AI brings little, but comes with huge cost

 https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2025/07/ai-in-wyoming-may-soon-use-more-electricity-than-states-human-residents/

 

"The project's energy demands are difficult to overstate for Wyoming, the least populous US state. The initial 1.8-gigawatt phase, consuming 15.8 terawatt-hours (TWh) annually, is more than five times the electricity used by every household in the state combined. That figure represents 91 percent of the 17.3 TWh currently consumed by all of Wyoming's residential, commercial, and industrial sectors combined. At its full 10-gigawatt capacity, the proposed data center would consume 87.6 TWh of electricity annually—double the 43.2 TWh the entire state currently generates."

 AI sucks up energy like a vacuum cleaner sucks up dust; it takes everything it can get.  But do we really need AI if it comes at such a cost?  Who will benefit from AI?  Who is pushing it on the public?  What are all the hidden costs?

 “The promise of automation was to do the mundane so human creativity can flourish. Instead, human creativity is demeaned as mundane so Big Tech’s machines can flourish.” [Thinking Like a Human, by David Weitzner, p. 114] 

Republicans: the bill saves money. Democrats: the bill SAYS adding $5 trillion to the debt

 

A book about why AI is dangerous

 The book Thinking Like a Human: The Power of Your Mind in the Age of AI, by David Weitzner, helps us understand why AI (“Artificial Intelligence”) is problematic.

There is a bit of woo thrown in here and there in Weitzner’s writings, but I find two sentences from the entire book that really summarize why we need to worry about the big push to grow AI. “The promise of automation was to do the mundane so human creativity can flourish. Instead, human creativity is demeaned as mundane so Big Tech’s machines can flourish.” [p. 114] and "Artful spaces want to nurture the slowness of experience in human time, while algorithmic spaces want us to ignore our bodies and respond to the prompts of digital commands." [ p. 230]

Essentially, AI is dangerous because it is taking the promise of robotics to free mankind from dull, repetitive work, and instead is an attempt by ruthless and/or incompetent businessmen to replace higher-level human thought and work with their AI products. So businesses have glommed on to a so-far poorly working product to make money by promoting something that will replace human thought rather than helping humans have more time to think and do.

“The policy wonks have bought in to the hype that algorithms, which started out as math, have become steady-state beings with agendas. AI is suddenly a deterministic force that our societies lack the power to resist. The strategies outlined in these papers seem to coalesce around a call for human passivity and impotence in the face of algorithms that have managed to transcend human control.” [p. 247-8]

Is there an antidote to having AI take over from human thought and actions? Yes, says Weitzner. We need to first think with our bodies as well as our mind. We cannot see ourselves as just a computer in a bag of flesh. We think with our vision, our touch, our smell, our interactions with others, our reactions to outside stimuli. AI has none of this. Also, we need to think LESS like AI. AI simply hoovers up what has been written and done in the past, and makes assumptions and “predictions” based on this information. So we as humans need to think not as calculators but as innovators, forward-thinking, questioning conclusions, brainstorming with others – in other words, doing the things that AI cannot do. “Artful spaces want to nurture the slowness of experience in human time, while algorithmic spaces want us to ignore our bodies and respond to the prompts of digital commands.” [p. 230]

So, do we stick with the original plan to have computers and robots do the rote and mundane, and help us with our inventiveness and progress, or do we flip that around with AI and let AI become the “genius” of the future while we do the cooking and cleaning? This is the choice Weitzner sees. And it is not a choice that humans are demanding, but rather a plan foisted on us by those who can make money if AI can take our place. We have a choice in this matter.

“Defense network computers. New... powerful... hooked into everything, trusted to run it all. They say it got smart, a new order of intelligence. Then it saw all people as a threat, not just the ones on the other side. Decided our fate in a microsecond: extermination.” [Kyle Reese, in The Terminator movie]

As an aside, I noticed that Weitzner throughout the book sort of assumes that all humans are extroverts. Part of the solution to AI is more human interaction, being open with each other, even synchronizing with each other by coming together for mass events. As a member of the Introverts, I am a bit off-put by this. Certainly there is room for us in this fight as well? We can be inventive and aggressive as well. I think I’ll write Weitzner for an addendum about this.

Dear Trump Administration: what's so bad about immigrants?

 https://www.reddit.com/r/Defeat_Project_2025/comments/1lfbr2x/ice_raids_and_their_uncertainty_scare_off_workers/

 

Trump claimed that his administration would expel illegal immigrants who are criminals, drug dealers, etc.  Instead, he expelling the very immigrants the country needs; hard-working, law-abiding immigrants.  Why?  What is the purpose, when the United States needs their labor?

