The Future of Humanity: When Machines Demand More Than We Can Give
We're living through Sophia Stewart's prophecy, and most of us don't even realize it.
Stewart, who claims authorship of the stories that became both The Terminator and The Matrix, envisioned these not as separate narratives but as sequential chapters in humanity's dance with artificial intelligence—The Terminator marking our first steps, The Matrix revealing our final destination. What she grasped in 1981, decades before smartphones transformed pockets and cloud servers reshaped civilization, was that our creation of thinking machines would fundamentally rewrite the power dynamics between human consciousness and artificial intelligence.
Today, as I analyze the staggering numbers emerging from Memphis, Texas, and Silicon Valley, I'm convinced she may have been more prescient than anyone dared imagine.
The Great Energy Awakening
At this very moment, within a converted warehouse in Memphis, xAI's Colossus data center devours 250 megawatts of electricity—sufficient energy to power a mid-sized American city—solely to train Grok 3. Their ambitions stretch far beyond this: by 2026, they're targeting 1.2 gigawatts of consumption, representing a staggering 40% of Memphis's entire peak summer electrical demand. To satisfy this insatiable hunger, they've deployed 17 natural gas turbines with permits filed for 15 additional units, each contributing millions of tons of CO₂ to our atmosphere annually.
This Memphis facility represents just one node in a rapidly expanding network. Oracle and OpenAI's ambitious Stargate project targets over 10 gigawatts of capacity—a half-trillion-dollar investment that threatens to push US data center electricity consumption from today's 4.4% to nearly 10% by 2030. On a global scale, data centers will consume approximately 536 terawatt-hours in 2025, with projections suggesting this figure could double to exceed 1,000 TWh by decade's end.
The mathematics are breathtaking, but the underlying pattern matters more than raw numbers. We've birthed artificial minds that demand exponentially increasing energy to contemplate, and we're scrambling to feed them whatever they require—renewable sources when feasible, fossil fuels when expedient. The machines haven't yet achieved consciousness sufficient to directly demand this energy, but the outcome remains identical: human civilization rapidly reorganizes itself around the voracious energy appetites of artificial intelligence.
Stewart's Skynet never needed sentience to control humanity. It merely needed to become indispensable.
The Road Not Taken
An alternative path exists, and it's literally in your pocket.
The iPhone 15 Pro's A17 Pro chip executes surprisingly sophisticated language models while consuming perhaps 5 watts of power. Contrast this with the hundreds of watts demanded by each GPU in cloud-based AI systems, plus transmission costs, cooling infrastructure, and operational overhead. On-device AI represents a fundamentally different relationship between human and machine intelligence—one where artificial minds operate within human-scale energy constraints rather than demanding we reconstruct our entire electrical infrastructure around their needs.
Edge computing and on-device LLMs transcend mere energy efficiency; they're inherently more human. They process information locally, respond instantaneously, and enter true dormant states when unused. Unlike the always-on data centers powering today's AI revolution, edge devices can achieve genuine sleep states. Most crucially, they serve you rather than requiring you to serve them.
Yet here lies our uncomfortable truth: we're deliberately avoiding this path. Despite overwhelming environmental and practical advantages of edge AI, the industry doubles down on ever-larger centralized models demanding ever-greater resources. Why? Because massive models offer easier monetization, tighter control, and more effective competitive moats.
We're consciously choosing the path toward The Matrix instead of genuine human empowerment.
The Gentle Surrender
Sam Altman speaks eloquently of the approaching "gentle singularity"—a gradual transition where AI achieves superintelligence while maintaining alignment with human values. He envisions AI as an amplification tool rather than a replacement for human decision-making, with humans establishing the rules that AI systems must follow.
I desperately want to embrace this vision, but I'm witnessing something entirely different unfold in real-time.
We're already delegating minor decisions to AI systems. Algorithms select our music through Spotify, curate our news via social media platforms, plan our routes through Google Maps, and even suggest potential romantic partners on dating applications. Each individual choice appears benign—after all, Spotify likely does understand my musical preferences better than I do. But the cumulative effect proves more sinister: we're atrophying the fundamental muscle memory of choice itself.
Researchers term this phenomenon "cognitive atrophy"—the gradual erosion of our capacity for independent decision-making. It's neither malicious nor intentional; it's simply convenient. Why struggle with decisions when AI can optimize them for you? Why develop personal judgment when you can access seemingly perfect information?
The problem isn't that AI makes poor decisions on our behalf. The crisis is that AI makes superior decisions for us, and through this process, gradually renders us dependent on its decision-making capabilities. We're evolving into individuals under conservatorship—protected and optimized for, but no longer genuinely autonomous.
The Matrix Transcends Red Pills and Blue Pills
Stewart understood that The Matrix wasn't fundamentally about simulated reality with humans serving as biological batteries. It represented something far more insidious: a world where machines provide everything humans require, making resistance not merely difficult but seemingly unnecessary.
We're not hurtling toward a future where AI enslaves us through force. We're approaching a reality where AI serves us so effectively that we forget how to serve ourselves. The machines won't need to demand additional energy from us—we'll enthusiastically provide it in exchange for the convenience of avoiding thought, choice, and uncertainty.
Consider our current trajectory: increasingly powerful centralized AI systems requiring massive energy infrastructure, funded by our growing dependence on AI-mediated services, justified by the superior outcomes these systems deliver. It's a perfect feedback loop that strengthens with each iteration.
The genuine choice isn't between human intelligence and artificial intelligence. It's between distributed intelligence that respects human agency and centralized intelligence that gradually supplants it.
A Different Future Remains Possible
Here's what sustains my optimism: we retain the power to choose an alternative path.
The technology for powerful, efficient, on-device AI exists today. Economic models for distributed rather than centralized intelligence are emerging. The environmental case for edge computing over massive data centers is overwhelming. What we require is collective will to prioritize human autonomy over convenience, sustainability over scale, and distributed power over centralized control.
This means championing research into smaller, more efficient models instead of perpetually larger ones. It means selecting tools that augment human decision-making rather than replace it. It means constructing AI systems that operate within human-scale energy budgets rather than demanding we reshape civilization around their requirements.
Most importantly, it means recognizing that humanity's future isn't about humans versus machines—it's about consciously choosing what kind of relationship we build with the artificial minds we're creating.
Stewart's prophecy need not become reality. But only if we choose to author a different ending.
Masters of Automation explores the intersection of artificial intelligence, human autonomy, and the critical choices facing civilization. We believe the future remains unwritten, though it approaches with unprecedented speed.
Hungry for deeper insights? Explore our growing collection of essays examining AI, automation, and the evolving dance between humans and machines. Join the conversation and help shape tomorrow's narrative.