[PTOB]

As someone who works on the design and construction of datacenters, I cannot stress enough how apropos this comment is. Even before the first conversation in your IDE starts, the load on national and local government resources, local utility capacity, and roadway infrastructure is enormous. We're all paying whether we're using the tools or not.

[compiler-devel]

Nearly nobody cares about the load on “national and local government resources, local utility capacity, and roadway infrastructure” for any other day-to-day activity. Why should they care about the same for AI which for most people is “out there online” somewhere? Related my, crypto bros worried about electricity usage only so far as its expense went and whether they could move closer to hydro dams.

[mcbishop]

The parent comment's point is that we _should_ care because cheap frontier-model access (that many of us have quickly become hopelessly dependent on) might be temporary.

[milkytron]

They should care because they are expensive. If we become dependent on something that is expensive, we have to maintain a certain level of economic productivity to sustain our dependence.

For AI, once these companies or shareholders start demanding profit, then users will be footing the bill. At this rate, it seems like it'll be expensive without some technological breakthrough as another user mentioned.

For other things, like roads and public utilities, we have to maintain a certain level of economic productivity to sustain those as well. Roads for example are expensive to maintain. Municipalities, states, and the federal government within the US are in lots of debt associated with roads specifically. This debt may not be a problem now, but it leaves us vulnerable to problems in the future.

[PTOB]

> Nearly nobody cares about ...

That's an accurate and sad truth about humanity in general, isn't it? We all feel safer and saner if we avoid thinking about how things really are. It's doubly true if our hands are dirty to some extent.

At the same time, I submit that ignoring the effectiveness of very small contingents of highly motivated people is a common failure mode of humanity in general. Recall that "nearly nobody" also describes "people who are the President of the United States." Observe how that tiny rounding error of humanity is responsible for quite a bit of the way the world goes - for good or ill. Arguably, that level of effectiveness doesn't even require much intelligence.

> Why should they care about the same for AI which for most people is “out there online” somewhere?

Well, some will be smart enough to see the problem. Some portion thereof will be wise enough to see a solution. And a portion of those folks will be motivated enough to implement it. That's all that's required. Very simple even if it's not very easy or likely.