Die Wähler fordern lokale KI-Sicherheitsmaßnahmen, da die Besorgnis über Rechenzentren zunimmt

Australian voters increasingly favor domestic legislation to govern artificial intelligence over international agreements, according to a new survey released on October 25, 2026. The poll reveals a shifting preference for local regulatory frameworks amid growing anxiety regarding the environmental and community impacts of a massive data center construction boom. While usage of AI tools has surged significantly since 2023, public sentiment is divided along generational lines, with younger demographics embracing the technology while older groups express deeper concerns about its societal dangers. The Resolve poll surveyed 2,200 individuals and found that 81 percent now support regulating the technology, up from 72 percent in 2023. However, the preferred method of regulation has changed. In 2023, 44 percent favored international rules, while only 29 percent wanted Australian-designed laws. This dynamic has reversed, with 41 percent now backing Australian-led legislation against 40 percent supporting an international approach. Only 20 percent of respondents believe the current pace of regulation is appropriate. Instead, 31 percent argued that development should slow down, 10 percent called for a temporary pause, and 18 percent advocated for a complete halt. Usage statistics indicate a rapid adoption curve. Two-thirds of all respondents currently use AI, with a quarter reporting daily use. This contrasts sharply with 2023, when just 31 percent reported having used the technology. Younger Australians, specifically those aged 18 to 34, show the highest engagement at 87 percent. Even among those aged 55 and older, nearly half have utilized the technology. Despite high usage, perceptions of risk vary widely. Among regular users, 23 percent stated that AI poses a danger to humanity and society. For non-users, this figure jumps to 60 percent. Similarly, 54 percent of regular users acknowledged risks but believed the benefits outweighed them, a view shared by only 26 percent of non-users. Optimism regarding minimal risks and revolutionary benefits is rare outside the user base, with 17 percent of regular users holding this view compared to just 2 percent of non-users. Jim Reed, a pollster for Resolve Political Monitor, noted that most workers feel AI will either assist them or leave their employment unaffected. He observed that less than one in five respondents viewed the technology as a threat to their specific job or wages. However, he highlighted that more than a third perceive it as a genuine danger to mankind. Reed suggested this dichotomy explains why approximately six in ten respondents believe AI development should be slowed, paused, or stopped entirely. Controversy surrounds the physical infrastructure required for AI expansion. Data center construction has become a focal point of community dispute. Proponents argue that the technology will trigger productivity gains comparable to the introduction of electricity or the personal computer. They contend that data centers are driving global economic growth and boosting Australian private sector investment. Critics, however, point to negative externalities, including potential job losses, excessive consumption of power and water, and contributions to higher interest rates on government debt. Claims suggest that new data centers could raise power prices by $50 billion over the next six years if developers do not construct new energy sources to support them. Westpac economists estimate that new data centers valued at $155 billion, representing more than 5 percent of gross domestic product, are currently in the national construction pipeline. Public opinion on these projects is split. The poll found that 32 percent of respondents support data centers in Australia, while 33 percent oppose them and 35 percent remain unsure. A distinct generational divide exists within this issue. Forty-two percent of those aged 18 to 34 back the projects, whereas only 22 percent of those over 55 do so. A joint House-Senate select committee is currently investigating AI’s effects on the national labor market, productivity, copyright laws, and workers' rights. The committee is scheduled to present its findings to the government by the end of next month. As the debate intensifies, the tension between technological optimism and caution continues to shape political discourse. The shift toward preferring local legal structures suggests a desire for tailored responses to local impacts, particularly regarding energy costs and environmental strain. The upcoming committee report will likely address these diverging viewpoints as policymakers weigh the economic benefits of the AI boom against the social and ecological costs identified by voters.