nateglims

I think one thing that muddles this in online discussions is that there are many voices saying many things about AI, Data Centers, etc. It's easy believe that everyone involved in obstructing data centers is some sort of NIMBY crank that believes fake news about electricity or water usage. But if you look at reporting from people like Jasmine Sun who visited these towns, the actual activists are a lot more sophisticated than tech forums think.

There's a lot of examples of companies failing to deliver things they promised at this level like the FoxConn complex in Wisconsin. Making city leaders sign NDAs doesn't help this. People are more skeptical of future tax revenue claims and it's hard to sell a direct benefit of the AI itself when you spent two years talking about eliminating all white collar jobs. The trust just isn't there.

Given the classical liberal philosophy of The Economist, this just reads like scolding when their world-view is falling out of favor. Luckily for AI boosters, I think data center builders are adapting to reality.

> Why are non-Western populations so excited by Ai

Are they excited? Or do they just not have political control at a local level?

I suspect their enterprise computer business creates more revenue than printers.

James Surowiecki has been dismissive about these prediction markets actually meeting the criteria for the Wisdom of the Crowds.

This is eerily similar to how a few people at work did some presentations about ralph loop and connecting agents to slack right when management was really pushing unrealistic AI productivity boosts. I was repeatedly asked to speed things up with AI while I was already heavily using AI to do work.

You are making claims for why you think the emissions are worth it but I don't see how this makes concerns about emissions invalid. Even water usage, while blown out of proportion, can be a rational concern if you have a fossil fuel power station.

You can just flip this around and ask why is slowing down AI to control emissions harmful? What numbers that don't make tail risk claims are you providing for this?

You've missed out on migrating to Zoom, Asana, and Sharepoint now.

Compared to recent trends it’s more like the entire 2010s was over hiring

Amazon runs anthropic models in it's own DCs with Bedrock.

Within Amazon, token usage is gamified if you use Kiro and your team isn't billed for it in the same way you are billed for AWS or have to account for your capacity in older systems. I've credibly heard of people gaming this internal ranking before anyone paid attention to it. There are also tons of enthusiasts doing all kinds of internal projects and sharing them.

There's definitely some pressure from managers when they hear about N00% productivity boosts in internal presentations, but where I am at they would figure out if you were making up tasks rather than working pretty quickly and the pressure comes from aggressive deadlines and a shift from the yearly OP1 process to a more agile one.

Groups that are excluded from unemployment statistics aren't a specific generation. They are retirees, students, people who gave up on seeking a job, etc.

> * Employment was 10x better than today, and not by today's way of counting (which don't count group x y and z)

I'm pretty sure we count unemployment the same way. Those groups are just larger now because of age, education and economic malaise.

Wezterm has some support for it on nightly.

I just had an idea for an RLVR startup.

It basically does

> The value of listed American enterprise-software companies is down by 10% over the past year.

I would wager being remote made him a target. It seems like a stretch to say it's just the global job market when the layoffs are global.

The layoff includes people in India.

Reality doesn't disagree with him in that the ROI is still not here yet. Maybe the coming replacement of software engineers will start to ramp up equity gains due to productivity, but it's real hard to get there by replacing your receptionists and lowest tier of support personnel.

The title is click bait. 3 of the 5 people interviewed were optimistic and one of the pessimists is an MIT professor, not a goldman analyst. The rest of it is market outlooks from 2024 for chips and power that don't seem that far off.

I'm a little confused by this analysis. Are you saying that all enterprise software has been replaced with MS word and AWS?

> To be fair, it's not entirely their own fault. Competition is strong, especially from Google and Apple. Even with perfect decisions, they likely would still have lost big since their peak. The market for alternative Browsers isn't as big any more as it used to be.

Their peak in share was also pre-chrome. They've basically been losing the battle slowly for over a decade.

Firefox improved in quality significantly between 2014 and the recent decline. And it's not like Brave has shown incredibly good judgement in these areas.

I'm sympathetic to snowden and think he should just be pardoned, but in retrospect was this actually huge news? Other than reaffirming that telcos were a weak link and that we should encrypt everything, what was a major revelation?

I don't think americans broadly care if we are spying on any of the countries listed in part 1 or 2 of this. Mexico, Brazil, Venezuela, Bolivia and China?

You can use ChatGPT for minor stuff and still have a negative view on AI. In fact the non-tech white collar workers I know use chatgpt for stuff like business writing at work but are generally concerned.

Negative sentiment also comes through in opinion polling in the US.

Its a weak proxy for people who are not in tech.

In polling japan and sweden are very similar in terms of sentiment though: https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2025/10/15/how-people-aro...

Sure, I meant the anglosphere. But in most countries, the less people are aware of technology or use the internet the less they are enthusiastic about AI.

Outside of tech, I think the opinion is generally negative. AI has lost a lot the narrative due to things like energy prices and layoffs.

I think the interest rate and shareholder pressure were the most immediate causes. In 2021 you could get head count to do trivial projects at many tech companies and by the end of 2022 you had layoffs and hiring freezes.

I think the theory is if you get to that point, it's already over.

What decisions were MBA instead of engineering decisions? It seems like intel has just made a lot of bad bets or failed to put their mass behind good ones.

The heights nvidia has achieved seem incidental and have depended heavily on the transformer/LLM market materializing.