A lay person might assume models are biased to protect their owners' business interests but that's clearly not the case here.
The frog and scorpion come to mind: AI might already have stung society but it also admits freely that's what it's doing.
And yes this is a brilliant piece by Bernie showing us the facts directly from the source.
I don't ACTUALLY think this happened, but for the first few minutes I was 50/50
I wish there was a version with an opposite of Sanders.
Also, the AI was kinda stupid at the end. If it agrees ~bribery~ lobbying will never allow the government to do much, then why would suggest a government action (pausing new datacenters). Sycophantly agreeing, "oh yeah, YOUR idea is the only one that works, Senator!"
On the main topic, a possible datacenter moratorium, I will admit that I am to far removed from the US and your particular situation, not to mention the many state and local governments involved to make a true judgement one way or another.
I will however say that a lot of the issues currently raised with data centers such as local water usage, environmental concerns ranging from generator exhaust to noise pollution and local tax incentives causing issues for municipal funding have existed independent of the current situation for decades.
Bottled water companies have harmed local communities to a similar and likely greater extent than datacenter build up, pollution in e.g. the cancer alley is an ongoing issue with little political will to find solutions and tax incentives have been part and parcel for decades before. The same goes for other issues currently focused on with model training and deployment like data privacy, right to access ones own information from processors, etc.
Now, I am not saying that Senator Sanders isn't interested in more comprehensively solving these issues beyond the current data center buildout and the interest this has generated by the public, but what I am saying is that a crucial difference between EU and US regulatory approach can be seen in this case, rather than pushing forward solid environmental and privacy regulation for all areas of the economy, there appears to be a tendency to operate on a more targeted level. Banning Huawei, forcing the sale of TikTok, considering a moratorium on data center buildup, these are just some examples where, in my European mind, a more broad regulatory framework that companies the same regardless of their origin (in the case of e.g. the TikTok ban there is no reason such concerns shouldn't equally apply to Meta) and area of operation (as mentioned, many data center concerns are equally applicable to other areas of the economy). If there were more comprehensive laws that are applied across industries, perhaps many concerns with data centres in the US would not exist.
I do however, in fairness, also understand that the US operates in a very different manner, that passing regulation so comprehensive is likely impossible with the makeup of Congress (not just the current split but also the Filibuster and other procedural quirks) and that a data center moratorium can be a way to bring attention to such issues in an easy to comprehend manner. And I do also have to admit that while the EU was initially willing to enforce strict environmental standards on our own local car manufacturers, there has been a willingness to compromise on this front for our local economic benefit, so I cannot say confidently how we'd approach questions in this field if software behemoths like Meta and Alphabet were European rather than American.
