DE version is available. Content is displayed in original English for accuracy.
Advertisement
Advertisement
⥠Community Insights
Discussion Sentiment
29% Positive
Analyzed from 3137 words in the discussion.
Trending Topics
#data#centers#building#don#hate#more#power#water#going#things
Discussion (78 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews
https://jasmi.news/p/no-data-centers-in-my-backyard
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbgvTlt1VB8
âOh, you hate the military industrial complex? What are you, a Pinko?â
Even more, Iâd really doubt that is a US interest to let the public know if such campaign is happening against non-US countries, so I donât expect Meta, X or whatever to kindly inform me about that.
There is a hard to miss tendency for the things which get the most noise to be the most useful to national adversaries.
You can't mention specific incidents here for comparison because the comments will be filled with disagreements and accusations about the specifics not the big picture.
Search yourself for things that are getting attention and not getting attention and judge for yourself how useful each would be to external powers.
When I see stories about how a hardware startup like SpinLaunch has had to move over and over because no matter where they go, locals flood the town hall meetings to declare their relatively boring technology is too scary, I'm not surprised town halls are being flooded over AI datacenters.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGxmCvLb9bs
McCarthyism was a total overreaction in hindsight, but had roots in pervasive foreign meddling. For the past 100 years, America has been a target of influence campaigns from both foreign and domestic organizations.
Itâs debatable if a DC will affect local energy costs but people donât want to risk it. Big tech has lost all their social capital. I would say at this point all of corporate America has. They have too much power over the public. People are starting to push back.
I think it deliberately avoids censorship of any kind, which makes it both more open to truth (if anyone posts it there) and more susceptible to manipulation.
This is basically a content-free comment that only serves to rile up the community.
We give tax breaks because we recognize that these things are beneficial to the economy and want to incentivize their construction. Some countries go even farther and directly subsidize development.
So many of these things DON'T benefit the public, especially as automation reduces the number of jobs they produce. They mostly benefit the capital holders and they'll take steps to increase their profit even if they hurt the public in the long run.
Smaller footprint if insidea a metro area by having a skyscarper type data center , as i recall AT&T used to have such windowless anonymous buldings scattered in some cities for their equipment. Or have a Silo type structure going down if in a more rural area to not blight the landscape.With added advantage of dampenig on the sound pollution (although not sure what effects a humming underground building will have on subterrerean life).
Probably cost? All those would cost more that the biz are willing to spend , while putting up four walls and a roof is ordeers of scale cheaper.
That one in utah everybody hated was gonna be built in an empty valley. There would have been no impact to neighbors because there weren't any, and no impact to the grid because they planned to build their own nuclear power plant.
It is in a remote valley. And, it's going to use less groundwater than the previous use of the land. The only things to really complain about are huge amounts of gas consumption and AI bad. If the locals pinned them down to building out solar and mini-nuke power, the only thing left would be AI bad.
At a national level, the political establishment is doing nothing useful to fix this problem and is instead making things much worse. Many people are very upset about this, but it is is going to take years to fix this problem electorally (though I do believe it is possible for this to happen, given all the recent evidence that giant political money spends on status quo candidates are increasingly not working and arguably starting to have the opposite effect of being toxic for the candidates who receive them).
Data centers are a flashpoint of leverage where the rightfully pissed off populace has the ability to use local political power to take a stand and throw a wrench into the system today rather than 2/4/6/8 years from now.
Didn't think so.
I want to see large investment in mass produced nuclear power plants, enabling us to do exactly what you are suggesting.
Actually, Americans hate Silicon Valley and AI, the data centers are just a concrete proxy: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/04/opinion/ezra-klein-podcas...:
> Itâs A.I. as sort of an avatar for a small group of Silicon Valley billionairesâ ability to impose their vision of the world onto everybody else without their consent.
> And I think thatâs also what I hear echoed in these data center debates. Itâs not just: Itâs going to use this much water or that much water. I frankly think that even if there was no misinformation about water use, people would be just as angry about the data centers.
