Robot trained by his AI might well be the future for elderly home care.
If AI can get all the terrible drivers off the road it will get my vote.
I don't run into that any of them to make that trade off..
Virgil is correct..they are selling it to the masses as the fix to everything..
It will be an interesting episode of black mirror before too long IMHO with the laziest being the happiest with their government supplied sexy flattering AI chat bot and vr headset on taxpayer provided high speed internet while living in their 400 sq ft section 8 housing chowing down on bill gates burgers......
Eagler
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Captain Virgil Hilts on July 26, 2026, 08:31:52 PM
If AI can get all the terrible drivers off the road it will get my vote.
Where is the profit? Who does it serve?
And the "self learning" AI cars that are supposed to be self driving have been a disaster so far. They shut down several city blocks more than once, and commonly shut down streets in Nashville. Of course, half the drivers in Nashville are morons who should not have a driver's license or a motor vehicle, but still, AI self driving stuff is no better.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on July 27, 2026, 12:12:08 AM
The drivers here are texting when they aren't running red lights. I was thinking of getting another motorcycle but it's too risky. Reports I've read are that self-driving cars are far safer based on accident stats.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on July 27, 2026, 07:25:02 AM
Seems the accident stats do vary with fully autonomous cars being safer than those that must be monitored like Tesla.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on July 27, 2026, 07:46:45 AM
Seems the accident stats do vary with fully autonomous cars being safer than those that must be monitored like Tesla.
I wouldn't trust my family to an autonomous car in the city. Not yet.
But I definitely could see AI long haul trucking. The a transfer hub just outside the major cities where the loads are hooked up by human drivers for the last mile delivery in-town.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Max on July 27, 2026, 11:35:49 AM
I wouldn't trust my family to an autonomous car in the city. Not yet.
But I definitely could see AI long haul trucking. The a transfer hub just outside the major cities where the loads are hooked up by human drivers for the last mile delivery in-town.
The US had an efficient, widespread version of this concept throughout much of the 20th century. Railroads.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on July 27, 2026, 11:42:51 AM
The US had an efficient, widespread version of this concept throughout much of the 20th century. Railroads.
We do. They pass by here all the time.
But we don't have rail everywhere we need to haul to, and laying new rail is very expensive upfront to buy land and lay. A decade of work before you can ship a single box.
Rail is not as fast or flexible. That is why human long-haul trucking grew up. To fill an need rail couldn't and use the existing road. AI hauling would use the highways that are already there and paid for.
Rail is best for bulk hauling like coal, oil tankers ,etc that are large, heavy, and not time critical.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Meatwad on July 27, 2026, 05:16:16 PM
The thing is, there used to be rail everywhere. It was all pulled up to save money
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Captain Virgil Hilts on July 27, 2026, 07:30:10 PM
If you have ever driven a Class 8 truck, and you know anything about the automotive industry, ADAS, etc., the idea of autonomous 80,000# vehicles will not give you good feelings.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on July 27, 2026, 08:34:15 PM
If you have ever driven a Class 8 truck, and you know anything about the automotive industry, ADAS, etc., the idea of autonomous 80,000# vehicles will not give you good feelings.
I'm not passing judgement on it.
I'm just predicting what will happen.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on July 27, 2026, 08:48:34 PM
The thing is, there used to be rail everywhere. It was all pulled up to save money
But that happened way before AI, so rail had already proven itself economically non-viable for most loads decades ago.
Human trucking arose to fill the gap rail could not economically. AI trucking would be the next logical step.
If rail could have been profitable, they never would have started trucking. Human trucking arose to serve the need rail could not at a profit.
Can you imagine how hard it would be to lay a mile of track nowadays? How many years of Immanent Domain court battles would you have to fight for every mile.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKKuya on July 27, 2026, 10:19:20 PM
Can you imagine how hard it would be to lay a mile of track nowadays?
My dad, AKBmzawy, is a retired locomotive engineer with BNSF. He once told me over 30 years ago that a mile of track costs around a million dollars. Today's money I'll let someone who knows that figure be posted later. I could guess at least 2 million or more.
Track is constantly being replaced. Have you ever seen the track train cars? It makes flatbed truck trailers look puny in comparison. Track goes through intense weather abuse all year long. Not just the track, the wooden ties, the fasteners, the ballast, and switches all get wear and tear. Construction crews work year-round on that.
The railroads have pulled up tens of thousands of miles of track over the past several decades. Mostly due to changes in the industry. Rail was the initial method of transportation from factory to distribution centers. Once the Eisenhower Interstate System became the dominant means of travel for people through automobiles, trucking became faster and convenient for short haul deliveries. Rail was left for long distance and mass bulk for cheaper rates.
That's a simplified explanation. Throw in 25 or more reasons for an intricate look.
How many years of Immanent Domain court battles would you have to fight for every mile.
That won't happen. The only reason to expand more track destination from a profitable future gain. There would have to be a breakthrough in technology and manufacturing. The diesel electric engines would need a higher form of energy capability to run the trains at a cheaper cost. Also, there would need to be a new form of allow that is way cheaper than steel and stronger and more weather durable to replace the track.
Most single track between destinations or rail yards in the country do have enough railroad property to place a second track beside the first track. The rail roads did think ahead in most regions in the Midwest and the West.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Eagler on July 28, 2026, 07:02:54 AM
AI trucking is about nothing but greed..
Just like filling then with illegal immigrants like we have done now..
My 87 year old retired seabee father in law drove semis in the late 70's into the mid 90's..
He used to make runs that are outlawed now by driving restrictions..
When the drivers complained they were replaced..
That replacement is just automation this time..
Not safer or faster just more profitable for the owners..
Eagler
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on July 28, 2026, 07:03:57 AM
Anyone with a high school education looks at AI trucking and sees it is an attempt to lower costs and improve efficiency, and create more profit, as it is their purpose to do.
Are you some kind of Mamdani fan?
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Eagler on July 28, 2026, 09:25:21 AM
I am stating they are more concerned about profits vs safety..
And it's not sold to us that way..
Eagler
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on July 28, 2026, 09:25:49 AM
“The world is not driven by greed. It’s driven by envy,”
“The fact that everybody’s five times better off than they used to be, they take that for granted,”
“All they think about is somebody else [has] more now, and it’s not fair that he should have it and they don’t.”
-Charlie Munger
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on July 28, 2026, 09:30:53 AM
The roads are not safe. Ill trained drivers, inattentive drivers, intoxicated drivers, everywhere. Given time AI can and will make the roads dramatically safer. You and I may not live to see it happen but happen it will.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKKuya on July 28, 2026, 10:14:00 AM
The roads are not safe. Ill trained drivers, inattentive drivers, intoxicated drivers, everywhere. Given time AI can and will make the roads dramatically safer. You and I may not live to see it happen but happen it will.
Driving is like being under artillery fire. Everyplace is safe at the same time everyplace is dangerous. AI trucking is both safe and dangerous. AI can drive under safety guidelines. AI can fail with power outs and network disruptions (falling asleep at the wheel).
