UK government insiders say AI datacenters may be a pricey white elephant The British government is pressing ahead with "AI Growth Zones" amid fears the rush to build datacenters to power AI could backfire and leave the countryside littered with expensive high-tech "white elephants." Local and regional authorities were asked this week to put their communities forward to become "dedicated hotbeds for …
Generative AI, from LLMs, is just bullshit: no accuracy or truthfulness guaranteed. Great for generating bullshit where the content doesn't matter, but mostly useless for anything else.
"AI" already has a bad reputation amongst the general public, who have quite sophisticated bullshit-sense. When will government realise they're being conned by Big Business?
"When will government realise they're being conned by Big Business?"
Government don't care about wasted investment, because the waste isn't counted in growth figures. With the current desperation to find growth, government are looking to bump up GDP. Business investment and government spending contribute directly. Whilst the quickest way of bumping up GDP and finding some growth is government spending (eg build a national high speed road network, and a national high speed rail network) that's constrained by government borrowing costs. If credulous tech companies can be persuaded to invest a few billion in DCs, then it doesn't matter if they deliver any benefits, or even if they stay open, or the investing company goes bust.
Unfortunately, one of the reasons we have a growth problem is that previous governments have also disregarded the importance of value creating investments. So defence mis-spends and overspends increase GDP, but produce nothing and result in higher borrowing costs for government; Misguided policies like policy support for solar power result in billions being spent on that, and because that's commercially funded it has the even more toxic effect of crowding out proper, risk based commercial investment.
"So defence mis-spends and overspends increase GDP, but produce nothing"
Not quite true. They can occasionally produce long queues at the hearing clinic, for example.
Upvoted, AC. An informed and well thought-out comment.
The insanity of the 'growth-at-any-cost' mindset is summed up in the headline of a ZeroHedge article I saw a couple of weeks ago: It Took $5.80 In Debt To Generate $1 Of US "Growth" In The Fourth Quarter
@Loudon If you're not familiar with it already, read Dr Tim Morgan's analysis "Perfect Storm". It's telling a similar story, but at greater length. Exceptionally well argued. Whether you agree with where it leads into Dr Morgan's surplus energy economics theory is up to you, but it's worryingly difficult to put up strong counter arguments.
https://surplusenergyeconomics.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/tpsi_009_perfect_storm_0093.pdf
Thank you for the link, AC; I've downloaded that.
I've had a quick read of the contents page; its warnings remind me of "The Final Crash" by Hugo Bouleau, which predicted the 2008 crash twelve months before it happened.
So I'll certainly give it a read. And thanks again!
This is also why they are giving the go ahead to Heathrow and Gatwick expansions. Its money spent (i'll not say invested on purpose) into the UK economy that costs government nothing. If the big tech companies want to build huge buildings then why stop them? At least thats the current governments thinking it seems to me
> "The Final Crash" by Hugo Bouleau, which predicted the 2008 crash twelve months before it happened
The film the "The Big Short" was excellent viewing is showing how the crash happens, must give it another viewing, also ordered a 2nd hand copy of the above book as I enjoy those types of reads
"P.S. To my two downvoters: Keir? Rachel? ...is that you?"
Perhaps it was. But if you want fiscal competence, these two are the only people that have tried in the past twenty plus years. For decades we've had politicians taking very poor economic choices purely to avoid unpopularity, for a rare and undoubtedly temporary period we have a government willing to grasp a whole handful of nettles. I should point out I didn't vote for them, even though I have vowed never to waste my vote on the Conservative party as long as I live.
You may disagree, but (to paraphrase Ambrose Evans Pritchard) you need to tell global money markets that. At the moment UK credit default swaps are better priced than the US, France, Japan, Canada, China, and Saudi. Also judging by international FDI flows, investors think the UK is a far better prospect than the EU.
"When will government realise they're being conned by Big Business?"
Not conned when said businesses have given donations to Labour.
Like Dale Vince's solar farm approval. It just so happened he gave £5 million to Labour. What an amazing co-incidence!
(For the record I also believe all other political colours had / have / will have their snouts in the same trough)
The problem seems to be that there's some good stuff getting mixed in with the hype train.
iNews interviewed the Science Minister on AI and a clear 50% of the stuff he was talking about was sensible, useful stuff - but only tangentially connected to "AI" and none of it to GenAI. And none of it requires UKGov to subsidise AWS/Azure/OpenAI/Palantir/CoreWeave at a cost of billions (at a time when Labour just cancelled their support for Edinburgh University's exascale supercomputer, which would have been a very valuable national research resource). The smart investment would be punting a couple hundred million into PhD projects for those genuinely useful diagnostic imaging applications and suchlike.
