It's not even about that. That isn't even how a model is created.

And that's what I'm getting it. It's basically bad science fiction being used to create some form of a pseudo-religious experience.

At least your local Mandirs, mosques, churches, synagogues, gurdawara, and other formal religions do food drives and connect a subset of your local community.

What do AI Doomers do? Nothing.

They are trying to convince the world of the problem. What else can they do?

> What do AI Doomers do? Nothing.

You seem very keyed up about this, so it is a good thing you are wrong. AI doomers are far more likely people to be giving to GiveWell, or actually thinking about how they are helping society. Source: Am AI doomer. Donate to GiveWell.

I also wasn’t commenting on how a model is created…?

Do you disagree there are significant incentives to scale up the power, ubiquity, and direct physical impact of these systems?

Please answer with yes or no, and not some snarky “bad science fiction” straw man.

While I do think there is an incentive to scale up physical infrastructure, there is a lot of "AI Washing" happening in the space, with bog standard energy projects being justified for "AI Scaling", especially because ESG as a investment category is dead, and a lot of energy investments would be bucketed under the ESG asset class.

> I also wasn’t commenting on how a model is created…?

That comment wasn't targeted at you. I just find AI washing arguments laughable sometimes. It's very similar to the ambulance chasing and scare tactics that is a major part of Cybersecurity GTM.

> there is a lot of "AI Washing" happening in the space

Total red herring. Your argument for why AI cannot be a risk is because it depends on so much physical infrastructure. Sure, this infrastructure isn't going to come from thin air, but if there are strong incentives to put in place then it makes no difference whether it came from thin air or VC checkbooks. It is then in place, ergo your rationale for why this cannot be a risk is invalid.