
Karen Hao on how the AI boom became a new imperial frontier
Hao tells Reuters this isn't a comparison she made lightly. Drawing on years of reporting in Silicon Valley and further afield to countries where generative AI's impact is perhaps most acutely felt — from Kenya, where OpenAI reportedly outsourced workers to annotate data for as little as $2 per hour, to Chile, where AI data centers threaten the country's precious water resources — she makes the case that, like empires of old, AI firms are building their wealth off of resource extraction and labor exploitation. This critique stands in stark contrast to the vision promoted by industry leaders like Altman (who declined to participate in Hao's book), who portray AI as a tool for human advancement — from boosting productivity to improving healthcare. Empires, Hao contends, cloaked their conquests in the language of progress too.
The following conversation has been edited for length and clarity.
Reuters: Can you tell us how you came to the AI beat?
Karen Hao: I studied mechanical engineering at MIT, and I originally thought I was going to work in the tech industry. But I quickly realized once I went to Silicon Valley that it was not necessarily the place I wanted to stay because the incentive structures made it such that it was really hard to develop technology in the public interest. Ultimately, the things I was interested in — like building technology that facilitates sustainability and creates a more sustainable and equitable future — were not things that were profitable endeavors. So I went into journalism to cover the issues that I cared about and ultimately started covering tech and AI.
That work has culminated in your new book 'Empire of AI.' What story were you hoping to tell?
Once I started covering AI, I realized that it was a microcosm of all of the things that I wanted to explore: how technology affects society, how people interface with it, the incentives (and) misaligned incentives within Silicon Valley. I was very lucky in getting to observe AI and also OpenAI before everyone had their ChatGPT moment, and I wanted to add more context to that moment that everyone experienced and show them this technology comes from a specific place. It comes from a specific group of people and to understand its trajectory and how it's going to impact us in the future. And, in fact, the human choices that have shaped ChatGPT and Generative AI today (are) something that we should be alarmed by and we collectively have a role to play in starting to shape technology.
You've mentioned drawing inspiration from the Netflix drama 'The Crown' for the structure of your book. How did it influence your storytelling approach?
The title "Empire of AI" refers to OpenAI and this argument that (AI represents) a new form of empire, and the reason I make this argument is because there are many features of empires of old that empires of AI now check off. They lay claim to resources that are not their own, including the data of millions and billions of people who put their data online, without actually understanding that it could be taken to be trained for AI models. They exploit a lot of labor around the world — meaning they contract workers who they pay very little to do their data annotation and content moderation for these AI models. And they do it under the civilizing mission, this idea that they're bringing benefit to all of humanity.
It took me a really long time to figure out how to structure a book that goes back and forth between all these different communities and characters and contexts. I ended up thinking a lot about 'The Crown" because every episode, no matter who it's about, is ultimately profiling this global system of power.
Does that make CEO Sam Altman the monarch in your story?
People will either see (Altman) as the reason why OpenAI is so successful or the massive threat to the current paradigm of AI development. But in the same way that when Queen Elizabeth II passed away people suddenly were like, 'Oh, right, this is still just the royal family and now we have another monarch,' it's not actually about the individual. It's about the fact that there is this global hierarchy that's still in place in this vestige of an old empire that's still in place.
Sam Altman is like Queen Elizabeth (in the sense that) whether he's good or bad or he has this personality or that personality is not as important as the fact that he sits at the top of this hierarchy — even if he were swapped out, he would be swapped out for someone who still inherits this global power hierarchy.
In the book, you depict OpenAI's transition from a culture of transparency to secrecy. Was there a particular moment that symbolized that shift?
I was the first journalist to profile OpenAI and embedded within the company in 2019, and the reason why I wanted to profile them at the time was because there was a series of moments in 2018 and 2019 that signaled that there was some dramatic shift underway at the organization.
