While most oppose AI data centers, there is one group enthusiastic about them: merchandise thieves

In the United States, at least a third of all data centers of the world. With investment reaching insane levelseach time they are built larger and more powerful infrastructures Unfortunately for the neighbors, who report an increase in pollution, increases in the electricity bill and problems with water supply. While all this is happening, there is a small sector of the population that has seen a business opportunity: thieves. What’s happening. They tell it in Business Insider. Last week in Illinois, police recovered two truckloads of stolen data center equipment. First they found a trailer containing $300,000 in coils of copper cable at a truck yard in Chicago. Later, they discovered that the same person who left the trailer had stored another one a week before and here came the bombshell: the second trailer contained material worth 1 million dollars. It is not the only theft of this type that has happened recently. At the beginning of the month they had The Canadian Press about $5 million worth of data center materials were disappearing while “in transit.” The containers left the port and were listed as having been picked up by the supposedly legitimate carriers, but never reached their destination. Why is it important. The data center boom is creating a supply chain of very valuable materials, especially DRAM chips and memories, but also metals such as copper. Organized crime is no stranger to this and has begun to attack these infrastructures that are so present in the US. Furthermore, they are using the very technology they are stealing from to achieve successful operations. Theft of merchandise. They say in Futurism that the US Department of Homeland Security estimates the theft of merchandise in losses of 35,000 million dollars a year. These gangs often attack retail trade, intercepting goods before they reach stores such as sports equipment from Nike. More sophisticated. Speaking to the Canadian Press, the head of the venture company Verisk CargoNet states that “The bad guys are very good at marketing (…) Now it is much more strategic, much more specific… They know what is in fashion and what sells well.” In the case of the 5 million theft that we mentioned before, the thieves used generative AI and other tools to impersonate a real transportation company and manipulate systems and communications. For days, it seemed like everything was going well and by the time they realized the deception it was too late. Image | Xataka with Magnific In Xataka | The iPhone is one of the most coveted pieces by street thieves. Apple wants to make it more difficult for you

We have a problem with AI. Those who were most enthusiastic at the beginning are starting to get tired of it.

The most promising promise surrounding AI at work today It’s not that it’s going to replace us.but it could free ourselves from part of the burden we carry every day. In recent years, much of the technological discourse has insisted on this idea, also driven by the arrival of assistants such as ChatGPT, Gemini or the different co-pilots integrated into everyday software: fewer routine tasks, more time to think, create or decide calmly. However, as these tools begin to be truly used in real environments, a question arises that can no longer be ignored: what happens when that promise of relief is confronted with the daily practice of work. Depletion system. The narrative of relief begins to crack when academic research looks at what happens inside companies. A study published by Harvard Business Review describes that, in the observed case, the AI ​​did not decrease work, but rather tended to intensify it, even without explicit orders to produce more. These findings can be interpreted as a sign of an emerging problem, where increased capacity can push certain organizations towards dynamics close to structural exhaustion, more linked to constant acceleration than to the promised efficiency. Where does the data come from?. The aforementioned work was developed for eight months within an American technology company with about 200 employees, combining in-person observation two days a week, monitoring of internal communication channels and more than 40 in-depth interviews with engineering, product, design, research and operations profiles. The company did not mandate the use of AI or set new performance goals, although it did offer enterprise subscriptions to business tools, which allowed it to analyze what happened when adoption arose on the initiative of workers. The pattern behind the promise. Far from a sudden change, the intensification described by the researchers takes the form of a recognizable process. The magazine summarizes its findings in three mechanisms that, combined, transform the daily work experience: progressive expansion of responsibilities, increasingly blurred boundaries between activity and rest, and simultaneous management of multiple tasks supported by AI. The increased activity began, in many cases, with something that at first glance seemed positive: the feeling of being able to do more on one’s own. It was no secret that AI makes it possible to tackle tasks that previously required external support or specific knowledge, gradually expanding the perimeter of its role. However, this growth did not replace previous responsibilities, but rather added to them and triggered new demands for supervision and adjustment within the teams. When the pause is no longer a pause. The study also shows that this dynamic not only arises from doing more things, but from doing them at different times. By reducing the initial effort required to begin a task, AI made it easier for work to slide into spaces traditionally reserved for rest, such as meals, short intervals, or the end of the day. Over time, this barely perceptible continuity transformed the work experience into something more constant and less delimited, decreasing resilience even without formally increasing hours. Fragmentation of care. Harvard Business Review points out that the possibility of executing several actions at the same time, relying on systems that work in the background, pushed many professionals to maintain an increasing number of tasks open simultaneously. This multiplication of fronts generated a feeling of momentum and support, but also required frequently reviewing the results produced by the AI ​​and continuously changing context. As this behavior became habitual, expectations of speed tended to rise within the organization. A possible way out. The study suggests that the problem does not lie in the technology itself, but in the absence of frameworks that regulate its daily use. Therefore, it proposes developing an “AI practice” based on intentional pauses that allow decisions to be reconsidered, work sequencing that reduces fragmentation, and moments of human connection that counteract isolation. In this scenario, the challenge for companies stops being to adopt more AI and becomes integrating its capacity without eroding the balance of daily work. Images | Vitaly Gariev In Xataka | Google is going to borrow money to pay back in 100 years. You have to believe that in 100 years Google will still be there

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.