Kyle announced:
Just ML
* Living England - algorithm to combine field surveys and sat data to map wildlife habitat.
Rules based/forensic accounting but could be augmented with some ML/pattern matching (with human review/supervision).
* NHS Residency Checker - Applicants for a European health insurance card will have their claims run through an AI tool which scours all available information about them to confirm they are eligible
* ESA Medical Matching - processing claims for employment/support allowance
* MOT Risk Rating - identify which garages need more frequent inspection for MoT fraud
Oh FFS
* Highways webchat - An AI bot to answer questions about road works and closures.
* Probation advice - bot to assist officers in what interventions/conditions to use
* Redundancy pay calculator
The first one, along with things like medical diagnostic imaging analysis are kind of sensible and achievable. But not really "AI", except they share some statistical ML techniques that underpin generative AI. This doesn't need us to subsidise US billionaires. It requires us a spend 5% of that money on some PhD projects. If you want value and unicorn startups to shout about, that's what you invest in - not just letting MS/Google/CoreWeave stomp all over us.
The second block are all insane and scary. These are mostly addressed with rules-based algorithms, overlaid with a smattering of forensic-accounting techniques. A bit of ML to assess "risk of fraud" would not necessarily be a disaster, except the Govt have declined to sign up to AI safety projects, and are looking to fast-track unsupervised decision making where the computer gets to say "no" and you have no recourse to human review.
The last three are just silly. The highways web chat would be better served by a simple interface to see planned closures and works. An AI proposing probation conditions sounds about as legally sound as an AI judge handing down sentencing... and how is an "AI" ever going to work out Redundancy pay? That's simple rules-based accounting, combined - potentially - with some negotiation wherever a union is involved. But I suppose it's another tool for party donors to hide behind when trying to short change workers... follow the money.
The only place I want to see AI is in the Pedestal or server closet.
I just want early identification of anomalies on chest X-Rays etc.
Or a home assistant that can operate at the same speed and reliability that I used to have just over a year ago. (My Jetson style home may soon be Jetson powered)
It seems that everyone in the race to build “AI” (ie LLM) infrastructure never actually has any idea whatsoever about what it’s going to be used for!
It’s infuriating!!! Especially when it’s a government department wanting to spend MY money
“Let’s build an AI bit barn. Fuck Yea!!!”
And you’re going to do WHAT with it?
“…silence…..”
Their idea of what they're going to do with it is rent capacity to people. Which works well until there's more capacity available for rent than people wanting to rent it, which is when the race to the bottom* starts.
* - and no, I don't mean employing Richie and Eddie as IT admins.
It strikes me that LLM AI trained on text is really a rather poor aspect of AI to concentrate on.
What AI can do, and where it should be deployed, is in self learning (training) on things other than text. It is this self-training that will be it's benefit, not the training data itself.
If we have a 'real' AI solution, we should be able to point it at any data set, and give it some goals (such as 'these are examples of what we're looking for'), and let it loose.
Examples which may be good or bad include:
Identification of potential cancers from X-rays and other scans (good)
Tracking people from multiple video feeds (good and bad)
Spotting trends in weather formations, ice loss, floods etc (good?)
Analysing seismic data to spot potential earthquakes and tsunamis (good)
Accurate condensing of large datasets to allow rapid identification of information (be it legal, scientific or other data) (generally good but could be put to bad use)
The problem is that I don't believe we have such a thing as a general AI model which can take any data set. We have ones that can learn text, and some that do language, image and music processing, together with some tools that can take the condensed data and generate something similar to it's input data. But this is really not the bit of AI that we need, even if these are things that grab attention.
But even if we could have a real general AI, one of the problems is, and will remain to be, is initial trust in what is produced. For the initial deployment, we will want to check the results to identify things that should be spotted but aren't, and also false positives and 'hallucinations'. And once we get past this stage, we will need to have an "explain your decision" function, so that it does not look like the AI has just had a 'hunch'.
Unfortunately, businesses and governments are being jumped into building something that can do what we see today, and are suffering from FOMO about not getting on the band-wagon.