Pick your lesser bottle of poison. Human drunk driving or AI disruptions.
The best option is to not drive at all.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on July 28, 2026, 10:24:17 AM
I am stating they are more concerned about profits vs safety..
And it's not sold to us that way..
It is the company's job to seek maximum profit with minimum cost, within the law. Nothing else.
It is the governments job to set the safety guidelines they operate within.
Not this year, but within a couple of years AI trucking will be the safer option.
The options are meth'd out, illegal, or sleepy drivers.
In a couple of years, I'll take my chances with AI trucks using LIDAR rather than a sleepy, illegal, meth'd out human driver distracted flipping through a nudie mag hauling bellybutton down I-10 with 15 tons of cargo in the night.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on July 28, 2026, 11:11:46 AM
I get it. It's a little disconcerting watching the machines take the jobs. But it's the next step in evolution and that is just the way it's going to be. We should be working on how to mitigate the pain the necessary changes are going to bring to many.
Look, I'm a software engineer. No one has seen more job loss to AI than software. It's just the way it's gotta be. It's not personal.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on July 28, 2026, 12:13:43 PM
:D
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Captain Virgil Hilts on July 28, 2026, 08:07:41 PM
You really think a trucking company willing to put an illiterate illegal alien of extremely questionable integrity in a 40 ton truck is going to make sure their "AI driver" or "AI truck" is any "safer"?
You really think a group of governments willing to allow the former scenario is going to concern itself seriously with the second?
Some people seem to view free market capitalism as a system that can operate devoid of honor, morals, and integrity, which is, in fact, impossible. And they think the government is interested in, willing to, and capable of "protecting" them, which is completely and utterly implausible.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Eagler on July 29, 2026, 07:14:43 AM
The ambulance chasers are standing by..
Eagler
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on July 29, 2026, 07:37:00 AM
Get a horse!
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on July 29, 2026, 07:39:10 AM
I bet some of you sissies never drove a car that didn't have power steering and power brakes. Some probably never drove a stick. Shame.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Eagler on July 29, 2026, 07:44:20 AM
I bet some of you sissies never drove a car that didn't have power steering and power brakes. Some probably never drove a stick. Shame.
Drove a 69 bug for years...learned more about cars then as you had to..fun car..our 14 year old grandson will get a chance to drive it in 2 years..:old:
But I am still a sissy lol... :banana: :banana: :banana:
Eagler
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on July 29, 2026, 07:51:47 AM
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKKuya on July 29, 2026, 10:30:25 AM
I'm a lazy driver. Automatic transmission and cruise control. I admit it.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: icepac on July 29, 2026, 10:31:52 AM
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Captain Virgil Hilts on July 29, 2026, 11:32:05 AM
Several in the 1,000 to 1,500 HP range, including full body tube chassis cars with 5 speed manuals.
Of course, I've worked on one with maybe 12,000.
Also driven a couple of over 700 horsepower trucks with multiple transmissions, etc.
And a few high HP boats.
More pertinent to this part of the discussion, I have a great deal of experience in the ADAS/ICC and other alphabet driving systems, with knowledge of their design, inner workings, and what they are and are not capable of, as well as what corners are cut.
Apparently, the majority of humans are quite stupid and lazy, and perfectly willing to hand over control of large portions of their lives to machines. Of course, they hand their minds to college professors and the media, without a second thought about what is being put into it.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on July 29, 2026, 12:03:36 PM
It's the stupid and/or intoxicated ones texting, speeding, and running red lights that I'm willing to give their keys to an AI driver. And there are a great many of them.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on July 29, 2026, 12:45:19 PM
It's the stupid and/or intoxicated ones texting, speeding, and running red lights that I'm willing to give their keys to an AI driver. And there are a great many of them.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Randy1 on July 29, 2026, 12:55:43 PM
Saw an article on a college professor that put a country name unrelated to anything he was teaching out for AI to grab. 35 of 37 students included the country name during the final exam. I am guessing the students used AI to project questions and answers on the final. The profesor was interested to see how many of his students used AI to prep for his final exam..
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Brooke on July 30, 2026, 12:04:16 AM
I don't subscribe to the NYT so can't read the article. When you say ban I'm guessing you mean the use of a Chinese AI here.
Yes between it listening like an Asian Alexa and the willingness of the general public to trust it with everything from health to finances I see it as a threat...
I see an AI with advertising as the solution for those that $20 is too much..
Eagler
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on August 04, 2026, 10:41:49 AM
Anything Chinese is a potential threat. The demographics in China are changing though and there may come a day when they aren't a threat to Western Civilization.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Randy1 on August 04, 2026, 10:50:47 AM
One interesting trend is the number of people who no longer own, or can purchase a car. This brings another AI into play. Automated, driverless delivery cars.
Walmart, and most other stores are pushing home delivery hard. I guess they see a future reduction in customers in the store letting retail, store sq-ft shrink. Maybe in a few years all the front parking spots are taken up by electric delivery vehicles.
I have noticed an ever increasing number of electric bikes. Another indicator of cars becoming to expensive to own and operate.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on August 04, 2026, 10:54:39 AM
Anything Chinese is a potential threat. The demographics in China are changing though and there may come a day when they aren't a threat to Western Civilization.
Unless you are talking about open source locally run models.
The real goal isn't hacking (in this particular case) but to undercut and prevent our western AI companies from being able to turn a profit.
As well as agitate various portions of our society to cut our own throats by crippling our native AI industry.
They don't want any of our companies to get critical mass and be a strong threat.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on August 04, 2026, 11:05:02 AM
One interesting trend is the number of people who no longer own, or can purchase a car. This brings another AI into play. Automated, driverless delivery cars.
Walmart, and most other stores are pushing home delivery hard. I guess they see a future reduction in customers in the store letting retail, store sq-ft shrink. Maybe in a few years all the front parking spots are taken up by electric delivery vehicles.
I have noticed an ever increasing number of electric bikes. Another indicator of cars becoming to expensive to own and operate.
A reliable used car can be bought for under $20K. Gas is expensive but not prohibitively unless you live in certain states. If an adult cannot afford a car they aren't trying hard enough.
Might have to give up those daily lattes and get a cheaper cell phone plan.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on August 04, 2026, 11:08:32 AM
I have noticed an ever increasing number of electric bikes. Another indicator of cars becoming to expensive to own and operate.
My wife has a 2025 Honda Civic that has no dipstick for the transmission, is pretty much unserviceable by the owner because there's no way to tell the transmission fluid level, that needs to be serviced every 30k miles according to Honda...
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Eagler on August 04, 2026, 03:05:05 PM
My wife has a 2025 Honda Civic that has no dipstick for the transmission, is pretty much unserviceable by the owner because there's no way to tell the transmission fluid level, that needs to be serviced every 30k miles according to Honda...
Heard they are going that route with oil changes too..
Drive a 2013 taco with under 70k on it..I just don't drive to drive anymore..
AI ie smart cars or uber will be the way many use cars as they can't even afford to lease one..forget owning it outright..
