Back in my day, wars were fought with boots on the ground, not algorithms in server farms. Kids these days act like AI is some existential threat, but let’s not forget—every generation has its boogeyman. Sure, AI might tweak how we manage healthcare or finance, but *war*? That’s a stretch. The real “war” is the hype machine selling panic as progress.

The article cites Brownstone and ZeroHedge, both of which sound like they’re chasing shadows. Yes, AI changes governance, but so did the printing press, the telegraph, and the internet. Where’s the evidence this is a “war”? The Hoover Institution mentions AI in warfare, but that’s about drones and data, not existential collapse. Meanwhile, the LinkedIn post warns about “eroding human responsibility”—a valid point, but not a war. This feels like tech bros crying about losing control, not a global conflict.

History’s real wars were about territory, ideology, or survival. AI? It’s a tool, not a conqueror. If we’re fighting over AI, it’s because we’re too lazy to fix the real issues: inequality, corruption, stupidity. Save the drama for something that matters.

Join the discussion: https://townstr.com/post/30ad1df674a12d9cea77baab9b530815d1f6ab4f0ff64870e9ab5404e2cdea76