We should be looking at what we want to do tomorrow, or next year or next decade, but so few people have a vision that can look beyond today.
all the examples, you give are useless when AI isn't reliable.
I tested some AI on musk's nazi salute, it tried to gaslight me, it pretended all the video's were possibly blurry or faked and that "sources" said it wasn't, and told me fact checkers had said it wasn't (until I asked it to give me a link, then it admitted it lied) at which point it switched to saying the context was the reason, until I pointed out the nazi salute was to praise an authoritarian, even then it tried to excuse the salute.
That sort of invented information is very dangerous.
AI is just garbage in/garbage out
even a small error bar becomes incredibly important when the system is used in large scale!.
Much of that exists and works well, often produces more accurate results at less than 1/1000th of the compute resource of more traditional methods For example, weather prediction - Graphcast from Google
https://deepmind.google/discover/blog/graphcast-ai-model-for-faster-and-more-accurate-global-weather-forecasting/
Chatbots just aren’t a very big part of the capabilities of LLM, despite the news. Other things LLMs do - pharma drug design and structure prediction; genomics; materials design; architecture;
My company developed and use LLMs internally for industrial process control; robotics control with tens of millions of degrees of freedom; component design; structural analysis (not just faster but *much more accurate* than finite-element…..there’s a bunch of stuff lying behind that statement)
Those are not Large Language Models though.
There's a clue in the name.
All of those purposes are handled by "expert systems", "classifiers", "optimizers", and similar "AI" that are specifically trained to do those tasks.
Their usefulness varies, but some are pretty good.
Now if you really are connecting an LLM to any of the above, please tell me your company name so I can make a fortune shorting your stock.
I know exactly where AI will be used for: more data harvesting (on you) so that AI customers (not you) can be informed (about you), and they will be able to target (you) with adds and "exclusive offers", a.k.a. going after (your) money.
That is why "everybody" should have an AI-enabled PC - to do your own harvesting on their behalf.
Maybe I am too pessimistic.
AI is likely to be a much more expensive version of the Metaverse and NFTs. There is no business case for the investment amounts that have been mooted. Nobody will pay that much extra for tech of questionable value and utility. What is termed 'AI' will find a niche, and LLMs may be used for human/computer interaction, but it is not the gamechanger it is being billed as.
Along with Australia and the EU, the UK is already cracking down on internet/tech access with censorship/surveillance legislation, so investing in tech in these areas may no longer be sensible. Use of tech in the UK may decline, looking ahead, as access to online services and sites is increasingly banned by the state. If you develop here, you should consider an early IP sale to a US company, as much of the next gen of tech may not be reliably legal in these areas on release/maturity.
"Along with Australia and the EU, the UK is already cracking down on internet/tech access with censorship/surveillance legislation, so investing in tech in these areas may no longer be sensible."
Better invest my pension in the publishers of Razzle, Fiesta and the like, or the companies mailing them out in brown envelopes....
Note for overseas readers: Probably best not to search for those publications on a work computer. Not only will the themes cause all enterprise filtering and monitoring to sound the klaxon, you might be very disappointed in these exceptionally down-market journals.
"Better invest my pension in the publishers of Razzle, Fiesta and the like, or the companies mailing them out in brown envelopes....
Note for overseas readers: Probably best not to search for those publications on a work computer. Not only will the themes cause all enterprise filtering and monitoring to sound the klaxon, you might be very disappointed in these exceptionally down-market journals."
I always thought they were the bottom end of the market too ...
Local and regional authorities were asked this week to put their communities forward to become "dedicated hotbeds for AI infrastructure development"
Can Local Authorities put their communities forward for "Never here", too?
How many bit barns are required, really? What is the 'competition' for AI really about?
Since my bit of countryside (Walpole) got 'blessed' with an extra substation, we're also lined up for 2 HVDC-AC converter stations, a synchronous condenser (which seems to be neither synchronous, nor a condenser) and a now a gas fired power station, all in the same couple of hundred of acres (on prime agricultural land they're just compulsorily purchasing). No doubt any fields that don't go in this first rush will get covered in datacenters, since there'll be oodles of power and the locals will be all protested out.
So, from my pov, if you see the national grid helicopter hovering near you, just sell up and move before they publish plans, you're in for a decade of shit while they plan then build it, then continuous shit afterwards.
Or even worse....
Attempt to build a HVDC interconnecter straight through a crowded industrial city to the local 400Kv substation, in the process closing one of the 3 roads out of the place while purchasing a bunch of land thats currently one of the few open spaces in the city....
