outright ban would not survive court scrutiny, Kotkowski told the crowd
Maybe not, but maybe so. Stranger things have happened.
Why not an indefinite moratorium? (they do exist) If an additional moratorium cannot be put into place before the current one’s termination, an outright ban may serve to at least postpone, or perhaps consider trying a 5-year ban to allow for additional study, legislative discussion, and (blah blah blah). Politicians (and corporations) come up with things like this all the time, so there certainly have to be other options.
Perhaps the thing to do is to get the state legislators in on this, and with the current state of things, a call, e-mail, or good old letter to one’s Republican official stating “no ban? no vote for you”. More than a few states are considering outright bans. After all, People should have the choice to say that some new technology – which is all A.I. is (if not essentially a con) – is not wanted. The many negative effects of A.I., intentional or not, may constitute very good reasons to ban A.I. production overall (if possible).
It seems far too early for throwing up one’s hands and saying there is nothing one can do. A.I. itself is new. No one can say he/she/they know what the future impact of A.I. on the country, much less individuals may be. That in itself should be good enough reason to ban A.I. data center for a reasonable period of time for further debate and study.
When people do lose the right to determine the course of their own towns and counties, and even states, then perhaps it is time for some rather drastic changes. Voting can work, but we have to demand politicians who will stand up for their people, regardless of party. Put them on defense. Demand action. And tell them you’ll vote for their opponent no matter what if he/she doesn’t ban data centers from your area.
See who is on your side, and who is on the side of a corporation/business having more rights than you, because this is what this is about: money versus the People.