There seems to be a weird self-fulfilling narrative here:

1) "AI companies will go bust because tokens will cost too much" >> 2) "Don't let them build data centers that will sit empty" >> 3) Demand outstrips supply by a lot >> 4) Token costs too much.

This is no different from the NIMBY's that block all the housing then sit in a huff saying "see! everyone's leaving. good thing we didn't build anything!" when the rents go up.

▲

sensanaty 4 days ago | parent [-]

Talk about a goomba fallacy. The people who are against the data center buildups (which is increasingly becoming a bipartisan issue the world over thanks to the antics of the AI psychos) are not the same people complaining about token prices. I'm sure many of them would even be gleeful if the AI companies went belly up

▲

pj_mukh 4 days ago | parent [-]

Doesn't matter if they're different people or if it's politically popular.

It's how the cycle would go, and in the end the same people will complain about how AI "is only for rich people" (how high token prices will express itself in populist language)

The exact thing happened to housing.

▲

sensanaty 4 days ago | parent [-]

Again, the people who are anti-AI don't give a shit about token prices. They will care that AI is only for rich people, but this won't be due to token prices, but because only the wealthy will be the ones with any kind of job (if the dream of the AI overlords is to come to fruition anyways) or income stream due to displacement caused by AI

	▲	pj_mukh 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		"dream of the AI overlords" I don't care what their dream is, I care about what's happening IRL. Please read the original article again, AI is clearly being used by workers to expand their productivity (and their earning capacity). The main thing that will screw that up is if token prices spike. "AI is only for rich people, but this won't be due to token prices" Statement doesn't make sense. Higher prices means unaffordability. I don't know why that would change for AI tokens. Higher token prices is what will make sure advanced models are only available to capital owners This feels "unintuitive" only because it's not the dominant narrative, but that's not a measure of accuracy. "Everybody believe so" is not a good defense.