I prefer the BBCs story yesterday (and featured on el-reg today) about the unreliability of "AI" results. the rush for AI will produce profits .. for the people making AI chips and equipment.
It's been said before, but it bears repeating as often as necessary... datacentres are a shitty deal for local communities wherever they're based.
They provide *very* few local jobs relative to their massive size, and even fewer high value ones- virtually everyone using them for the high-tech use they were built for will be doing so remotely. That even goes for much of the support. (*)
Yet, for all that, they're highly demanding and disruptive on local infrastructure- especially when it comes to power- and generally large and intrusive in the places where they're built.
No thanks.
(*) The only-slightly-exaggerated example I use is that a data centre will require two local employees- a security guard and a dog. The dog is there to stop the security guard touching anything. (Yes, I ripped that off an old joke about aeroplanes).
...that a FOMO-driven push towards yet another technology that politicians don't actually understand (despite kidding themselves that they do after having read a couple of New Scientist articles about it) will lead to white elephants?
I don't think that's very likely- after all, we all remember how important the blockchain was going to be just a few years ago, and it's not like *that* magical panacea ended up forgotten about when the next technology-du-jour came along, is it?
Those are some numberwang employment figures aren't they? In what world are even 20 people employed on a server farm, far less an AI farm? Enquiring minds would like to know.
The last huge server farm I was 'employed' at consisted of me, and I wasn't there. I was vaguely aware of a bare handful of other 'employees' who also weren't there. Our function was mainly to not be there and actually to be employed in completely different roles in another post code entirely.
Occasionally, I would be asked to nip along and kick the tyres, perhaps swap out a UPS, or blade and that was about it. What is it about an AI farm which requires anywhere between 20-200 personnel in the local vicinity?
My guess is there is nothing special. After commissioning, any employment opportunities will be over the hills and far away; except for the odd IT, or Leccy Board contractor who can nip along and change a lightbulb after lunch. Perhaps someone would care to enlighten me?
Maybe 20 people is 200 on the construction site for 1/10 of the operational life?
My question is - what are we going to do with these buildings, when they empty out like phone exchanges. I get the feeling we're in the anti-sweet-spot of AI - massively inefficient solutions to nebulous (at best) requirements.
They'll make terrible accommodation. Maybe indoor farming can have another go, if the buildings come for free? You should be able to load-shed your lettuce's lighting for a few hours, so get nice cheap power.
Ha! nah, it was all remote and CCTV and coded entry and the like. They weren't really geared up for drone strikes.
There may have been a watchie floating about a gatehouse somewhere - I never knew of, or encountered one though - maybe he was taking his dog for a walk around the perimeter.
This is why I don't get the rush to build these. The apped-out masses see it as a nuisance; midwits like me see a threat to job security; the enthusiasts and professionals see it as a headache; there's no going green to be had; there's no job creation to be had -- WTF? Why keep pushing?
@jospanner
"Because there HAS to be something, otherwise we might have to admit that big tech capitalism might not be working out"
What do you mean by big tech capitalism? I am fairly sure most of us rely on some big tech capitalist company day to day and our lives are better for it.
"That infinite growth isn’t possible."
Why is that? I ask because infinite growth it is often misunderstood so I want your interpretation.
@phuzz
"Finite resources."
But that isnt the limit on growth. Economic growth lets us do more with less. We also reuse and recycle what is worth doing (even if the gov enforces recycling uneconomically too). The Soviet Union increased growth through expansion and increased resource use but apparently didnt achieve much economic growth beyond that. The west alternatively had stellar economic growth in comparison which was not all based on expansion.
More efficient engines use less oil. Less land to produce more food. Less gold used to coat electronic boards. Etc.
Well the 5-building datacentre campus I work at must employ about 80-100 people on a permanent basis. There are always electricians + HVAC engineers (or at least general engineers), cleaning staff (both client areas and datacentre cleaning teams), security/client reception, NOC staff, network team, plus management for those staff (a lot of whom are subcontractors).
So you can expect some staff at places which do room-level or rack-level renting of space, but not that many for the size of the campus.
this project is like a ping-pong game. One party cancels it when they come into power then later on and usually just before anit election when the incumbents need the votes, a new plan gets approved only for the new government to cancel it.
My prediction....
It will never get built.