> ...
> And what happened? The data center developers sued Saline Township, a town of, again, a few thousand people, saying: Wait, no, this is exclusionary zoning. You canât have no industrial use in your entire township. And when a town of that size is getting sued by a giant A.I. data center developer, they just settled.
> They were just like: Fine, give us a few million for the fire department and for some schools, and this fight is not worth it to us. But that, to people, felt like a profound violation of little-D democracy.
> It felt like the dark money in politics story, which is: You have some very rich companies show up with a bag of money to your politicians. They donât tell anybody else whatâs happening. The politicians arenât allowed to tell their citizens and involve them in the decision-making process, and they themselves work out a deal â a deal that is fundamentally asymmetric because of the amount of money on one side â that will then transform the image of your community, your lived reality, into the world that these tech companies have decided for you.
> And so I think that the data centers, in that sense, are a very visceral microcosm of the way that a lot of people feel that A.I. is showing up in their lives.
Mist recent, the datacenter's cost has shot up to ~50 billion, fow which they decided they wanted a tax break of 50% for 12 years, and it was granted using the same methods.
also, they named the datacenter project "The Barn" as an extra slap in the face, like look at how quirky and rural we are. I would actually have more respect for them if they had named it "Fuck You Saline".
I know there are problematic data centers. I just want to know what the stats are vs. the rhetoric.
But that all seems fine as long as not egregious. But for anything to get built, housing or data centers or what not, we have to accept that those right next to any building project will experience some negative externalities.
* Job attrition because "AI". * Blamed for high energy prices * A totem for high wealth individuals * A lot of building for not that many jobs * In small countries like the UK, some are a massive blot on the landscape compared to their surroundings
Oh, but at the same time, we want everything to be cheaper. But not with AI. Or Data Centres.
https://themeparkarchitect.com/go-away-green-disneys-paint-c...
> While many theme park fans may initially believe there is only one âmagicalâ go away green color that was developed by Imagineering, that couldnât be further from the truth. There are a plethora of varying shades of green hues developed and utilized by Walt Disney Imagineers, and other theme park designers, depending on the theme parkâs location and surrounding color palette.
There's no color that would make an building that takes minutes to pass at highway speeds "go away."
Joking conspiracy theories aside, perhaps the over-commitment was part of the plan with the expectation that there will be rejections from government
Even if people weren't protesting DCs, we would hit peak DC when we run out of water, which isn't far off. A major drought will likely disable large amounts of the economy that depends on AI that depends on water.
Instead of trying to find property tax arrangements that work to give municipalities a big payoff, and power supply arrangements that could be an opportunity to boost the green and nuclear sectors, we have political hobbyists jumping on a bandwagon of misinformation.
Years ago, I lived in a town where low humming would start up in the early mornings and go for hours. It drove me insane with the back of my mind trying to figure out what was causing it while simultaneously trying to ignore it and failing. I moved far away but sometimes I hear a rumble that goes on a little too long and that sense of dread starts to creep back into my mind.
But I would say datacenters are fine if they're prevented from screwing up electricity prices and have proper pollution controls.
If only the LLM-peddlers didnât slurp up all tech supplies using VC money leaving regular people scraping up a small fortune for a heavily used DDR3 1GB stick, we wouldnât be where we are.
No. Data centers have very, very few positive externalities for the people who live around them. They employ very few people, use a lot of infrastructure and resource, to provide services for people far from the community.
And on top of that the technologies they enable are loudly marketed as things that could destroy us all, or at least take most of the well-paying jobs.
If they're so great to live by, build them in Atherton.
Maybe one day, Silicon Valley will learn that their insufferable arrogance is not a virtue for everyone outside of their bubble.
If China gave superior paid offerings we might just start transferring all our data over to them instead. Anyways, have we considered building our compute infrastructure in China's backyard instead?