Wolfy Chai

Wherever you look, from graduation speeches to mainstream media feeds, AI dominates the national discussion. A few years ago, AI was not even in something that was discussed as even an isolated possibility. However, here we are saturated by AI talk everywhere we look.

This uprising of AI came with uncanny timing—in unison, all the investors, the government and large tech companies unilaterally decided “hey, this is the direction we are going to push.” This marvel of modern political engineering and crony capitalism occurred now, even though the foundations of AI have been there for many years prior. So, why now? The only rational answer seems to point towards evidence of this collusion—an AI collusion that bridges investors, private companies, and the government. 

No matter which tech company you investigate, they all have been awarded government contracts and have been subsidized with taxpayer dollars. The government investment has international implications. Israel, for example also has arranged for many contracts with the same tech companies. Many of these contracts are for “defense” purposes (another way of saying predictive policing and surveillance.)

The implementation of predecessor technologies was also uncanny—not because they were some novel technologies, rather, because the infrastructure deploying the technology had not been built out yet. This is evidenced by the public funding of fiber optic cables and the establishment of 5G. The government used taxpayer dollars to upgrade internet so that people can be directly wired into it with fiber optic cables. Now, however, data centers are becoming the number one customer using the fiber infrastructure, all without paying for a dime. Additionally, 5G quickly replaced the need to rely on wifi and this infrastructure on mobile devices. 

A commonality amongst all AI and data centers is that they tax an already strained public infrastructure supply. As such, they present new moral tradeoffs that never previously existed: do we preserve personal and invasive surveillance data or do we save people’s lives; do we value human health or “progress” and profits. 

Additionally, the entire system operates in exact opposite to capitalistic ideals. If data centers need land, they will simply buy people off, bribe local municipalities for ordinance exemptions, or amass the necessary land through eminent domain. They operate as a quasi-governmental institution—having all the same powers without any of the accountability. 

Inevitably, once the network of data centers gets embedded deeply enough, the government will try to invoke that anything limiting or threatening their existence is protected by “national security” concerns, as so often is cited in the post-war on terrorism war. This excuse will likely be used to justify everything from diverting public water supplies to diverting or prioritizing power from the grid in times of emergency. 

The data center issue pinches a nerve that is so often ignored by modern right- libertarian politics; the existence of a private activity being so consumptive and pervasive that it violates the rights of real people; if data centers were refused usage of publicly funded utilities like fiber optic cable, water, and power infrastructure or if local residents weren’t forced to foot the bill. 

Unfortunately, many of the negative externalities will result in “takings” of people’s lands, but few instances are likely to arise to the level of a “regulatory taking” whereby, all economic value of land is depleted. There will likely be another class of taking that falls short of what the law requires just compensation for. People’s land will be rendered unlivable for humans but not uneconomical. It is unlivable if there is no water, the cost of living becomes too high, people develop health issues, or if they communities are not secure in times of disaster. 

This projected path is luckily not inevitable, even if all the talking heads say that it is. This is a path that was deliberately decided and has been curated for years in the making. It would not look so inevitable and imminent if the government greenlit the construction of data center after data center; if the government wasn’t handing out massive contracts to tech companies; if billionaires voices did not matter even slightly more than the average persons; if laws weren’t passed making it illegal for States or local governments to outlaw or restrict data centers. 

The assault on people is a full out war. It is not simply the case where a new technology enters a market and naturally over time, through competition, becomes successful or predominate—in contrary, its position as top priority and its predominance is economically, socially, and politically engineered. The influx of AI is similar to the printing of money, the government decides what the money is, what it looks like, and how much it is worth, and you just must accept it.