
The new imperialism — AI's true price is exploitation and brutal extraction
An instant New York Times bestseller traces the arc of artificial intelligence not as a story of innovation, but of control: over data, environmental resources, people, and ultimately, the future.
On the surface, isn't this an exhilarating moment?
'Generative AI is thrilling: a creative aid for instantly brainstorming ideas and generating writing; a companion to chat with late into the night to ward off loneliness; a tool that could perhaps one day be so effective at boosting productivity that it will increase top-line economic activity,' writes US tech journalist Karen Hao.
'Under the hood, generative AI models are monstrosities, built from consuming previously unfathomable amounts of data, labor, computing power, and natural resources.'
Hao's description comes early on in her new book 'Empire of AI: Inside the reckless race for total domination', which has caused a sensation in Silicon Valley.
It charts the rise of OpenAI, the company responsible for ChatGPT, and in so doing records how its founder, Sam Altman, and his colleagues have traded early idealism for something much darker.
What started as a non-profit focused on building safe artificial general intelligence (AGI) has rapidly transformed into a profit-chasing, opaque tech behemoth in an arms race against its competitors, which will end — well, somewhere nobody currently is capable of understanding.
The focus of Hao's book: how the AI race is recreating the familiar contours of colonial-era exploitation by constructing a kind of empire in real time, built not on land or oil, but on compute power, data and labour.
And like empires of old, it functions through brutal extraction.
Developing world targeted for dirt-cheap labour
To train large language models like ChatGPT, what is required are humans. Ideally, humans who speak English and are willing to work for a pittance.
In Kenya, Hao reports, OpenAI has outsourced work for its content moderation systems to local workers earning barely more than the minimum wage. Their task: to read and categorise thousands of graphic, disturbing text descriptions so the company can build safety filters for its chatbot.
'Hundreds of thousands of grotesque text-based descriptions,' she writes, have to be sorted into different categories: bestiality; adults raping children.
The job is profoundly psychologically scarring — but what do the tech oligarchs care? It's not Americans doing this work.
'With the many other countries that the tech industry relegates to this role, Kenya shares a common denominator: It is poor, in the Global South, with a government hungry for foreign investment from richer countries,' writes Hao.
Venezuela is another example. Hao explains how the country's economic collapse created a workforce desperate enough to accept almost any wage: 'Venezuela suddenly checked off the perfect mix of conditions for which to find an inexhaustible supply of cheap labour: Its population had a high level of education, good internet connectivity, and, now, a zealous desire to work for whatever wages.'
The book recounts the story of one Venezuelan woman working up to 22 hours a day just to make ends meet. The tasks for which she earned pennies were small, repetitive, and exhausting — labelling datasets, transcribing audio, annotating images. In other words, the invisible labour that makes AI appear magical.
South Africa, of course, has been targeted too, with facial recognition software developers circling the country like vultures in search of valuable data about black faces.
Writes Hao: 'Facial recognition companies from all over the world were jostling to get a foothold in [South Africa] to collect valuable face data, especially after the industry had received significant criticism about their products' failures to accurately detect darker-skinned individuals.'
Environmental toll still unknown
All this extraction requires a physical backbone. Hao devotes a section of the book to the vast data centres that underpin modern AI.
The amount of water, electricity and raw materials required to keep AI systems running at scale is immense, and growing. Altman told a conference in June that a 'significant fraction' of the world's total power should ideally go towards running AI.
'Hyperscalers call their data centres 'campuses' — large tracts of land that rival the largest Ivy League universities, with several massive buildings densely packed with racks on racks of computers. Those computers emanate an unseemly amount of heat, like a labouring laptop a million times over. To keep them from overheating, the buildings also have massive cooling systems — large fans, air conditioners, or systems that evaporate water to cool down the servers,' writes Hao.
