Replies

"The idea that there’s all this data on me (or you) that they are trying to gather - but they don’t yet have enough computing power to handle it all is mentally retarded."

I had a conversation with AI about data centers. It's too long to post so I'll give you the highlights.

I asked AI, "Will data centers be used to monitor and control people?"

AI: "The short answer is yes, data centers enable the monitoring and control of people, but they are the infrastructure that makes it possible, not the autonomous actors doing the monitoring themselves. The intent and execution depend entirely on the organizations (governments, corporations, or criminal groups) that store and process the data within them.

Here is how data centers facilitate monitoring and control:

1. Mass Surveillance and Government Control.

Governments use data centers to store vast amounts of information.

2. Corporate Surveillance and Behavioral Control

Private companies use data centers to track consumer behavior for profit, which can translate to subtle forms of control.

3. The "Black Box" Problem

A significant concern is that the algorithms running in these data centers (AI and machine learning models) often operate as "black boxes." (ME: we won't know what they're programmed to do).

Conclusion: Data centers are the engine room of the digital age. They make large-scale monitoring and behavioral control technically feasible and economically scalable. Whether this leads to a "surveillance state" or a more efficient, safe society depends on the laws, ethics, and transparency governing the organizations that operate the software within them."

Every smart device you own in the near future will be connected to data centers. Your phone. Your car. Your refrigerator. Your washing machine. Your automatic sprinkler system. You smart meter. Your home thermostat. Anything that can contain a computer chip will feed your information to data centers.

There is no opt out.

Those rationales for opposing data centers would have applied to the development of modern databases and other modern computer technologies going back decades. You don't block the development or expansion of technology on such grounds.

I'm old enough to recall back in the 70's when Democrat Congressmen were blocking the acquisition of new computers by the FBI, based on that kind of thinking.

The disputed project involves the use of the bureau's existing computer as a central message switching center for local and state police agencies when they make inquiries and responses to each other about wanted and missing persons and stolen property in F.B.I. records.

Such inquiries are now handled by mail, telephone and a consortium operated by the states. Critics have maintained—and the F.B.I. has denied—that the messageswitching ability will ultimately permit the bureau to keep track of all messages going between all state and local police agencies.

In a letter June 8 to Attorney General Griffin B. Bell, Mr. Moss contended that the Administration'Administration action in approving the F.B.I. project “poses a threat to the civil liberties and privacy of every citizen” and was “the beginning of the creation of a national police force.”

What you want goes way beyond that episode. They were just trying to prevent the FBI from implementing something (which never seems to have created this big civil liberties threat). Your idea would have been like blocking the development of technology itself, in order to prevent the FBI from having a "national police force", which is preposterous.

The idea of blocking the advance of computing power to prevent companies from "influencing" consumers is particularly absurd. Maybe they should block advertising!

I don't know what your point is about "sounding like" Kevin O'Leary. That article actually says that there is foreign interference. It says that Interior Secretary Burghum and others agree that there's foreign interference.

Says O'Leary:

We uncovered something far bigger than I ever expected. After seeing coordinated false attacks against the Utah data center project, we brought in an advanced data science team to trace where the content was coming from and the results were shocking. What we found led back to organized networks, political activist groups, and funding trails tied to massive international entities. We dug through IRS 990 filings, tracked IP data from around the world, and uncovered what appears to be a coordinated campaign targeting energy and data center projects across multiple regions.

I shared 90 pages of evidence with federal law enforcement and raised concerns directly with contacts at the White House. This isn’t speculation. The filings, funding records, dates, and connections are documented. There’s a coordinated PR war happening around energy infrastructure and data centers, and we’re not going to ignore it.