Okay, he's a leader of a large religion.

That still doesn't give him any special knowledge or authority regarding AI.

Specifically sex abuse within the church.

They might be surprised to learn that Ukraine has to agree to end the war before it'll actually end.

Lots of religions have one of those.

He's a religious leader, what does he have to do with the tech industry?

I think this would depend on the house being designed for this in the first place. A long time back I recall reading about how non-flow-through houses would endure high winds in a hurricane or tornado until one of the windows broke, at which point the hole in the house allowed the wind to ram air in (or suck air out depending on which way the hole was facing) and the whole house would disintegrate.

If my recollection is correct then there might be a slight benefit in the house-wrapping idea in that it might do a bit to prevent a hole like that from being taken advantage of. But only a slight benefit. Probably better to just do the traditional nailing of plywood over windows and such.

Are military AIs still considered inherently evil?

At least it doesn't contain any fire.

I set up an image generation AI on my computer and it just sat there not generating pictures of anything, until I told it what I wanted it to generate. Then it generated that.

Well, kinda. But the internet is global and you can hook a data center up to it anywhere. There's plans to build them literally in space. And I run local models on my own machine at home, that's not going away either. So the impact of regulation will be limited and local. AI as a whole isn't going away.

The article itself is so lacking in substance that it's hard to even say it's misleading. The part that seems to be about "AI is too expensive" reads:

Fortune, citing The Verge, said that Microsoft steered engineers away from Anthropic's Claude Code and over to GitHub Copilot CLI, even though access to Claude Code was opened only about six months ago.

Which isn't "AI is too expensive", it's "our in-house AI was cheaper than Anthropic's service."

And the whole rest of the article is just the usual vague "not everyone finds AI useful for everything" and "water usage? Power grids?" And "by 2030 there'll be a lot more tokens used than today" (which seems contrary to the headline, but whatever).