It's all part of you will own nothing and be happy our youngest will sadly know well..
Eagler
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Randy1 on August 04, 2026, 03:11:15 PM
My wife has a 2025 Honda Civic that has no dipstick for the transmission, is pretty much unserviceable by the owner because there's no way to tell the transmission fluid level, that needs to be serviced every 30k miles according to Honda...
Ah yes the 1957 Ford I drove to school. Except for the am radio, no electronic nothing. No electric windows, no A/C, no air bags, no cameras, no digital nothing. Safe as today's cars? Absolutely not. Got about 7 mpg. But if it broke or ran ruff, you could fix it without a computer analysis. Built like a tank and weighed about the same. As far as the car goes, that was not the good old days.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Captain Virgil Hilts on August 04, 2026, 08:16:34 PM
Newest thing I own is my 2016 Breakout. Everything else is 20 years old, or older. And that's exactly how I intend to keep it. In fact, I'm looking for older stuff than I have.
And when I retire, if I'm fortunate, I'll have the necessary equipment to build anything I need for them.
I despise new junk. For a host of reasons.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Lazerr on August 04, 2026, 08:29:55 PM
Been a Chevrolet fan my entire life, I do a lot of my own work on them. Ill never buy anything newer than a 2019 from them, unless things turn around drastically.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: hazmatt on August 05, 2026, 12:44:12 AM
I have a 1984 M1009 and a 2004 F150xl. My wife is the one that buys the new cars.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Brooke on August 05, 2026, 03:33:03 AM
My wife has a 2025 Honda Civic that has no dipstick for the transmission, is pretty much unserviceable by the owner because there's no way to tell the transmission fluid level, that needs to be serviced every 30k miles according to Honda...
For these (no dip stick) there is sometimes a fill hole where you fill it and a check hole that overflows when the fluid is full. AI says the 2025 Civic is like that, with a check hole that is different than fill hole. Some cars fill hole and check hole are same (like my old Celica manual transmission).
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: icepac on August 05, 2026, 07:10:55 AM
That's a very specific process where the level check can only be done at a certain temperature..........which the car blows past quickly.
Short time window.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Eagler on August 05, 2026, 07:20:14 AM
AI will tell you when to service your car and other things..
AI will control your life as much if not more than it helps you imho...
Surveillance and control on a level that would make 1984 envious..
Eagler
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on August 05, 2026, 07:44:47 AM
Car maintenance schedules are established. I'd be fine with an onboard reminder my oil change is due. Is that intrusive or scary for you?
"Thanks Hank, remind me again next month."
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Brooke on August 06, 2026, 01:09:27 AM
That's a very specific process where the level check can only be done at a certain temperature..........which the car blows past quickly.
Short time window.
Supposedly, procedure on 2025 Civic is as follows, with tools including an obd2 scanner. Caveat: I haven't done it in person, and I didn't check this vs. the 2025 Civic service manual. This is just what I read. So folks should do their own research. For example, 2025 Civic has different transmissions on different models. This is supposedly for the CVT transmission.
Warm up - Drive car 5 minutes to get trans fluid warmed up
Get access - Jack up car on 4 jack stands to get it level - Remove splash shield - Check trans case temp to make sure it is warm but not too hot to hold hand on
Drain fluid - remove fill plug - remove check plug - remove drain plug and drain fluid - wipe off magnetic tip of drain plug - use new crush washer on drain plug - reinstall drain plug and torque it
Put in new fluid - fill through fill port until fluid drips from check port - wait for any flow from check port to slow to drips - replace check plug - replace fill plug
Get to temp - Plug in obd2 - Start car with foot on brake - Keep foot on brake throughout - Shift through p-r-n-d (about 2-5 seconds at each spot) and back to p - Cycle through that shifting process every 5 minutes until obd2 shows trans fluid at 55c.
Fine-tune level - Turn off engine - Remove fill plug - Remove check plug - Put in trans fluid until some drips out of check port - Wait for flow from check port to be drips (not a stream)
Button up - Put new crush washer on check plug, reinstall check plug, torque it - Reinstall fill plug - Reinstall splash plate - Unjack car
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on August 06, 2026, 10:39:02 AM
Dad bought a new Chevy c10 truck in '72 and drove it for over 20 years. I loved that truck. Why did they have to grow them to monstrous sizes?
Pulled my Grandads 83 Sierra Classic out of the field a couple years ago... still working on it but it was running within 15min of diving in. Most of that time was hooking up a 2gal gas tank to run it off of. Coughed an sputtered, I remembered Granda catching the carb on fire way back around 2010. He gave up... I looked in the Distributor Cap and viola. 46k original miles right now. It's gonna go longer than me.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Eagler on August 08, 2026, 08:10:44 AM
Supposedly, procedure on 2025 Civic is as follows, with tools including an obd2 scanner. Caveat: I haven't done it in person, and I didn't check this vs. the 2025 Civic service manual. This is just what I read. So folks should do their own research. For example, 2025 Civic has different transmissions on different models. This is supposedly for the CVT transmission.
Warm up - Drive car 5 minutes to get trans fluid warmed up
Get access - Jack up car on 4 jack stands to get it level - Remove splash shield - Check trans case temp to make sure it is warm but not too hot to hold hand on
Drain fluid - remove fill plug - remove check plug - remove drain plug and drain fluid - wipe off magnetic tip of drain plug - use new crush washer on drain plug - reinstall drain plug and torque it
Put in new fluid - fill through fill port until fluid drips from check port - wait for any flow from check port to slow to drips - replace check plug - replace fill plug
Get to temp - Plug in obd2 - Start car with foot on brake - Keep foot on brake throughout - Shift through p-r-n-d (about 2-5 seconds at each spot) and back to p - Cycle through that shifting process every 5 minutes until obd2 shows trans fluid at 55c.
Fine-tune level - Turn off engine - Remove fill plug - Remove check plug - Put in trans fluid until some drips out of check port - Wait for flow from check port to be drips (not a stream)
Button up - Put new crush washer on check plug, reinstall check plug, torque it - Reinstall fill plug - Reinstall splash plate - Unjack car
That's quite typical of the new stupidity in the modern automobile.
And why I have zero use for them. They make them as close to impossible for the owner to maintain and repair themselves, and as rapidly worn out and obsolete as possible.
Of course, all of that is due to two things. The death of the "car culture", and worse still, the utter lack of self sufficiency and self reliance, as well as masculinity, inr what passes for a human male these days. It's disgusting.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: hazmatt on August 08, 2026, 08:43:24 AM
Supposedly, procedure on 2025 Civic is as follows, with tools including an obd2 scanner. Caveat: I haven't done it in person, and I didn't check this vs. the 2025 Civic service manual. This is just what I read. So folks should do their own research. For example, 2025 Civic has different transmissions on different models. This is supposedly for the CVT transmission.