These centres require so much water that the tech companies are increasingly looking to developing countries to make a Faustian deal: we'll pay you to host our data centres, and in exchange leach vast quantities of water from your system. (A court stopped a planned Google data centre construction in Chile last year after an outcry from citizens about the water cost.)
Exactly what the environmental toll is is still unknown, because companies like OpenAI refuse to allow close monitoring.
This will all pay off … maybe.
Exactly what is all this harm in aid of?
Productivity and prosperity, we are constantly told.
But Hao writes of a June 2024 global study from the Upwork Research Institute, which found that 77% of workers said AI tools had added to their workload due to the amount of time they now had to spend reviewing AI-generated content while under pressure to do more work.
Hao also cites the Nobel economics laureates Daron Acemoglu and Simon Johnson, who have surveyed transformative technologies throughout history and concluded that they very rarely bring widespread prosperity.
One example: the invention of the cotton gin in the 1790s, which brought farmers untold wealth and established the American South as the largest global exporters of cotton.
Guess who did not benefit in the slightest?
'With the surge in cotton production, enslaved Black people were forced to work longer hours and physically coerced by even harsher means to squeeze out every ounce of their labour.'
This book's warning is not about robots rising up. It is about the humans already in charge.
The real threat, Hao argues, is not future annihilation but present-day exploitation. It is not that AI will become autonomous, but that it is already being wielded by a small elite to consolidate wealth and power.
This is the bargain we are told to accept, writes Hao: 'The staggering price society needs to pay for what it is developing will someday be worth it.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

IOL News
a day ago
- IOL News
ChatGPT's CEO on AI trust: a surprising confession you need to hear
Surprising confession, ChatGPT's CEO didn't expect people to trust AI this Much Image: RON AI Would it be fair to say we live in the matrix? A world where we turn to our smartphones for everything from tracking steps to managing chronic illnesses, it's no surprise that artificial intelligence (AI) has quickly become a daily companion. Need mental health support at 2am? There's an AI chatbot for that. Trying to draft a tricky work email? AI has your back. But what happens when we lean so far into this tech that we forget to question it? That's exactly the concern raised by OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, the man behind ChatGPT himself. During a candid moment on the OpenAI Podcast earlier this month, Altman admitted, 'People have a very high degree of trust in ChatGPT, which is interesting because AI hallucinates. It should be the tech that you don't trust that much.' Yes, the guy who helped create ChatGPT is telling us to be cautious of it. But what does 'AI hallucination' even mean? In AI lingo, a 'hallucination' isn't about seeing pink elephants. Yahoo reports that, in simple terms, an AI hallucination is when the machine gives us information that sounds confident but is completely false. Imagine asking ChatGPT to define a fake term like 'glazzof' and it creates a convincing definition out of thin air just to make you happy. Now imagine this happening with real topics like medical advice, legal opinions, or historical facts. This is not a rare glitch either. According to a study published by Stanford University's Center for Research on Foundation Models, AI models like ChatGPT hallucinate 15% to 20% of the time, and the user may not even know. The danger lies not in the errors themselves, but in how convincingly the tool presents them. Altman's remarks are not merely cautionary but resonate as a plea for awareness. 'We need societal guardrails,' Altman stated, emphasising that we are on the brink of something transformative. 