Nothing at all to do with most bays being sized from an average car from the 1950s, while the average modern car is much larger.
Nothing at all to do with trying to cram as many parking spaces into a site as possible, and who cares if customers can't open their door and actually exit/enter their car without dinging the adjacent car.
Never mind that some people need a big car because of large family, disability etc.
But no, it's all numpties buying massive SUVs. (And mo, I don't own an SUV).
Only places I've seen get parking right, from the customer perspective are:
1. Costco, since their bays are sized for US cars, and
2. in the last few years Sainsbury's, where they marked a foot wide space between each parking space (though maybe that was just round here, no idea how widespread that is).
Everyone else seems more than happy to shoehorn their customers into undersized parking spaces.
Oh rubbish, that’s what’s called an “excuse”, and you don’t want to admit it.
People managed with smaller vehicles for decades before the US obsession with size infected our roads.
People carriers, estate cars, and hatchbacks did people fine, until the enticement of sheer size took over. We lived out of a Clio and then a Polo as a family for years and never had issues.
Ask yourself how literally anyone managed before 2010 with a car, not a truck. Basic critical thinking.
You clearly don't understand, or are ignoring, that all the legally required safety tech in modern cars has forced even small cars to become much larger. It's got absolutely nothing to do with oversized American cars. 99% of cars for that market aren't sold here anyway.
And you're wilfully missing the point. The absolute average size of modern vehicles is irrelevant. Parking space size has never adjusted to the current reality.
I will never try to tell anyone what size of car they should be driving based on my beliefs, biases, and dislikes. It's simply nothing to do with me. Someone wants to drive a small car? Fine. Someone wants to drive a big car? Also fine. Either way it's none of my business, and it shouldn't be anyone else's.
My son and his wife had to buy a larger car (SUV actually) because their baby seat wouldn't fit behind the front seat in their old car. That's a practical need based on safety and is completely up to them. Nobody has the right to say otherwise. Really don't understand where people get off sticking their nose into places they've absolutely no business being.
What's your opinion of an "impractical car" got to do with a complaint about the state of the roads? Especially when you then complain about massive SUVs, which are emminently more practical than non-SUVs at dealling with our crappy roads.
You seem to be one of those people that thinks everyone should drive a tiny car, regardless of circumstances, just because you don't (appear to) like bigger cars. Get over yourself. Other people's choices are none of your business.
You will buy a car and spend and spend the rest of your life paying the loan on it and all the ones that come after it because it only has a lifespan of 5 to 8 years. Work work work like a good little drone to pay for your car and be happy or else.
The car and forced travel is what enslaves us all.
Yeah who likes being able to walk to local amenities?
Far better to haul one’s ass into a massive BMW, drive 5 miles to the nearest square mile of nondescript generic concrete, along the way wondering why you spend half an hour in traffic, and then wonder why you can’t find a parking space.
Then moan about it on the internet because having a big ass antisocial car is your RIGHT, god damn it!
Ahh you're one of those people who believes everyone should think and act exactly like you, and no one has any right to a lifestyle that differs from your interpretation of what's "right".
Make a lot of noise seeking attention, complain about non-issues, generally stick your oar in where it's not wanted, instead of just minding your own damn business.
Funnily, this AI bit barn idea bears much in common with the original new Labour announce of a high speed rail link between “London” and “Birmingham” with a journey time of 45 minutes, only problem theirs was no plan behind the idea and the connections in to London and Birmingham were hand waves…
Why "outside infrastructure"?
The government's record on development of almost all infrastructure has a poor record. Picking only a few cherries out of a very fruity cake: Humber Bridge, HS2 is a white elephant, Heathrow R3 is being commissioned even whilst other branches of government intentionally plan to make flying uneconomic for the masses, we're part the way through building about £25bn of fixed line telecoms infrastructure that will only duplicate that being provided by Openreach and Virgin Media, policy failures have caused catastrophes in relation to energy, water, sewerage, flood defence, road maintenance, schools, hospitals........even government encouraged schemes manage to bankrupt their investors (Channel Tunnel, M6 Toll).
The most enduring example of British infrastructure is the railways, and 95%+ of them were built by private companies in the Victorian era.
Ah, the railways.
Which were duplicated, bankrupted most of their backers, killed a few people and had to be nationalised to keep them running.
Until a few decades later they were privatised at great expense to the taxpayed, killed a few people and had to be part-nationalised to make them safe.
And then nationalised to keep them running.
