The proposed solution was you pay more for what you consume, therefore consumption goes down making the system more stable. This makes sense until you extend it to public utilities and change it to a ration/limit. First, GitHub users care about GitHub stability. Nobody else does. Second, alternatives exist, nobody is forcing GitHub on anyone else. Third, no limitation is proposed just a cost adjustment. All reasons the GitHub arguement is sound.

Majority of public utility consumers don’t give a crap about GitHub or AI. They’d likely tell you to kick rocks if you proposed any type of ration or limitation for your assertion that “we all must make sacrifices for the machine god”. Data center development is getting plenty of community pushback for exactly this reason.

Your train of thought is probably more average amongst GitHub user population but I fear is wildly off average when compared to a general population/the public.