'If we're not careful, trust will outpace reliability.' Image: Pexels Why do we trust AI so much? Part of the reason is convenience. It's fast, polite, always available, and seemingly informed. Plus, tech companies have embedded AI into every corner of our lives, from the smart speaker in our kitchen to our smartphone keyboard. But more than that, there's a psychological comfort in outsourcing our decisions. Research indicates that people trust AI because it reduces decision fatigue. When life feels overwhelming, especially post-pandemic, we lean into what feels like certainty, even if that certainty is artificial. That mental shortcut is called "cognitive fluency". The smoother information sounds, the more our brain tags it as true, a bias confirmed by a 2022 MIT-Stanford collaboration that tracked user interactions with chatbots in real time. Reliance on questionable data isn't just an intellectual risk. It can snowball into: Decision fatigue: Medication errors , such as following an AI-generated supplement regimen that conflicted with their prescriptions. Amplified anxiety: When the easy answer eventually unravels, we feel betrayed and trust our judgment less, notes cognitive scientist Prof. Emily Bender of the University of Washington Recent Pew Research data shows that 35% of U.S. adults have already used generative AI like ChatGPT for serious tasks, including job applications, health questions, and even parenting advice. The risk of blind trust Here's where things get sticky. AI isn't human. It doesn't 'know' the truth. It merely predicts the next best word based on vast amounts of data. This makes it prone to repeating biases, inaccuracies, and even fabricating facts entirely. Mental health and tech dependency More than just a tech issue, our blind trust in AI speaks volumes about our relationship with ourselves and our mental health. Relying on a machine to validate our decisions can chip away at our confidence and critical thinking skills. We're already in an age of rising anxiety, and outsourcing judgment to AI can sometimes worsen decision paralysis. The World Health Organization (WHO) has also flagged the emotional toll of tech overuse, linking digital dependency to rising stress levels and isolation, especially among young adults. Add AI into the mix, and it becomes easy to let the machine speak louder than your inner voice. Altman didn't just throw the problem on the table; he offered a warning that feels like a plea: 'We need societal guardrails. We're at the start of something powerful, and if we're not careful, trust will outpace reliability.' Here are three simple ways to build a healthier relationship with AI: Double-check the facts, don't assume AI is always right. Use trusted sources to cross-reference. Keep human input in the loop, especially for big life decisions. Consult professionals (doctors, career coaches, financial advisors) when it matters most. Reflect before you accept, a sk yourself: 'Does this align with what I already know? What questions should I ask next?'

IOL News
a day ago
- IOL News
How South Africa can turn its youth into the world's most wanted talent
South Africa has one of the youngest populations in the world. Over 60% of our people are under the age of 35. That's not a crisis — that's an economic goldmine, says the author. In a world being transformed by AI and an unrelenting war for skills, South Africa stands on the brink of an unprecedented opportunity: to become not just a source of talent, but a global talent hub. For too long, we've watched our brightest minds leave in search of opportunity, recognition, or growth. But what if South Africa could flip the script? What if we became the place the world looks to when it needs digitally savvy, globally minded, socially conscious professionals. That future isn't a fantasy. It's a strategy. And it begins with reframing our national identity — not as a country struggling with unemployment, but as a country brimming with untapped human capital that is ready to lead the industries of the future. The Case for South Africa as a Talent Hub South Africa has one of the youngest populations in the world. Over 60% of our people are under the age of 35. That's not a crisis — that's an economic goldmine, if we know how to mine it responsibly. We also have: • A growing digital infrastructure and startup ecosystem• World-class universities and learning institutions • English fluency and cultural agility • A strong tradition of resilience and innovationBut the most powerful asset we have is our youth's hunger for impact — their desire not just to work, but to matter. How Do We Unlock the Talent Economy? 1. Future-Proof Training for Future-First Careers We must equip young South Africans not just with degrees, but with globally relevant skills - in fields like data science, AI ethics, fintech, digital marketing, cybersecurity, climate tech, and remote project management. Every technical skill must be paired with human-centric capabilities: storytelling, leadership, empathy, collaboration. 2. A National Internship Accelerator Imagine a public-private partnership that places 100 000 youth per year in global virtual internships. Every participant becomes a South African ambassador - showcasing our talent on the world stage.3. Incentivising the Talent Return We must make it easier for our global South African diaspora to come home - bringing with them capital, networks, and know-how. Let's create "Returnership" programs and global alumni summits that connect the dots. 4. Export Services, Not People The global demand for services - from accounting to design to coding - can be met virtually. Let's build platforms that match South African youth with international contracts. Think: the 'BPO of the future.' 