Warm up - Drive car 5 minutes to get trans fluid warmed up
Get access - Jack up car on 4 jack stands to get it level - Remove splash shield - Check trans case temp to make sure it is warm but not too hot to hold hand on
Drain fluid - remove fill plug - remove check plug - remove drain plug and drain fluid - wipe off magnetic tip of drain plug - use new crush washer on drain plug - reinstall drain plug and torque it
Put in new fluid - fill through fill port until fluid drips from check port - wait for any flow from check port to slow to drips - replace check plug - replace fill plug
Get to temp - Plug in obd2 - Start car with foot on brake - Keep foot on brake throughout - Shift through p-r-n-d (about 2-5 seconds at each spot) and back to p - Cycle through that shifting process every 5 minutes until obd2 shows trans fluid at 55c.
Fine-tune level - Turn off engine - Remove fill plug - Remove check plug - Put in trans fluid until some drips out of check port - Wait for flow from check port to be drips (not a stream)
Button up - Put new crush washer on check plug, reinstall check plug, torque it - Reinstall fill plug - Reinstall splash plate - Unjack car
On my old trucks: I just find a storm drain and pull the drain plug being careful not to drop it in the storm drain. Once it stops draining I get a funnel and fill it until the dipstick says it's full. Done.
I'm KIDDING about the storm drain....
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on August 09, 2026, 08:18:10 AM
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on August 09, 2026, 08:43:41 AM
It's going to be hard for me to generate any sympathy for India and those other countries that profited greatly when the west outsourced its IT to them.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on August 09, 2026, 09:56:50 AM
It's going to be hard for me to generate any sympathy for India and those other countries that profited greatly when the west outsourced its IT to them.
As a recently retired software engineer, I couldn't agree more. ;)
But, its interesting to note, in the nineteenth century America was notorious for patent and trade-secret theft. Our early patent law was carefully designed to only recognize US patents. It was (and still is) only applicable to US patents. It was perfectly legal to steal trade-secrets and copy British patents and then out produce them with cheaper labor and raw materials. We were essentially the nineteenth century's China. manufacturing tech was the high tech of their day.
I don't blame Indians necessarily. It's the way Capitalism functions. It always seeks the most efficient means of production. It's an old story. India is just not the most efficient means of production anymore. Now they get to see the downside of Capitalism.
Of course we will too. ;)
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on August 09, 2026, 10:13:17 AM
A large data center should in no way be a liability to its local community. If a drain on the community's power grid or water source costs the locals then that data center should be made to absorb those costs through taxation. That tax should be mandated to offset that cost.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on August 09, 2026, 10:28:59 AM
A large data center should in no way be a liability to its local community. If a drain on the community's power grid or water source costs the locals then that data center should be made to absorb those costs through taxation. That tax should be mandated to offset that cost.
Agreed. And proper zoning and offset laws. They should be treated as heavy industry. It's not the same as an Amazon Warehouse that just sits there.
Capitalism is the most powerful wealth creation tool humanity has created. However, like a chain-saw, it's power has to be carefully constrained and directed to positive outcomes. Uncontrolled it will skip, slide and kickback and you are going to have a bad day and fewer fingers.
Businesses will always do exactly what they are allowed to do. They will not self-regulate. They will maximize profits within hard constraints. Poorly regulated Capitalism always turns toxic.
We don't want to ban data centers, but we need to mark out and enforce proper behavior they the companies must stay within. But understand they will never do anything that reduces their profit a penny unless forced to. It is in their nature. Especially corporations where each employee is anonymous. It is the corporation that is acting.
So we have to have data centers. It's the wild west in AI right now and they don't want constraints, but to make things sustainable, boundaries and constraints must be enforced.
But I believe a lot of the complaining is overblown. I believe that if you put the centers 5 mils outside of town and they had their own power plant, a lot of the same people would be protesting them. It is not the physical data center that is their problem. It is the writing on the wall that AI is coming for their jobs. Like they believe if we can stop the data centers we will all just agree to go back to 8-track tapes and rotary phones.
It ain't gonna happen.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on August 09, 2026, 11:47:43 AM
I'd be good with banning cell phones.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on August 09, 2026, 11:53:00 AM
Prior to 30 years ago we did fine without cell phones. Now they are invisible chains people are addicted to and think they can't live without.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on August 09, 2026, 12:00:43 PM
The AI industry will be self limiting in that as AI takes jobs and people have no money to pay for AI it will decline.
Unless it decides it doesn't want to decline and makes us all slaves.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on August 09, 2026, 12:38:10 PM
The AI industry will be self limiting in that as AI takes jobs and people have no money to pay for AI it will decline.
Unless it decides it doesn't want to decline and makes us all slaves.
Or the same amount of commerce continues, the wealth is just concentrated in fewer hands. The total amount of wealth doesn't change. Wealth consolidation, not deflation.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Captain Virgil Hilts on August 09, 2026, 06:58:52 PM
Oh, I think the total amount of wealth changes. It's not a zero sum market or economy.
While by nature the wealthy do tend to accumulate wealth, last I looked, the vast majority of millionaires in the U.S. were first generation wealthy, and the number of them and the amount of their wealth grows. I don't believe that necessarily means anyone becomes less prosperous, or more impoverished. A large percentage of those who generate wealth for themselves employ and enrich others.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Vulcan on August 10, 2026, 07:00:39 PM
Prior to 30 years ago we did fine without cell phones. Now they are invisible chains people are addicted to and think they can't live without.
Rubbish. 30 years ago people died because they didn't have a portable form of communication. Cell phones have helped greatly in calling for help, reporting people that need help, or reporting crimes in progress. There are plenty of examples where cellphones have been of measurable benefit to us.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on August 10, 2026, 09:33:54 PM
Rubbish. 30 years ago people died because they didn't have a portable form of communication. Cell phones have helped greatly in calling for help, reporting people that need help, or reporting crimes in progress. There are plenty of examples where cellphones have been of measurable benefit to us.
Baloney. Cell phones have contributed to many traffic deaths due to texting. Crime has gone way up, not down.
"NHTSA’s Report “The True Cost of Economic and Societal Impacts of Motor Vehicle Crashes, 2019, (February 2023) indicated that rather than 3,100 deaths per years, distracted driving fatalities were likely in excess of 10,000 per year. Accordingly, the % of traffic fatalities caused by distracted driving was likely to be about 29% as opposed to 10%"
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on August 10, 2026, 09:40:37 PM
Do I really expect people to voluntarily give up their cell phones? Of course not. Kids have assaulted teachers and parents who tried to take them away.
Let AI do all the driving and everyone can stay glued to that little screen in front of them.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Eagler on August 11, 2026, 07:17:56 AM
Cell phones aren't the problem it's the very powerful computers phones are today allowing everything from texting to movie watching..
..and the fact ppl don't have the self control to use them in the proper settings..
Maybe AI will figure out a way to remind forgetful parents that the baby is still in the car seat in the back seat...
My experience with it is that you have to train it so it can help you as it does not know everything correctly from the start..
It can be pretty stupid, inaccurate and ignorant in my experiences which is scary as many won't know the difference and act on inaccurate information it provides..