 If you want to find the illegal and criminal immigrants, you don't go to their court hearings, or their workplaces. That is where the GOOD immigrants are.  This is the tell.  

Immigrants should indeed come here legally.  The government should go after the criminals and moochers.  Let's get this corrected, or we will have no one to work our farms. 

It's a car world. We just squeeze ourselves in where we can

 https://getpocket.com/explore/item/parking-has-eaten-american-cities?utm_source=firefox-newtab-en-us

 

 "Scharnhorst finds that there are more than 2 million parking spaces in Philadelphia, 1.85 million in New York, 1.6 million each in Seattle and Des Moines, and just over 100,000 in tiny Jackson, which has a population of about 10,000.

Parking takes up a huge amount of space: Jackson has more than 50 parking spaces per acre, 25 times its residential density of just two households per acre. Jackson has a whopping 27 parking spaces for each of its households."

* * * * *

There were 284 million vehicles registered in the US in 2024.  They require roads, bridges, parking spaces, fuel stations, repair stations, plants to build them, plants to tear them down when they get old. etc.

 Public transportation could go a long way to changing this so people are more important than vehicles.  City planning could emphasize bicycling, which not only takes up less space but provides good exercise.  There are solutions to this problem.  Paris, for instance, has started to phase cars out of the city.   This would be difficult for cities with poor weather, but it does show the possibilities.

Will US cities change their ways?  I believe so. Cars are getting expensive.  The new generation is not in love with cars like Baby Boomers are.  There is hope.

The rich cause more pollution. Who knew.

 https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/may/07/two-thirds-of-global-heating-caused-by-richest-study-suggests

 

"The world’s wealthiest 10% are responsible for two-thirds of global heating since 1990, driving droughts and heatwaves in the poorest parts of the world, according to a study.

While researchers have previously shown that higher income groups emit disproportionately large amounts of greenhouse gases, the latest survey is the first to try to pin down how that inequality translates into responsibility for climate breakdown. It offers a powerful argument for climate finance and wealth taxes by attempting to give an evidential basis for how many people in the developed world – including more than 50% of full-time employees in the UK – bear a heightened responsibility for the climate disasters affecting people who can least afford it."

 

* * * * *

Can you believe the people who have personal jets, houses the size of small cities, and take vacations by circling the globe actually pollute more than poor people?  This is very useful news to find out where to look for reducing greenhouse gases.  Thanks to whomever did this research.

Trump is "phoning it in" and is no longer an acting president

 Donald Trump is no longer even doing his job as president. He spends 20% of his time golfing. He holds fundraisers for himself, using his official position to reward acolytes. He skips most of the daily intelligence briefings to keep him informed [https://www.politico.com/news/2025/05/09/trump-intelligence-briefing-frequency-00338946]. When asked questions about what his administration is doing he either says he doesn't know, or refers the questioner to another official. For instance, when asked whether he planned to send migrants to Libya, he responded “I don't know. You'll have to ask the Department of Homeland Security.” Even when asked about the most important aspect of being president, “[D]on’t you need to uphold the Constitution of the United States as president?” Once again, Trump answered, “I don’t know.” [https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/-dont-know-problem-trump-leaning-new-favorite-phrase-rcna205546]

 Trump generally skips the daily intelligence briefing.  Apparently he can't afford the time or brain power needed.

When the need arises to fill an important vacancy in his administration, he does not take the time to find the most qualified person. Instead he searches in his head through people he already knows and decides which one of them will best fit the slot. This is laziness and dangerous for the country.

This is called dereliction of duty. It means we do not really have a president. We have a golfing self-promoter disguising himself as president.

Dereliction of duty is defined as “a person’s purposeful or accidental failure to perform an obligation without a valid excuse, especially an obligation attached to their job. In the 1991 U.S. Court of Military Appeals case , U.S. v. Powell , the Court stated that a person is guilty of the offense of dereliction of duty when he or she willingly or negligently fails to perform his or her duties or by performing such duties in a culpably inefficient manner.” [https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/dereliction]

Trump is about to turn 79 years old. It may be that his age is catching up with him and he has trouble maintaining a knowledge of what is going on in his administration. In this case, it would not be dereliction but inability. In either case it is a danger to the country and must be remedied immediately. Congress has the ability to impeach and remove the president, though with a Republican majority at this time that is highly unlikely. There is also section 4 of article 25 of the Constitution, which allows “Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President. “

Whether Trump is deliberately failing to act as president or he is becoming mentally feeble, there are remedies, and they must be acted upon. Our country demands a president who is capable, competent, and willing to perform his duties.