OpenAI was co-founded as a nonprofit at the end of 2015 by Elon Musk and Sam Altman and a cast of other people. But in 2018, Musk leaves; OpenAI starts withholding some research and announces to the world that it's withholding this research for the benefit of humanity. It restructures and nests a for-profit within the nonprofit and Sam Altman becomes CEO; and those were the four things that made me wonder what was going on at this organization that used its nonprofit status to really differentiate itself from all of the other crop of companies within Silicon Valley working on AI research.
Right before I got to the offices, they had another announcement that solidified there was some transformation afoot, which was that Microsoft was going to partner with OpenAI and give the company a billion dollars. All of those things culminated in me then realizing that all of what they professed publicly was actually not what was happening.
You emphasize the human stories behind AI development. Can you share an example that highlights the real-world consequences of its rise?
One of the things that people don't really realize is that AI is not magic and it actually requires an extremely large amount of human labor and human judgment to create these technologies. These AI companies will go to Global South countries to contract workers for very low wages where they will either annotate data that needs to go into training these training models or they will perform content moderation or they will converse with the models and then upvote and downvote their answers and slowly teach them into saying more helpful things.
I went to Kenya to speak with workers that OpenAI had contracted to build a content moderation filter for their models. These workers were completely traumatized and ended up with PTSD for years after this project, and it didn't just affect them as individuals; that affected their communities and the people that depended on them. (Editorial note: OpenAI declined to comment, referring Reuters to an April 4 post by Altman on X.)
Your reporting has highlighted the environmental impact of AI. How do you see the industry's growth balancing with sustainability efforts?
These data centers and supercomputers, the size that we're talking about is something that has become unfathomable to the average person. There are data centers that are being built that will be 1,000 to 2,000 megawatts, which is around one-and-a-half and two-and-a-half times the energy demand of San Francisco. OpenAI has even drafted plans where they were talking about building supercomputers that would be 5,000 megawatts, which would be the average demand of the entire city of New York City.
Based on the current pace of computational infrastructure expansion, the amount of energy that we will need to add onto the global grid will, by the end of this decade, be like slapping two to six new Californias onto the global grid. There's also water. These data centers are often cooled with fresh water resources.
How has your perspective on AI changed, if at all?
Writing this book made me even more concerned because I realized the extent to which these companies have a controlling influence over everything now. Before I was worried about the labor exploitation, the environmental impacts, the impact on the job market. But through the reporting of the book, I realized the horizontal concern that cuts across all this is if we return to an age of empire, we no longer have democracy. Because in a world where people no longer have agency and ownership over their data, their land, their energy, their water, they no longer feel like they can self-determine their future.
Hashtags

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


The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Australia news live: Gareth Ward in legal bid to avoid expulsion from NSW parliament; Acoss says it's time to roll back property tax breaks for investors
Update: Date: 2025-08-06T21:59:17.000Z Title: Chalmers says he will err on the side of workers when it comes to AI Content: Treasurer Jim Chalmers appeared on 7:30 Report last night, where he was talking about how AI will be a key topic at the government's productivity roundtable in a few weeks. He was asked if he would support the Australian Council of Trade Unions' call for workers to be able to veto AI in their workplace. He said he would err on the side of workers: We need to be realistic about it. And certainly, I agree that workers need to be part of the conversation when it comes to rolling out a technology that has this gamechanging potential. And where there's very real potential risks in the labour market. I would always err on the side of workers having a say in how their work is done. Update: Date: 2025-08-06T21:54:54.000Z Title: Good morning Content: and welcome to our live news blog. I'm Nick Visser, I'll be bringing you updates as the day gets rolling. Let's start with this: The Australian Council of Social Services (Acoss) is calling for the government to roll back tax breaks for property investors before the treasurer's productivity roundtable. Acoss is calling for the 50% capital gains tax discount to be halved 'so there'd be some tax reward for property investment but nowhere near as generous', the group's chief told the ABC. Also today, a court is expected to hear jailed MP Gareth Ward's bid to prevent the NSW parliament from expelling him. We'll bring you all the developments. Stick with us.