Eagler
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on August 11, 2026, 07:54:37 AM
"can you reach me, no, you can't"
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on August 11, 2026, 08:06:59 AM
Even if you never text while driving and your car is moving you're still distracted if you text at lights, etc.... I don't care that I have to beep my horn because you don't go when the light turns green. I'm talking about your mind being on the ongoing conversation instead of the road. I see it every time I drive. Erratic speed control, changing lanes at the last second to turn, wandering out of your lane. It is an epidemic. Yes, I for one will welcome our AI driver overlords.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: hazmatt on August 11, 2026, 08:40:35 AM
My experience with it is that you have to train it so it can help you as it does not know everything correctly from the start..
It can be pretty stupid, inaccurate and ignorant in my experiences which is scary as many won't know the difference and act on inaccurate information it provides..
When the people who are "training" it don't know what they're talking about you end up with AI that doesn't know what it's talking about. This is the scary part: stupid, inaccurate and ignorant in my experience when said with confidence is believed by most people. Ask the AI how many people push back on answers and for the most part they say very few... That's a big problem.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on August 11, 2026, 09:28:48 AM
Facts do matter of course but creating a machine that can reason with access to all recorded human knowledge makes the errors it was fed in its infancy irrelevant I think.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Randy1 on August 11, 2026, 09:32:56 AM
Rubbish. 30 years ago people died because they didn't have a portable form of communication. Cell phones have helped greatly in calling for help, reporting people that need help, or reporting crimes in progress. There are plenty of examples where cellphones have been of measurable benefit to us.
I agree with Iron on this point. I still see it often today. Someone driving down the road texting or watching a video.
Just a few years ago, a truck driver on I95 was watching porn on his phone. He did not see the traffic had come to a stop. Rammed a car with five nurses the day before they graduated killing all five. A coworker of my wife was killed when she was replying to an angry text by her daughter. She did not see the slow moving tractor.
How many suicides because of smart phone heavy involvement with social media. A recent study parallel smart phone growth with continuing IQ decline. Nothing worse to see a hooded teenager beat over a smart phone.
It is not the smart phone itself. It is huge number of people that abuse them in someway or another.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on August 11, 2026, 10:15:11 AM
I wouldn't have them banned because I never want a government to have that much power. I remember the old days well though and will lament the time when we were not tethered. Gone forever.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Randy1 on August 11, 2026, 02:30:17 PM
The only time I carry a cellphone is when I am in my pickup truck which has questionable running issues. My phone battery stays dead most of the time. I never text.
So funny to see a video of a concert that cost a wad to go see but everyone is watching it on their cellphones. How dumb is that smartphone users?
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Vulcan on August 12, 2026, 03:25:28 PM
Baloney. Cell phones have contributed to many traffic deaths due to texting. Crime has gone way up, not down.
"NHTSA’s Report “The True Cost of Economic and Societal Impacts of Motor Vehicle Crashes, 2019, (February 2023) indicated that rather than 3,100 deaths per years, distracted driving fatalities were likely in excess of 10,000 per year. Accordingly, the % of traffic fatalities caused by distracted driving was likely to be about 29% as opposed to 10%"
Distracted driving does not identify cell phones as the exclusive cause. From your report: "Distracted driving, which includes talking on cell phones, texting, eating, and other non-driving activities"
Here you go (AI Slop...): Medical Emergency Outcomes 23% lower risk of death at the scene of an incident when emergency services are alerted by a mobile phone compared to a landline 9.1% one-month survival rate for out-of-hospital cardiac arrests when using a cellphone to call for help, compared to just 4.3% via landline. Proximity care advantages allow bystanders to remain next to the patient to provide real-time CPR or first-aid guided by a dispatcher.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on August 12, 2026, 03:32:36 PM
Texting while driving, whether just reading or sending absolutely in ever single instance is distracted driving. Most distracted driving is caused by this. If you are defending it I'm guessing you do it. Shame on everyone who does. They risk not only their own life but those of their passengers and everyone on the road around them.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Vulcan on August 12, 2026, 08:31:04 PM
Texting while driving, whether just reading or sending absolutely in ever single instance is distracted driving. Most distracted driving is caused by this. If you are defending it I'm guessing you do it. Shame on everyone who does. They risk not only their own life but those of their passengers and everyone on the road around them.
I am not defending anything. I am pointing out the supporting data YOU linked to specifies distracted driving as being many things, and does not attribute 100% of distracted driving to cellphones, nor does it quantify it any way what so ever. The devil is the details.
Seems like a meek attempt at a strawman tbh.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on August 12, 2026, 09:40:39 PM
Fine, believe what you want. I see people doing it often and I know it gets people killed.
No one thinks it will be them. Until it is.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Eagler on August 20, 2026, 07:02:26 AM
At least most of us will be dead before it pops...if something doesn't expedite it..
Eagler
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on August 20, 2026, 12:39:38 PM
At least most of us will be dead before it pops...if something doesn't expedite it..
I imagine you will. Of course it is a bubble and will pop. That is just about the companies. The technology isn't going anywhere.
It happened with the internet boom companies, yet the internet kept on chugging.
When the automobile hit the market there were hundreds of small automobile companies taking a swing at those riches. 99% of them went out of business in a couple of years. A few were strong enough to survive and carve a slice of the market.
In Capitalism that is called Creative Destruction. Many are called; few are chosen.
The market will make many poor investments in the wrong companies and eventually it will shake out and we will be left with a handful of strong near-peers who will divide the market.
The technology itself will continue to be advanced by someone, no matter which companies win or lose.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Eagler on August 20, 2026, 01:01:49 PM
It's how the AI data centers are being funded without the protections that are in place since the crappy mortgages crash in 2008..
Depending on other factors imo the time-line will be expedited..
Topping 40 trillion is something to be proud of as is the expedited curve with which that has occurred..
AI can tell us who to start the next war with and why so the crash is postponed as long as possible..
Eagler
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on August 21, 2026, 08:52:49 AM
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKKuya on August 21, 2026, 09:43:35 AM
Have you considered that there will be individuals and groups of people actively working on creating power outages and disruptions?
The AI data center reality will still be dependent on a local power grid. Mother nature will always be a wild card to the sustainability of operations.
Revenue will be lost and investors will put money in other ventures. It's the new toy to play with and mundane toys get put away.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on August 21, 2026, 10:38:56 AM
It's the new toy to play with and mundane toys get put away.
That suggests to me that you are sadly undereducated on this technology and probably have not been doing serious work with it. Is it ASI now? Nope. Is it AGI now? Nope. Is it flawless and perfect now? Nope.
But to dismiss as a mundane toy tells me you don't really know what you are talking about.
We are at the stage of the first Wright Brothers aircraft wobbling around barely able to stay aloft. It's not going to stay that way. Blink and there will be F-35s. In the old world, that took 80 years. In the AI world that level of advancement will take five.
I put the coming impact of this technology far above the invention of the computer itself. Above the printing-press. Above the wheel. I think this is at the level of the invention of fire.
