Looking for suggestions: We've all heard *a lot* about the growth in data centers associated with the AI hype, and rightly so, but, so far, I've yet to come across something that really ties that with some ideological component of the AI hype beyond appeals to growth, which I think I find a little general and unsatisfying.
I'm not sure if that makes sense, so if you've got something that might be relevant, send it over!
If I assume you're asking “what motivates the GenAI corporation drive to rapidly expand data processing capacity (by building more enormous data centres)?”
@theluddite
then I think you're right it's not *merely* the drive for endless growth.
IMO it's the drive to *monopolise* the field, by growing big quickly and getting as many users early as possible
combined with the fantasy that *only monopoly scale can do this*. To commodify and democratise this tech, is anathema to them.
@bignose Yeah you understood! Totally with you but I find myself going in circles because I think that all you said is true, but it still doesn't explain it because monopolizing data centers was already a thing before the AI hype.
Then "only monopoly scale can do this" is I again right I think but what is *this* and why do they think they'll actually get it this shockingly expensive way?
It's not data centres they are desperate to monopolise; as you say @theluddite they already do that.
Rather, it's *because* these corporations control the huge data centres, that they must propagate the assumption that big data centres are *necessary* to achieve their fantasy promises.
And hey, wouldn't you know it, here's Amazon and Microsoft and all the gang, ready to go with mammoth data centre capacity. Clearly they must be the leaders to listen to on how this goes.
The sudden arrival this year of Deepseek R1 *should* have caused a lot of questioning about whether Silicon Valley style mammoth data centres are necessary to achieve the extremely mediocre LLM results.
But that's where the utter vapidity of their promises (“AGI! Ask it anything! Replace half your employees! Don't ask details, watch this unimpressive demo!”) helps them. They promise virtually nothing concrete.
And the tech press in particular fills in the blanks with fantasy.
Great point but do you think it explains just how much money they're willing to set on fire? And even then, what is it about AI that makes that connection? In this explanation, what distinguishes AI from, say, crypto, which also requires massive investments? There is also a crypto hype that fuels material investment, but AI seems to have a lot more juice here.
@theluddite
> do you think it explains just how much money they're willing to set on fire? And even then, what is it about AI that makes that connection?
I'm convinced by Ed Zitron's thesis of the #RotEconomy:
A huge portion of financial activity, is based on the value of tech company stocks
Tech stocks are valued only because investors expect them to grow, rapidly and forever
Tech corps that don't promise unreasonable 10×, 20×, etc. growth, are severely punished
They have *no ideas left*.
Because they have no ideas left for plausibly promising rapid growth, they reach for increasingly unhinged fantasies.
Blockchain. NFTs. Metaverse. Generative AI. *Anything* that can convince investors to part with their money in the short term.
It simply doesn't matter, to Sam Altman or Sundar Pichai or Satya Nadella etc., *what* the story of the day is. Their job is, in large part, to talk seriously and tell a fable that investors will buy.
As for why #GenAI in particular seems to motivate so much rapid investment, @theluddite
the story has a convenient combination of features:
“This thing will suddenly grow faster than anyone can foresee”
“You've seen The Terminator, right? We must retain control over the machines as they inevitably attain AGI”
“Only genius can understand this. btw you've read my Fortune profile?”
“You've seen China, right? They're already into this. We must keep control in the hands of good ol' USA corps”
The Luddite
bignose