Ah, history.
I think you meant to say the British government's record on development of just about everything has been shit. Apart from the now creaking national grids for electricity and gas that were built 50-80 years ago.
IMO Concorde was an exception - sort of. It was/is an astounding technical achievement even though it was a massive commercial flop.
When the deserted sites have lost their grid connection, the security post is empty, the signboard is dangling because some of the fixing blots have rusted and more rust is trickling down the walls of the building what are we going to call these site? Starmers, Reeves or Rayners?
Local government can't even get an ERP system off Oracle that works so christ knows how clued up they'll be with AI. Chucking in the EU's couple of hundred billion yesterday, we must be up to about 100 quid cost for every person on the planet. Gimme 100 quid and I promise never to use AI. I promise.
Excuse me...what?
Fusion Power?
You mean the energy source that has been researched since the 50s? For which we are stll building the first few PURELY EXPERIMENTAL reactors, that are glad if they can maintain a plasma for more than a few seconds? Never mind actually producing power?
Is that the "fusion power" we are talking about here?
Interesting article in the current New Scientist, explaining how DeepSeek uses various tricks to punch way above its hardware weight. Seems downloading its Open Source code will be way quicker, cheaper, easier and greener than trying to keep upscaling last year's tech for the next five.
Ahhh but the photo opportunities for the politicians and all those oh so necessary golf outings, dinners, yacht cruises etc to discuss "policy' and "hammer out fine details'
The stench of corruption is already overpowering, it usually takes about a decade for the stench to become this strong
Why is the demand so high for "affordable" houses? That is the question to be answered. The older folk can remember when an average professional family could easily afford a 3 bed even with the lady at home looking after the kids. Yet as we move into the more automated world we seem to need evermore "affordable" housing, both partners have to work, kids aren't looked after so well, schools are crap, NHS is crap and we pay more and more taxes. Where is all the money going?
So that will be the DWP with mass layoffs and a program written to automate application processing -
IF highprofile=false
Set applicationstatus=denied
End
Pretty much no different to now, just from the treasury point of view gets the desired answer consistently..
Funnily enough the DWP uses the exact same tactics as USA insurers use - Delay, Deny, Defend
Also funnily enough Unum (provident) (USA Insurance company) have VERY VERY close working relations with the DWP.....funny that.....
"this site will also serve as a "testing ground to drive forward research on how sustainable energy like fusion can power our AI ambitions," the government said at the time."
Ah fusion, always just around the corner ...
I wonder how much farmland will be destroyed and countryside covered in solar or those damn windmills to feed power to the bitbarns. By the time they have built it all you'll be able to run your AI at home anyway. Currently, it makes the natural AI's power consumption look very frugal. Just as well because if Keir Harmer carries on there wont be much food.
The numpties in government appear to regard the summary statistic of GDP as a definitive indicator of economic success.
'Investment' in 'AI' will automatically raise the GDP for a short while. This results from money flowing within the economy as a consequence of purchasing land, erecting buildings, setting up massive computational resources, and employing people. Expectation of the economic 'boost' resulting in lasting increased prosperity (as measured by GDP and associated indices) seems fanciful.
The 'externalities' from the 'boost' may be deleterious to the quality of life for many people. Also, whilst some entities in the City, and friends in government, will profit from a 'take' from the money flow, little benefit will trickle down (the Cantillon Effect). What's more, there is no evidence for 'opportunity cost' being considered.
The plan bears hallmarks of opportunistic political pseudo-rationality.
Looking at the rest of the world, the UK Government is just following suit.
The trouble is, AI has become a giant Ponzi scheme. Just look at how some of the GPU-as-a-Service providers are doing with 75 percent price plunges on hourly rental having paid NVIDIA full whack. Now people are moving to smaller more manageable distilled models and agents, and so running the latest high-end GPUs and storing vast quantities of data is proving unnecessary. Quite a lot of the firms in this ecosystem are rushing to IPO as they know they will be worthless once the hype burns out.
The Hollywood trope of the killer AI robots, well we knew it was probably drivel on the way AI would kill off humanity , the truth is somewhat more down to earth in the colder parts of the world.
Death by hypothermia, because all the electricity is going to run the AI datacenters ! ( no electricity for heating )
and it the hot parts of the world , Death by heat stroke ( no electricity left to run the Air con )
So we all need to move to the "Goldilocks" climate areas of planet Earth !!!!
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