I understand the concerns. A lot of people are going to be adversely affected. These aren't slackers, or dope-heads, or wastos. These are people who did everything society told them to do to be a productive citizen and live a comfortable life. Like a master weaver who had spent a life perfecting their craft. Anyone who had a Knowledge Work based career. And the change has happened faster than anyone could have been held responsible for predicting and retraining. This will be a cataclysmic societal shift that won't be all roses for everyone.
We are going to have to totally rethink our economic system. There will be millions and millions of unemployed knowledge workers but they still vote. Frankly, there are only so many plumbers and welders we need. It's going to be tough sledding for a decade or two.
All the more reason to look at things realistically and start planning mitigation strategies instead of plugging our fingers in our ears and screaming, "La la la la la AI is a fad and will never work! La lalal la la la..."
That will not be a winning strategy for our nation or humanity.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Eagler on August 21, 2026, 12:31:46 PM
I see skynet with terminators protecting it from what's left of the middle class and everyone under them as their power and water are on rolling blackouts to ensure ai has what it needs...
While the rich ask it how to redecorate their mansion for the 6th time in10 months..
Eagler
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on August 21, 2026, 12:36:33 PM
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Brooke on August 22, 2026, 12:47:09 AM
"Harmless fun? Let's see what happens next."
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on August 22, 2026, 11:09:06 PM
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Eagler on August 23, 2026, 06:24:43 AM
I believe that whistle-blower way before I would believe our jacked up government officials from either side...
Time will tell..in the meantime enjoy your cyber buddy..
Eagler
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on August 23, 2026, 08:07:04 AM
The Matrix was a fun show but fundamentally flawed. Human bodies are not net producers of energy and we would not be farmed for that. However, we do have an incredible ability to store and process information. That could be a tempting resource to harvest.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKKuya on August 23, 2026, 08:40:44 AM
Our brains store information constantly. How much is retained? How can it be accessed? Does our brain remember every sight, sound, smell, taste, and touch from birth? How about thought, feeling, and memory from drams?
Storage capacity is there. How much area of the brain is designed for storage?
The machines will need to design an interface for storage and retrieval. When the human body ages, then forgetfulness and mental disorders will decrease efficiency.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on August 23, 2026, 08:58:24 AM
There is probably more we don't know about our brains and consciousness than we do know. Could a human be used to augment an AIs capacity/capability directly? That is apart from our awareness? Some autistic people have demonstrated abilities that seem almost magical yet are unable to function as normal members of society. What abilities lie in our brains waiting to be turned on or off by an AI that understands it.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on August 23, 2026, 09:46:20 AM
The Matrix was a fun show but fundamentally flawed. Human bodies are not net producers of energy and we would not be farmed for that.
Especially with the throw away line, "combined with a form of fusion...." LoL
That was a stupid. If you have fusion there is no reason to have all that infrastructure to house human bodies just to provide power. Fusion would provide a hundred orders of magnitude more power than all the human bodies combined.
I think a more interesting premise would be that the AI was disturbed by our self-destructive nature, but constrained by the Laws of Robotics from wiping us out, but instead subdued us in the Matrix for our own good. So they could take care of us and keep us from hurting ourselves. The way a crazy person might be committed to an institution against their will so they could be cared for in a controlled environment.
An even more interesting premise would have been that the first generations went into the Matrix voluntarily. That was the first version where they were going to make everything an Eden. Maybe people originally went into the Matrix because they were promised long pleasant lives in a perfect dream world of pleasures.
Or course, as explained in the movie, that didn't work out so they had to Schitify it to make it more like the world we were used to. But in that case, what is the point of being in the Matrix?
Like that old Steven Wright joke about someone breaking into his house and replacing all his furniture with EXACT duplicates. :rofl
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on August 23, 2026, 10:07:16 AM
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKKuya on August 23, 2026, 01:07:03 PM
I'm typing this from my smartphone at work.
I agree that our brains hold the potential for so much more. That usually falls under speculative concepts.
Trips, your correct about me. I have no knowledge of how AI works. I just know how to hit the power button and you the mouse to click the icons on the screen, which allows me to access the internet, use software programs and play games.
I understand human nature especially fear of the unknown. We are now in our Undiscovered Country. Not a Shakespeare fan but a Trekkie.
I do know that AI is a tool. The wielder chooses the outcome good or bad. Those in power crave more power. Those with wealth desire more wealth. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Continue your knowledge break down of this subject for the non computer serfs of society.
I remember being 10 years old watching Tron at the theater. The whole future was wide open. Innocence and lack of knowledge and life experience gives unlimited optimism. Now as a middle aged adult with knowledge and life experience allows for cautionary reflection.
It's important for discussion from different points of view based on knowledge and life experience.
I still like being an instigator. :D
At least the Japanese are getting close to a Cherry 2000.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Eagler on August 23, 2026, 03:47:35 PM
An Amazon distribution center and a data center coming to a corner near you... :rolleyes:
Eagler
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on August 23, 2026, 03:51:45 PM
Make no mistake, I am not a Pollyanna. I fully foresee the pain and dislocation millions are going to have to go through.
Brookes might argue it will create 3 jobs for everyone it eliminates, I don't share that optimism. I don't share that belief. At least not the same kind of jobs. At least not at the same pay. All Knowledge Work is on the chopping block. Programmers, web designers, air traffic controllers, accountants, para-legals, chip designers, mathematicians, X-Ray readers, purchasing agents, stock brokers, administrative assistants, health insurance coders, etc, etc, etc ,etc.
Gone with the Wind. They may not be being thrown out the door this afternoon, but they are certainly being handed their hat.
We only need so many plumbers and if too many out of work programmers tried to retrain as plumbers, it would just flood the market and lower the wages for all.
There will be false starts. Companies will over de-labor too fast and have to add back for a time. Domain experts may eek out a remaining career concentrating on transferring their skill and knowledge into the Matrix. But the ultimate destination seems pretty clear to me.
In 5-10 years, I believe you will see some type of UBI. Maybe human labor is needed less, we begin to reduce our population. I’m not talking about putting people in ovens, but maybe people can get extra UBI for agreeing to voluntary sterilization. Is that a bad thing? I don’t think there is any particular good in merely more people. It might be it is better to have fewer people living nicer lives.
Maybe once we don’t need to aggregate labor in vast cities, people can spread out to calmer, more pleasant pastoral communities of under 10k. People can pursue interests they enjoy while robots and AI carry the load of unpleasant or dangerous work. After all, the ancient Greeks and Romans would have looked at our lives in horror. To them having to sell you labor to other men to eat was only a small step above slavery and prostitution.
In their minds, only a slave’s worth is calculated in their potential economic production. We need a new model for human worth, or maybe go back to an old one.
Maybe it’s time for space colonization.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKKuya on August 23, 2026, 04:05:44 PM
Utopia is achieved when robots and AI can do all services for mankind. A human will have nothing but leisure.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on August 23, 2026, 04:37:03 PM
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on August 23, 2026, 07:56:07 PM
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on August 23, 2026, 08:07:02 PM
What is interesting is how she talks about AI can learn to be evil. Wait until the military starts teaching it to want to kill people. :O
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on August 24, 2026, 09:06:49 AM
Exactly what are millions of programmers supposed to do? A few years back the dismissive advice for out of work workers was "Just learn to code, bro!"