5. Brand South Africa as a Talent Nation Germany became synonymous with engineering. India with IT. Kenya with mobile payments. What will South Africa become known for? Let's craft a Talent Nation campaign that positions us as the go-to source for skilled, creative, and ethical young professionals. What makes South Africa stand out from the Crowd There are a number of compelling business advantages that make South Africa the preferred destination for outsourcing global business services, including the following: • One of the best ICT infrastructures in Africa, enabling seamless global connectivity; • Access to a large, young and highly trainable workforce fluent in English, with a neutral accent and strong empathy levels; • Recognised for its high empathy service delivery, excelling in customer journey management and first-call resolution rates; • Cost savings of 55-65% over source geographies such as the UK and the United States; • Strategic access to Africa through a regional hub-and-spoke delivery model. Over the past five years, this model has been changing the lives of more than 150 000 previously unemployed youth by equipping them with comprehensive training, in-demand skills and sustainable career pathways. Why It Matters When we give young South Africans a stake in the global economy, we give them a reason to stay, to build, to don't just fight unemployment - we fuel hope. We reduce inequality. We inspire entrepreneurship. We create a generation of global contributors who never forget their roots. Because South Africa doesn't just have talent - South Africa is talent. And the world is ready for what we have to offer. Let's Build It Together If you're a leader, a policymaker, an entrepreneur, or simply someone who believes in this country's future - now is the time to act. Let's create platforms, mentorship programs, job pipelines, and global bridges. Let's make 'Born in South Africa' a global badge of professional excellence. The Future of Jobs Summit™ (Part 2): A National Call to Action That's why the upcoming Future of Jobs Summit™ (Part 2) is more than just an event - it's a next chapter of the summit will bring together business leaders, policymakers, educators, and youth trailblazers to co-create a Talent Action Plan for South Africa. We'll unpack the bold initiatives needed to position our youth at the heart of the global economy and launch scalable solutions for job creation, skills development, and cross-border career you believe in building a South Africa where every young person has a future worth staying for, the summit is where that future begins.


Daily Maverick
a day ago
- Daily Maverick
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair: US's economic outlook is decidedly murky
When I worked in fund management in the City of London in the 1990s, my team dreaded seeing one of our largest company investments featured on the cover of Business Week. Too often, it heralded bad news. So we formulated a curse: 'Those whom the Gods wish to destroy, they first put on the front cover of Business Week.' This sentiment derives from the Latin warning, 'Those whom Jupiter wishes to destroy, he first deprives of reason.' It has been adapted many times since … including by James Bond! The variant that informed our 1990s curse came from Cyril Connolly, the journalist and critic: 'Whom the Gods wish to destroy, they first call promising.' Fast-forward to 2024 and it seems as if The Economist has usurped Businessweek. On 19 October 2024, the British weekly ran a front cover story lauding the United States as 'The Envy of the World'. Eight months later, at least to many non-Americans, America is anything but. Result? Many foreigners are selling their American financial assets. Outsiders increasingly pity – not envy – the US because of the domestic political quagmire in which it is visibly trapped; its foreign policy challenges are no less daunting. But I will leave the reader to decide for themselves whether they agree with these assessments. For my part, I focus mostly on the economics. Yet here too there are multiple signs of malaise. And they are not just cyclical – GDP growth was actually negative last quarter – but structural. Many titans of US finance fear this malaise could yet have world-altering consequences. The subtext of The Economist cover story was to laud what especially financial markets had dubbed 'US exceptionalism': high economic growth, solid productivity gains, a generally strong