David G: “What happens after the bubble pops? What do we do amongst the wreckage of what was once the AI bubble?”
Tante: “A question that really concerns me is [the data centres that have been built]; who will they [the future owners of data centres, after the hyperscalers stop paying] turn to, to get their money back? The only entities that I can think of that have the money to make this worth it, is the military, and the security apparatus. […]
“That is useful for a lot of shit that we don't want. That is a problem that really concerns me. Who has problems that fit to pattern-matching machines; and who has the money [to pay data centres to address those problems]? And that's gonna be a lot of military applications, that's gonna be a lot of security apparatus applications, that we all probably should not want.”
David G: “That's wonderfully probable and depressing.”
Tante: “I'm fun at parties.”
A decade ago, when I was Talking About Cryptocurrency (approving), in presentations etc., this was indeed a very frequent assumption of my audience. They would be confused and/or shocked when I referred to earlier in the presentation to show that no, every transaction on the blockchain is visible to everyone, forever, otherwise it can't even work.
I suspect a lot of the shocked response was due to the (unspoken) follow up question “then what the heck is the point of this, why would I use this?”
But I can see why the assumption comes along. Cryptography is all about secret, obscured communication; why wouldn't cryptocurrency be about secret money transactions?
At least now we can Talk About Cryptocurrency (derogatory) and dispel that assumption, where we can.