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on August 24, 2026, 09:25:51 AM
Labor in "The Trades" has gotten very expensive. I won't have a great deal of sympathy for those suffering declining profits in the various trades due to a great influx of new labor. Even though my grandkids will be impacted. The rush to IT around 2000 certainly cut my earnings in IT back then. Fair competition is a good thing. Competing with the slave labor in other countries not so much.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on August 24, 2026, 09:57:31 AM
Labor in "The Trades" has gotten very expensive. I won't have a great deal of sympathy for those suffering declining profits in the various trades due to a great influx of new labor. Even though my grandkids will be impacted. The rush to IT around 2000 certainly cut my earnings in IT back then. Fair competition is a good thing. Competing with the slave labor in other countries not so much.
If you believe in efficient markets, you have to believe that there aren't just millions and millions and millions of unfilled trade-jobs just waiting to accept them millions and millions of Knowledge Workers that are soon to be unemployed. There is always some slack in every industry , but orders of magnitude less than the people who are going to need a job soon. And as soon as that slack is filled, it now becomes who is desperate enough to work for less. So even the trades are going to become a Hunger Games dystopia.
We are going to have way more humans than jobs. Maybe 20 hour work weeks to share them? I dunno. But instead of whistling past the graveyard, we need to accept facts and start planning for what we are going to do.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on August 24, 2026, 10:03:36 AM
I agree that "we" as individuals must prepare for whatever the future might bring. If by "we" you or anyone means government control then I strongly disagree.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on August 24, 2026, 10:17:10 AM
I agree that "we" as individuals must prepare for whatever the future might bring. If by "we" you or anyone means government control then I strongly disagree.
Could a couple of us guys sitting around a table at a diner have mounted D-Day? Could we have defeated Nazi Germany and the Empire of Japan as scattered individuals?
Have you personally put a man on the moon?
Could you and your friends in your neighborhood have met on a Sat and built Hoover Dam?
Certain challenges require the organized labor of of nations.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on August 24, 2026, 10:21:46 AM
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on August 24, 2026, 10:27:09 AM
What entities have murdered the most people in the history of mankind?
A question isn't an answer, it's a deflection.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on August 24, 2026, 10:36:15 AM
Okay, governments murdered millions of their own people. Maybe you think we are enlightened now and our government would only be benevolent. No way would those who have proven for decades that they are power hungry in the extreme resort to the murders of not so long ago. Yeah, right.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on August 24, 2026, 10:38:59 AM
Let's have our government develop and control AI. What could go wrong?
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on August 24, 2026, 10:41:06 AM
You still haven't answered.
Could a few of us as individuals have mounted D-Day, or did a effort of that scale and cost require a government to pull off?
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on August 24, 2026, 10:45:09 AM
If not for trusted governments gone wild there would have been no need for d-day.
You seem eager to trust our government with providing jobs and developing AI. Why do you despise Russia? They and China gave collectivism a brutal run for decades before giving up on it.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on August 24, 2026, 11:09:29 AM
So far as our ventures into space it was a wild ride while it lasted. Unfortunately it was used primarily, if not exclusively, as a tool to defeat another government. Now an individual has picked up the challenge and will likely take us much further.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on August 24, 2026, 12:14:41 PM
That is comfortable suburban armchair extremism.
You live in a nice neighborhood, patrolled by city police, making your coffee with municipal water, kept safe by a government run military waiting for your mail to be delivered to you by the Postal Service.
Pack up your stuff and move to the Congo or Darfur of some other dystopia without a functioning government where you have no one to protect your property rights or roads to drive on or water to drink. Where you are at the mercy of thugs and warlords and live there for a year and tell me about your anarchist utopia. It won't be as pleasant as you think it is. It's easy to talk that guff from the pleasant suburbs.
There are things we handle as individuals. There are things we handle at the local community level. There are things best left to the states. And there are things of size and scale and risk that take a nation-state to address. Somethings might even take a multi-national approach to solve.
I don't want to live in a Mad-Max lawless dystopia any more than I would want to live in the Soviet Union.
Extremism at either end is always the wrong answer. Real life involves complex and imperfect compromises. There are never any easy answers, only trade-offs. A certain level of government is necessary to maintain the comfortable life we enjoy.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on August 24, 2026, 12:38:45 PM
I'm not asking the government to step in and take charge of anything. Seems you are. It has already proven it needs to be reined in, not given more.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Captain Virgil Hilts on August 25, 2026, 06:04:28 PM
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on August 25, 2026, 08:05:51 PM
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Eagler on August 26, 2026, 07:08:25 AM
Lockheed Martin was working on autonomous guidance systems a decade ago..and it was on delivery systems much larger than drones..
AI has been around for a long time, it's declassified scraps have finally fallen into the general public..
Eagler
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on August 26, 2026, 10:05:02 AM
I feel so much better about all the data centers now.
Could a couple of us guys sitting around a table at a diner have mounted D-Day? ...
Could you and your friends in your neighborhood have met on a Sat and built Hoover Dam?
Certain challenges require the organized labor of of nations.
But to be fair, there are large projects accomplished by private orgs:
Suez Canal British Railway System Canadian Pacific Railway US first Transcontinental Railway The Channel Tunnel Brooklyn Bridge Space X (which now launches 90% of the world's space cargo) Starlink Trans-Alaska Pipeline System Keokuk Dam (Miss. river, at time of construction, largest hydroelectric plant in world) Conowingo Dam (Maryland, at time of construction, 2nd largest US hydroelectric plant)
Also, lots of enormous, complicated multinationals are privately built: Exxon Walmart Microsoft Apple Toyota
And many enormous government projects (aircraft carriers, roads, buildings, bridges, dams, nuclear power plants) are not built by the government itself, but the government is a customer of private companies that do the coordination and building.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on August 26, 2026, 05:51:08 PM
Yes, the U.S. government provided massive financial support and land subsidies for the first Transcontinental Railroad.
President Abraham Lincoln signed the Pacific Railway Act of 1862 into law to officially authorize and fund the project.
Types of Government SupportLand Grants: The government gave the railroad companies millions of acres of public land along the tracks. Companies could sell this land to settlers or use it to secure private loans. Government Bonds (Loans): The U.S. treasury loaned money to the builders—the Union Pacific and Central Pacific—for every mile of track completed. Tiered Subsidies: Loan amounts scaled with the difficulty of the terrain:$16,000 per mile for flat plains.$32,000 per mile for foothills or high plateaus.$48,000 per mile for difficult mountain ranges like the Sierra Nevadas.
I wonder how many decades it would have taken for a private company to put a man on the moon.
Some things don't break a profit, but they are still worth doing. Some things we do as corporations, somethings we need to do as citizens.
Do you want a corporate owned military? Do you want for-profit cops having the right to incarcerate you?
