I have been a computer enthusiast for decades and actively use AI services every single day. I am not standing on the sidelines complaining about technology I do not use. It is precisely because I have a deep, practical understanding of this technology, its hardware, and its actual capabilities that I can see through the hype and spot a speculative bubble.
Here is why your "car and pothole" comparison misses the mark:
1. Driving the Car vs. Funding Private Race Tracks
I drive the car, but that does not mean local homeowners should be forced to build a private race track for a multi-trillion-dollar corporation. Using technology does not mean local retirees should have their monthly electric bills hiked to pay for the dedicated power lines, substations, and generation plants required by giant server farms.
2. Real Technical Knowledge vs. Corporate PR
Regurgitating corporate press releases is not the same as understanding technology. Anyone with actual depth in this field knows the difference between sustainable digital infrastructure and a frantic, speculatively financed buildout. Regulators and utility commissions are raising alarms precisely because they see who will be left holding the bill for these rapidly depreciating assets.
3. Paying Your Own Freight
If these massive server campuses are the incredibly lucrative future of the global economy, then multi-trillion-dollar tech firms do not need local Florida ratepayers to underwrite their utility grid expansion. They can pay 100% of their own generation and interconnection costs.
Recognizing corporate welfare is not being "anti-technology." It simply means having enough experience in the field to spot a bad deal for local taxpayers and utility customers.
You’re still making the “I don’t fly, so I don’t want to pay for airports”. I wonder if your opposition to taxes that support data centers isn’t coloring your assessment of the technologies and risks.