dollar and, above all, a stock market that had consistently outperformed all-comers. The result of the latter was that the US – with but 4.2% of the world's population – accounted for 67% of end 2024's MSCI All World Equity Index. The idea of American exceptionalism is far from new. It dates back to a 1630 speech from John Winthrop. Quoting the Bible – 'You are the light of the world. A town built on a hill cannot be hidden' – this Bostonian Puritan inaugurated a theme that has been oft repeated in US politics: one of American uniqueness, that, by being 'above', America would be a 'beacon of hope' for the world. US politicians have repeatedly echoed this notion, most famously John F Kennedy in 1961: 'We must always consider that we shall be as a city upon a hill – the eyes of all people are upon us.' In October 2024, The Economist was suggesting that this US beacon of hope had become 'The Envy of the Financial World'. How different everything seems now! Part of the challenge faced by those of us in finance daring to suggest that 'something is amiss with the US' is that we face a form of colour blindness: dollar blindness. Most financial analysts and investors – plus the talking heads of CNBC and Bloomberg – speak Dollar as their first language … and are rarely fluent in any other currency. And because they nearly always speak in dollars, they cannot appreciate how much the US dollar 'ain't what it used to be'. Furthermore, by having strong equity biases, they often have only a vague grasp of the vagaries of bond and currency markets. To most of the Dollar-fluent group, the fact the S&P 500 has hung in there since 18 October 2024 (and Donald Trump's election soon thereafter) means there is no cause for alarm: equities are broadly flat since that article. Even if equities are not one of the vital signs flashing red, an increasing number of foreigners are now divesting their savings from US Treasuries and thereafter the US dollar. (To state the obvious, the currency unit of account for foreigners is not the US dollar.) Over the past eight months, the UST 10-year yield has fallen from 4.08% to 4.28%. More significantly, over the same period, the 30-year – which saw outflows of $11-billion in Q2 25 – has fallen from 4.38% to 4.82%. On top of these bond losses, many foreigners have lost money on the currency cross as the dollar's DXY Index has fallen from 105.5 to 98.0 over the past eight months. (The DXY actually rose to 110 until just before Joe Biden handed over to Trump, but has fallen 11% since that presidential inauguration). Added to these red lights, we must note a recent slew of US macro data – both hard and soft – that is painting a worrying cyclical picture. The IMF forecasts that – after 2024's 2.8% – the US economy will grow a full percentage point less, at 1.8%, in 2025. In 2026, they see yet further deceleration in that growth rate. This slowdown will be before the effects of the tariff war are fully reflected. In addition, there is a growing foreign tourist stayaway now all too evident in flight and hotel occupancies. Finally, the loss of the growth drivers from immigration – which has driven all GDP growth post-Covid! – are also hard to estimate. Meanwhile, the 'all-important' US consumer is showing signs of stumbling: 'all important' as consumption accounts for nearly 70% of US GDP. The Consumer Confidence Index dropped 5.4 points in June to 93.0 – significantly below the 98.4 consensus estimates. May's retail sales were down 0.9% month on month. May auto sales decelerated from March and April. Restaurant sales fell -1% in May after a gain of +2.5% in April. Housing data is cooling: May housing starts were down 9.3% to a five-year low and property prices are falling in real terms. But, in the grander scheme of things, these monthly macro readings are but peripheral readings, cyclical more than structural. What matters above all – more precisely, underneath it all – is what lies beneath in the foundations of the US economy. For buried there is a ticking time bomb: the US Federal budget deficit. And Moody's, by recently stripping the US of its last AAA sovereign debt rating, has alerted investors to the increased volume of that ticking. For the first eight months of FY 2025 to end May, this deficit rose $1.37-trillion, up 13.5% on 2024's equivalent. After a $1.8-trillion deficit in FY 2024, a higher total for FY 2025 now looks possible … and this despite the cost-cutting efforts of the now-departed Elon Musk and his left-behind Doge team. Trump's flagship budget – 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' (OBBBA) – is criss-crossing multiple minefields in Congress. The Senate and House Republican versions –still not reconciled to each other – are underpinned by heroic