u/lurkervidyaenjoyer

Daily Mail's not exactly the most consistent source, but this is an exclusive from them, with plenty of direct quotations, and references a TikTok account here which seems legit.

Basically these absurd datacenter projects require so much energy, that the utility has resorted to using eminent domain to displace residents in rural areas from their homes so that they can run the transmission lines.

It's like these clowns have never heard of optics or public relations before. Hearing stories like this and the stuff in Utah and Lake Tahoe really almost seems like they're trying to piss off the populace and rally them against datacenter projects, because they sure don't seem to be making any effort to sway people in favor of them.

Another big fearmongering piece from Anthropic, this time about China, which it seems like is coming up in the discourse a bit more now, such as from the likes of Mr. Dogshit AKA Kevin O'Leary.

First thing I noticed here is that the level of patriotism towards America and hostility towards its potential adversaries is so off the charts that it should be abundantly clear that Anthropic's refusal to take the Pentagon deal was not in any way out of a difference in alignment. They'd gladly partner up with the U.S. Military-Industrial complex if they thought their models were capable enough, and the only reason they didn't was either the half-stated reason of them believing Claude lacks that reliability (because it's AI), or a cynical PR stunt.

Second, the whole premise is that Chinese AI would be some scary form of oppression? How?? It's just a chatbot. I mean at worst they might train them to not talk about Tienanmen Square, but AI models screw up on their own guardrails all the time, and I've heard that some of the local-runnable open-weight models from over there are surprisingly uncensored. For how long I'm not sure, but so far this spook story hasn't quite panned out or shown many signs of doing that.

And then there's what they want. Preventing GPU smuggling is fine I guess, since it's a rule our administration has already had, and at the very least it'll stop infrastructure companies from looking like complete bozos by swapping product labels with hair dryers.

But preventing China from doing datacenters? You mean there's this big scary country you're so heavily against, and you want them to not lose all their money? Preventing distillation seems odd, since all distillation does is help them catch up. I've seen no evidence that a Chinese AI can outperform a U.S. AI purely by distilling it, in any metric other than training cost.

And then there's the whole promoting export thing, which in the wake of the incidents involving AI datacenters in Utah, Lake Tahoe, Tucson, and others, seems less like an effort to enrich the U.S. by exporting goods and services made here, a policy I'm generally in favor of, and more like them bleeding America and Americans dry while trying to seek some kind of vague route to profit from overseas users, which won't work.

This one's a tale of two articles. From the TechCrunch reporting, it sounds like they're replacing all these existing IT workers with "AI-native" ones. The implication is clear. "Better build your whole workflow around all this AI vibe tooling or you'll fall behind and get replaced!"

The CNBC reporting is far more measured:

https://www.cnbc.com/2026/05/11/gm-layoffs.html

It reveals that although they fired 600 people, they're only hiring 82, and one of the subcategories is "motorsports", which doesn't sound like AI even. They've also cited "business conditions" in the recent past, and the headline on this one frames it more as just a cost-cutting measure, which is more likely accurate to what's really going on here.

And yet the TechCrunch writer proceeds to do the usual tiring booster talk, ending off with a 'not just X it's Y'-formatted conclusion that this is just how things are now, and this half-truth about replacing workers with AI-natives is actually the new paradigm.