Reuters
2 hours ago
- Reuters
TRADING DAY Wall St momentum calms tariff shakes
ORLANDO, Florida, Aug 6 (Reuters) - TRADING DAY Making sense of the forces driving global markets By Jamie McGeever, Markets Columnist Wall Street rallied on Wednesday as investors continued to take their cue from earnings and AI-related optimism over tariffs, while a weak 10-year Treasury note auction served as a reminder of the precarious U.S. fiscal situation. More on that below. In my column today I look at how investors' apparent readiness to accept tariffs challenges the orthodoxies that have underpinned economic liberalism and world markets for the past 40 years. If you have more time to read, here are a few articles I recommend to help you make sense of what happened in markets today. Today's Key Market Moves Wall St momentum calms tariff shakes Positive investor sentiment and risk appetite were on full display on Wednesday, as optimism around corporate earnings and the U.S. tech boom again overshadowed more worrisome global developments on tariffs and growth. Traders cheered news that ChatGPT maker OpenAI is mulling a stock sale that could value the company at $500 billion and Apple's pledge to spend $100 billion on U.S. manufacturing. U.S. earnings continue to surprise to the upside too, and the S&P 500 consumer discretionary index rose 2.4%, its best day since May. Wall Street stood in contrast to a more subdued global session. Benchmark Asian, emerging and European indices were all flat on Wednesday, with the Trump administration's tariffs weighing on sentiment across the board. The major exception was China, where blue chip stocks closed at their highest in more than three and a half years on hopes that the United States and China will strike a trade deal in the coming days. Trade-related optimism elsewhere, however, is in much shorter supply. U.S. President Donald Trump on Wednesday slapped further import duties on India, bringing the total tariff rate to 50%, while Brazil's President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva told Reuters that relations with the U.S. are at a 200-year low. Some Fed officials, meanwhile, are signaling growing unease about the U.S. labor market and economy. Minneapolis Fed President Neel Kashkari and San Francisco Fed President Mary Daly on Wednesday said interest rates should probably be lowered in the coming months. In bonds, a weak $42 billion sale of 10-year U.S. government bonds drew the weakest demand in a year, and followed a somewhat disappointing auction of $58 billion three-year notes the day before. Thursday's $25 billion sale of 30-year bonds will come under even greater scrutiny. Also on Thursday, the Bank of England is widely expected to cut its key interest rate to 4% from 4.25%. But the challenges facing the Bank are significant - the fiscal outlook appears to be deteriorating sharply, and inflation is close to double the central bank's 2% target. Before that China announces July trade data, with economists expecting export growth to slow and the surplus to narrow. Earlier this week, official U.S. figures showed that the U.S. trade gap with China in June shrank to its lowest in more than 21 years. Markets' tariff resilience challenges long-standing economic orthodoxy Investors have been living in a real-time economic experiment ever since U.S. President Donald Trump, opens new tab returned to the White House in January. Whether it's tariffs, "America First" isolationism, overt politicization of independent economic institutions, or upended global economic norms, markets are having to deal with challenges few investors have faced before. So how are they reacting to the leader of the free world ripping up the economic playbook that has shaped the global financial system for 40 years? Wall Street and world stocks are at record highs, U.S. high yield corporate bond spreads are the tightest since before the 2007-08 global financial crisis, and Treasuries are remarkably calm, with the 10-year yield below its average of the last two years. It's not all serene, of course. The U.S. "term premium" - a measure of the extra compensation investors demand for holding long-dated Treasuries over short-term debt - is the highest in over a decade. Inflation expectations and long-dated yields have shot up too. And one needs to acknowledge that the full impact of Trump's tariffs has yet to be fully felt. But, at this point there has been no U.S. recession, even if growth is slowing. And the market plunge on the back of Trump's April 2 "Liberation Day" tariff debacle lasted a few weeks. The powerful stock market recovery since then suggests investors were less bothered by the actual tariffs than the shock of the initial announcement, the