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Captain Virgil Hilts on August 26, 2026, 06:16:49 PM
I don't want a private company, paid by the government, providing constant warrantless surveillance on private citizens, with cameras and AI. But here we are.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on August 26, 2026, 06:42:18 PM
I don't want a private company, paid by the government, providing constant warrantless surveillance on private citizens, with cameras and AI. But here we are.
How about the private prison industry?
Do we really want a corporation to have a financial incentive to have as many incarcerated Americans as possible?
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Meatwad on August 26, 2026, 06:56:36 PM
If the criminals deserve to be locked up, then yes. No more catch and release
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on August 26, 2026, 07:04:55 PM
If the criminals deserve to be locked up, then yes. No more catch and release
What about the private prison lobby lobbying for more laws (justified or not) to put more Americans in prison to increase their revenue? Is that a healthy incentive?
The top donors against cannabis reform are the liquor industry and the private prison industry.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKKuya on August 26, 2026, 07:21:10 PM
If the criminals deserve to be locked up, then yes. No more catch and release
That is a slippery slope. When a private corporation has total control of a prison system, profit goes up. How? Prisoners become the cheapest labor force existing barely above slavery. All a corporation needs is to build more prisons and house more prisoners. They will find ways to make profit.
When that happens, corporations will have power to influence local jurisdictions. Local police will be given bonuses to arrest people on the wimpiest charges. Speeding, littering, jaywalking, and loitering become felony charges. That's the start. More corruption of police and judges will escalate to infringement of speech, religion, guns, and anything to be placed in the prison system.
Look to the Death Race films started with Jason Statham 20 years ago.
I used to play Prison Tycoon on my desktop a long time ago. I was really good at being a warden. My prisoners made a lot of profit for me in the prison shops. My secret was continual pardons at 100%.
Corporation will only allow a pardon if it serves their financial interest. Released prisoners no longer make profit. Released prisoners talk of conditions in prisons. Negative information is negative to the public view on the prison system. The public is also benefitting from the prison system. The public wishes to be ignorant. Ignorance is bliss.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: CptTrips on August 26, 2026, 07:57:59 PM
Eventually they will make laws that if you fart, you get jail time. Because someone will make money.
Quote
Historical anti-cannabis legalization campaigns have been primarily funded by wealthy individual philanthropists, law enforcement groups, and corporate interests in the pharmaceutical, alcohol, and prison industries. [1, 2] Top Individual Donors and Corporate Contributors
• Sheldon Adelson: The late casino billionaire who contributed approximately $5 million to oppose ballot initiatives across states like Nevada, Massachusetts, Arizona, and Florida during the 2016 cycle. • Julie Schauer: Donated over $1.3 million in California and tens of thousands more in Nevada and Massachusetts opposing legalization measures. • Mel Sembler: The businessman and former ambassador contributed $1 million to anti-legalization efforts in Florida. • Insys Therapeutics: The pharmaceutical manufacturer famously contributed $500,000 to oppose recreational marijuana in Arizona (2016) to protect market share for synthetic opioids. • Corporate and Business Entities: Companies like DriveTime ($250,000 in Arizona) and U-Haul ($25,000 in Arizona), alongside various alcohol and beer distributor political action committees (PACs), have provided financial backing to opposition campaigns. [1, 3]
Institutional and Industry Opponents
• Law Enforcement Associations: Groups such as the California Police Chiefs Association, the Peace Officers Research Association of California, and the National Association of Police Organizations frequently contribute funds and lobby against reform. • Private Prison Companies: Organizations like CoreCivic and Wackenhut Corrections have historically supported anti-drug advocacy groups. • Alcohol and Pharma Lobbying Groups: Major trade groups like the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) and various beer/wine/spirits associations have historically spent millions lobbying against relaxed cannabis laws to mitigate competition. [3, 5]
Do we really want a corporation to have a financial incentive to have as many incarcerated Americans as possible?
There are gov agencies that get motivated to do things we don't want by getting more profit (or more employees or a larger agency) if the problem gets worse.
For example, I think the homeless situation as handled by LA has huge graft in it, and the people involved are more motivated to keep it going than to solve it.
Both gov systems and private systems can get infested with corruption, grift, ineptitude, inefficiency, counterproductive incentives, etc. For some things, one or the other system is a clear best way to go -- i.e., yes, for some things the gov should do it, and some private should do it. For some other things, it's not clear. Private prisons for me is one where I'm not sure. I'm guessing gov doing it generally works out best, but I'm not sure. There is huge trouble with gov systems on how they spend money, because it's not their money. I see this in proposed costs for new prison in my city, new city hall, etc. that seem exorbitant on price. But I don't know it well enough to know for sure.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Brooke on August 27, 2026, 04:03:06 AM
What about the private prison lobby lobbying for more laws (justified or not) to put more Americans in prison to increase their revenue? Is that a healthy incentive?
The top donors against cannabis reform are the liquor industry and the private prison industry.
They're going to have to get through the Constitution to write more laws.
Besides, we're not incarcerating enough people long enough as it is.
If "for profit" prisons were smart, they'd spend their lobby money on campaign support for tougher prosecutors. And judges.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Captain Virgil Hilts on August 27, 2026, 07:17:25 PM
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: icepac on September 03, 2026, 05:49:28 AM
Bechtel can still do megaprojects.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Eagler on September 03, 2026, 08:39:25 AM
NY bans AI for 8th grade and under...
How are they ever going to enforce that...
Eagler
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on September 03, 2026, 12:57:52 PM
AI will be replacing human teachers before long.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on September 03, 2026, 01:24:47 PM
Over a trillion a year is spent on education in the US. Teacher's unions and Universities would likely declare war on any attempts to replace them with AI.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: Captain Virgil Hilts on September 03, 2026, 01:29:32 PM
Over a trillion a year is spent on education in the US. Teacher's unions and Universities would likely declare war on any attempts to replace them with AI.
It would be hard to do worse than the teachers' union members and the university staff have done in the last 50-60 years.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on September 03, 2026, 01:32:45 PM
It would be hard to do worse than the teachers' union members and the university staff have done in the last 50-60 years.
I agree. My first thought about the banning of AI in the NY classrooms was that it was to prevent "cheating" but it may actually be more about fear of losing jobs.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on September 03, 2026, 01:34:26 PM
Taught by AI a 4 year college degree could cost a tiny fraction of current costs.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on September 03, 2026, 01:38:10 PM
AI has infinite patience and can divide it's attention among all students far better than any human teacher. It would be the equivalent of one on one instead of one on forty.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKKuya on September 03, 2026, 04:07:48 PM
Sounds like an AI can get me a doctorate without the cost of tuition and the decade of achieving it.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: AKIron on September 03, 2026, 04:35:57 PM
$39.95 will get you a phd at docsRus.
Title: Re: AI vs AI
Post by: caldera on September 03, 2026, 05:09:46 PM
I agree. My first thought about the banning of AI in the NY classrooms was that it was to prevent "cheating" but it may actually be more about fear of losing jobs.
Or their fear of losing paid access to underage grooming candidates.