78: Keir Starmer, Sam Altman, and the Militarization of AI
A Gift to the Far Right
What does it take to dominate the future? For British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, it’s massive investments in artificial intelligence, a strategy he claims will catapult the UK into global leadership. For Sam Altman of OpenAI, it’s the audacious claim that artificial general intelligence (AGI) will emerge during the next Trump administration. For the rest of us, it’s a rising tide of skepticism over who pays for these ambitions and what they leave behind.
AI has become the battleground for political ambition and corporate dominance, but its promises come with hidden costs. Beneath the dazzling rhetoric lies a stark reality: the spiraling energy demands, ethical quandaries, and military entanglements that underpin this technology.
Starmer’s Vision: Ambition Meets Skepticism
Prime Minister Starmer’s AI strategy, launched with considerable fanfare, promises to position the UK as a global AI superpower. Core components include:
Massive investment in computing capacity, with plans for new government-backed supercomputers.
AI growth zones designed to attract investment and foster innovation.
Expanded access to NHS health data for training AI models, under the premise of enhancing public services.
However, the strategy faces substantial criticism:
Energy Infrastructure Failures: AI’s reliance on energy-intensive data centers conflicts with the UK’s soaring industrial electricity costs. Critics, including Shadow Energy Secretary Claire Coutinho, warn that the government has yet to address the infrastructure weaknesses that could undermine this vision.
Ethical Blind Spots: The plan to allow NHS data access to private AI firms has sparked fears of exploitation and erosion of public trust. Patient advocacy groups worry about the commodification of health data.
Creative Industry Backlash: The proposed “rights reservation” system for copyrighted works places the burden of protection on creators, leading to protests from artists and writers who see this as a giveaway to tech giants.
The Starmer government’s vision is audacious, but critics question whether it is more sizzle than steak—a rhetorical flourish masking deeper structural deficiencies in the UK’s economy and energy sector.
Altman’s AGI and the Politics of Bravado
In a move blending techno-optimism with political cynicism, Sam Altman recently claimed that AGI—Artificial General Intelligence—will be achieved during the next Trump administration. This assertion is less about timelines and more about the climate of audacity that defines contemporary AI discourse. The Trump regime—defined by post-truth politics—provides a perfect backdrop for AI narratives that prioritize buzzwords over substance. When evidence and policy take a backseat to bravado, it’s not surprising that the military emerges as a primary patron.
AI is expensive. Training advanced models requires astronomical computing power, and the private sector’s ability to foot the bill is increasingly strained. Enter the military, which offers vast budgets and a long history of funding frontier technologies. The U.S. Department of Defense, for instance, has become one of the largest investors in AI, motivated by both national security imperatives and technological superiority.
Biden’s recent Executive Order on Advancing U.S. Leadership in Artificial Intelligence Infrastructure explicitly connects AI development to national infrastructure and security. It emphasizes:
Building large-scale AI computing clusters.
Strengthening supply chain security for critical computing components.
Incentivizing collaboration between government and private industry.
While the order frames these initiatives as infrastructure investments, the undercurrent is clear: military interests are central to sustaining AI’s growth.
The Energy Equation: Quantifying AI’s Power Demands
The scale of energy required to power advanced AI systems is staggering. Training a single large language model can consume as much energy as thousands of households use in a year. Data centers hosting these models are energy-intensive, often requiring dedicated power plants to sustain operations.
To meet these demands, the US and UK will need to:
Upgrade Infrastructure: Significant investment in energy infrastructure, including renewable energy sources and grid modernization, will be essential. Without these upgrades, power shortages could become a limiting factor.
Lower Energy Costs: Industrial electricity rates in the UK are among the highest in Europe, making it a less attractive destination for AI companies. Policies to reduce costs or subsidize energy for AI-specific purposes could alleviate this burden.
Boost Efficiency: AI research must prioritize energy-efficient algorithms and hardware. Innovations in chip design and cooling technologies could substantially lower the energy footprint of AI systems.
Failure to address these energy challenges risks turning ambitious AI plans into empty promises. Policymakers must recognize that energy is the backbone of AI infrastructure and act accordingly.
This militarized funding model poses profound questions. AI breakthroughs often flow into commercial applications, but the priorities of military funders inevitably shape the technologies being developed. Surveillance, autonomous weapons, and cyber capabilities take precedence over socially beneficial uses like healthcare or education.
Moreover, the emphasis on military funding sidelines public input. AI’s development becomes an elite project, divorced from democratic oversight and accountability.
AI’s trajectory is being shaped not just by technical breakthroughs but by political decisions and economic structures. As governments like Starmer’s UK and Biden’s U.S. position themselves as AI leaders, the question of who truly benefits remains paramount.
The stakes couldn’t be higher. As hype, lies, and militarized funding dominate the AI landscape, it’s up to all of us to demand a future where authority over AI is shared, transparent, and accountable.