chaotic way it was delivered, and the amateurish way the levies were calculated. This outcome is not what economic textbooks would have predicted. Tariffs are a tax. And the overall U.S. average effective tariff rate looks likely to be around 18%, according to the Budget Lab at Yale. That's down from an estimated 28% in May but still nearly eight times higher than the level in December. Who will ultimately pay this tax is up for debate, but if sustained at that level, the president of the United States will have effectively imposed a tax hike worth around 1.8% of GDP, one of the largest in U.S. history. But wait. Aren't higher taxes bad for business, markets and growth? Don't higher taxes sap consumers' spending power, stunt investment and hiring, and crush the private sector's entrepreneurial spirit? Markets' relatively speedy acceptance raises the question: What happened to the last 40 years of economic orthodoxy, symbolized by the so-called "Washington Consensus"? This was the set of principles drawn up in the late 1980s that broadly mirrored the views of the Washington-based International Monetary Fund, World Bank and U.S. Treasury, ostensibly to help direct policy in Latin America but which ultimately served as the economic framework for Western liberal democracies and global markets. They included support for privatization, deregulation, the free flow of capital, fiscal discipline, and lower taxes. They also entailed lower barriers to trade, a cornerstone of globalization. For years these tenets were regarded by policymakers, business leaders and investors as sacrosanct. Some, like rigid adherence to tight fiscal policy, were put to the test - and shown to be flimsy, at best - during the GFC and pandemic. So now that the tariff line has been crossed, what about other economic commandments? Could governments look to raise tax revenue from other sources, such as wealth taxes on the super rich, a "Tobin tax" on foreign exchange transactions, or other "soft" capital controls? These are obviously anathema to the doctrine of free market capitalism. But then so were tariffs. To be fair, we are just entering this new era. And as my colleague Mike Dolan observed earlier this week, even if tariffs don't send the economy or markets into a tailspin, they may still lead to a "slow burn," with many years of lost economic potential, elevated volatility and lower investment returns. But investors aren't looking that far ahead. What they see right now is a pretty resilient U.S. economy, solid earnings growth, and red-hot optimism around U.S. tech and AI. And some of the old orthodoxies may be in the rear-view mirror. What could move markets tomorrow? Want to receive Trading Day in your inbox every weekday morning? Sign up for my newsletter here. Opinions expressed are those of the author. They do not reflect the views of Reuters News, which, under the Trust Principles, opens new tab, is committed to integrity, independence, and freedom from bias.


Reuters
2 hours ago
- Reuters
Paycom raises 2025 revenue and profit forecasts on AI-driven demand
Aug 6 (Reuters) - Payroll processor Paycom Software (PAYC.N), opens new tab raised its forecast for annual revenue and profit on Wednesday, as the addition of AI features helps accelerate demand for its employee management services, sending its shares up 7% in extended trading. The company now expects fiscal 2025 revenue of $2.05 billion to $2.06 billion, up from its previous projection of $2.02 billion to $2.04 billion. Analysts on average expect $2.03 billion, according to data compiled by LSEG. Paycom has been integrating artificial intelligence features into its software with its 'smart AI' suite that automates tasks such as writing job descriptions and helps employers identify which employees are most at risk of leaving. This has boosted demand for Paycom's services as businesses look to simplify workforce management functions. "We are well positioned to extend our product lead and eclipse the industry with even greater AI and automation," CEO Chad Richison said in a statement. Paycom expects 2025 core profit in the range of $872 million to $882 million, up from previous expectations of $843 million to $858 million. The payroll processor reported revenue of $483.6 million for the second quarter ended June 30, beating analysts' estimate of $472 million. Adjusted core profit was $198.3 million, compared to $159.7 million in the same period last year. Paycom's expectation of strong growth comes despite a sharp deterioration in U.S. labor market conditions. U.S. employment growth was weaker than expected in July, while the nonfarm payrolls count for the prior two months was revised down by 258,000 jobs, according to a Labor Department report.