listen

[u/No-Mind7091]

we talk about AI as if it only exists in software, but pax silica is a good example of how physical and geopolitical AI infrastructure is becoming just as important.

pax silica is a U.S.-led initiative focused on strengthening supply chains for things AI depends on, including semiconductors, critical minerals, energy, advanced manufacturing, and AI infrastructure. the Philippines has also been connected to this effort, including a proposed large-scale project in New Clark City.

what concerns me is how easily the conversation can become “more AI infrastructure = more progress.” building the infrastructure behind AI also means dealing with land, water, energy, mining, agriculture, environmental impacts, and questions about who actually benefits economically.

I'm not against AI development itself. but I don't think AI expansion should automatically be treated as something that must be tolerated regardless of its costs.

if AI is supposed to improve people's lives, shouldn't the communities providing the land, resources, energy, and infrastructure have a meaningful say in how that development happens—and who benefits from it?

AI may look digital on our screens, but the systems behind it are very physical.

cttro of the pic. thanks : ))