assumptions, especially on the revenue side. Both also rely upon a GDP growth rate rising over 4%, an eventuality few neutral forecasters find credible. The Tax Foundation forecasts the OBBBA will raise GDP by just 1.1%. Yale University even sees growth declining 3%! The dysfunctionality of Congress is rooted in a seemingly irreconcilable desire for Republicans to cut taxes and for Democrats to raise expenditure. (The Republicans always want to raise defence expenditure too.) If what results in the actual numbers in coming years is a mish-mash of lower revenues (suggesting tax cuts happened), yet similar or even higher expenditure (implying Republican cost cutting will have been mostly thwarted), then it is a mathematical inevitability that the primary deficit (which excludes interest on debt) of the Federal Budget will rise. Yet there is wishful thinking on the part of most Republicans that the primary deficit can, looking forward over the next decade, be contained at around $500-billion annually. However, if any overall deficit results, and not just a primary one, this means the overall total federal debt ($37-trillion end June 2025; forecast $37.5-trillion to end fiscal 2025) must rise too. So to be clear, a primary deficit of '$500-billion' in 2025 (Ahem! It is heading for $1-trillion plus!) plus this year's debt interest bill of $800-billion would result in an overall deficit of $1.3-trillion … which would then be added to total outstanding federal debt. The following year, interest on a larger federal debt (now forecast to be $37.5-trillion federal debt by the end of September 2025) would then be payable. Not that the primary deficit can in any way be ignored, it is the interest bill on government debt that risks weighing down US government finances the most. Why? Because if Congress cannot run primary budget surpluses, influencing that interest bill is essentially beyond their reach. And, to quote the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (4 June 2025): 'If interest rates were to remain elevated at current levels – with 10-year Treasuries at 4.5% – then interest costs would climb further to $2.1-trillion (5.1% of GDP) in 2034 or $2.2-trillion (5.2% of GDP) under a permanent OBBBA scenario.' Uncontrollable interest payments could yet become the tail that wags the federal deficit dog. One must add to this fiscal fiasco the cocktail of uncertainty now facing the US's longer-term economic growth prospects: higher tariffs, evidence of foreigners boycotting US goods (think Boeing, as recently as 2017 the US's top industrial exporter), macro policy uncertainty causing investments to be postponed, and increasing cuts to university-based R&D as part of a wider attack on academia, the legal profession, the fourth estate and above all the Constitution itself. Far from being 'the Light on the Hill', the US's economic outlook is decidedly murky. Is it any wonder that foreign investors are shying away from the US bond market, precipitating rises in longer-term interest rates (so adding to the financing burden of federal debt) and thereafter causing the US dollar to sink? The British historian Arnold Joseph Toynbee wrote that 'Civilisations die from suicide, not by murder'. And the mounting travails faced by today's US have mostly been self-inflicted. What should we expect next? Georges Danton, the orator who became the minister of justice in 1792 three years after the French Revolution and president of the National Convention a year later, was credited (among others) to have predicted: 'Like Saturn, the revolution devours its children.' Madame la Guillotine made Danton's acquaintance in 1794. Will Donald Trump start turning on his own? Was Elon Musk his amuse-bouche? Will Tulsi Gabbard be the next course? How will Trump serve the Maga wing of the Republican Party as they decry his 'foreign adventures'? Or Thomas Massie? And will Baked Alaska – Lisa Murkowski – yet be Trump's dessert? 'The New Colossus' is a sonnet by Emma Lazarus written in 1883 to raise money for the construction of the Statue of Liberty's pedestal. It is engraved on a bronze plaque inside that pedestal. Its most famous lines are: Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door! This welcome does not apply in 2025. What then does the future hold for an America that is no longer a Statue of Liberty lifting a lamp beside a golden door? In the first version of the film The Planet of the Apes, the closing image is of a partially buried Statue of Liberty rising rusted from a deserted beach. The film's lead, played by Charlton Heston, realises the gruelling odyssey he has just survived has all been in vain: he was always back on Planet Earth. This powerful scene surely echoed Shelley's 1818 sonnet, Ozymandias: Poetry for thought. DM