RU version is available. Content is displayed in original English for accuracy.
Advertisement
Advertisement
⚡ Community Insights
Discussion Sentiment
57% Positive
Analyzed from 2242 words in the discussion.
Trending Topics
#data#centers#water#center#local#power#don#noise#more#actually
Discussion (104 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews
1. Local governments can require that if the data center peak load is 1.0GW, they must provision transmission and generation capacity for the local region of 1.2GW; the extra power can be given to the neighbors at substantial discount.
2. Construct a public swimming complex nearby, heated with waste data center heat.
3. Local governments can enforce strict limits on environmental noise at the property boundary. I've personally stood right next to a 150MW-class datacenter and experienced sound levels less than traffic from a typical suburban 4-lane street; making the datacenter quieter than any other industrial use is a choice the builder can make if they have the right incentives.
Setup directional microphones around the perimeter, and fine them $25,000 per minute per dB above the agreed threshold. Distribute the fines to the neighbors. Failure to pay promptly means the sheriff shuts down the power.
All of these options are far cheaper than launching the data center into space...
I think many data centre opponents understand that being opposed to AI is not sufficient to halt a local project, so it is noise, water use and power consumption that they latch onto - although, in jurisdictions without plentiful water and clean power, those two reasons are quite valid.
In my own local community, there’s vocal opposition to a proposed data centre that is next to Lake Ontario, 500 metres from the nearest residential neighbourhood, on a brownfield site with 500 megawatts of clean power capacity. None of that makes a difference to those opposed.
My proposal would be to require data-centers to provide enough clean energy to power themselves for years to come. That would help humanity survive. Plus it would lower energy costs when there is more power-generaion available. Lowering your power-bill would make people love AI.
I generally agree that I would not like to live across the street from a datacenter. Having worked inside of dozens of them, I could not care less if I lived half a mile from one. Most people who live within such a distance currently do not have a clue. At that point I would not even worry about the noise from the backup generators.
Compared to the activism of the 60s and 70s, where so many people seemed willing to put their entire lives on hold for the cause, the fact that there is no major populist uprising against the dismantling of the institution of the presidency leads me to believe there is a threshold of contentment afforded by modern technology and QoL.
In either case it is about populism though. Hopping on a bus to California to protest was a cool thing to do. Somehow this data center thing happened to catch on and become a lever people felt they could move with mere outrage, even if it does seem pretty misguided.
They did. They elected Trump.
> no major populist uprising against the dismantling of the institution of the presidency
Some people view the president as the only directly-elected person powerful enough to fight for them in dismantling the rest of a government that isn't working (or even actively working against them). So they implicitly want a strong president.
This only goes as far as the president agrees with them of course.
I would say that speaks more to apathy than activism.
> Some people view the president as the only directly-elected person powerful enough to fight for them in dismantling the rest of a government that isn't working
I think consciously verbalizing a position even that nuanced and esoteric is niche, but there is certainly something to be said for peoples' susceptibility to a type of "strong" cult leader.
Talking to people on HN, the answer is a resounding "NO." If I point out that smart phones are contributing to mental illness and have enabled mass-scale surveillance larger than ever previously thought possible, the response has been "but I might have trouble paying for parking and some restaurants don't have menus."
Zero-sum scarcity mentality needs to end. Don't push back on prosperity. Push to have those gains distributed more evenly.
Push for a ridiculous tax on data centers that goes directly to the local economy. If they don't buy it then it's the same result as blocking them on vibes.
There is some misinformation around resource usage, but most data center constructions aren't being fully candid and transparent with their expected resource usage either. I think the key issue is that many major constructions haven't built any trust with local communities nor have they listened to people's concerns, but they feel entitled to force through their projects anyway.
If you think that these AI data centers are great and incredibly beneficial, go advocate for your local government to bring construction to wherever it is that you live. Let people sort themselves out based on their interests.
That said, we've seen data center projects often employ much less jobs than expected. I know Core Scientific when they did a data center in like Texas they employed like 10 people not 200
So imo I dont think the article truly represents the opinions and thoughts of most michiganders
* Billionaires
* Job Loss
* AI slop floods
Ultimately they feel the need to be activists and they do so by being NIMBYs because you can have a ton of influence in municipal politics.
if they weren't concerned then "hawaiian bunkers" wouldnt even be in society's vernacular.
if any rich people get caught in the crossfire at this point then that's on them but society has made it pretty clear that this is not an "if" situation and more a "when" one.
The interest groups opposing them will do anything, including harming economic growth, jobs, great products, and life-saving research — as long as it kneecaps their rivals.
Assuming positive intent, what’s different nowadays that makes it all different? It would actually make me pretty happy to hear about the incredible leaps and bounds that’ve been taken.
Please square that with a rational argument against data centers then?
Agreed - here in Australia one of the big TV networks was heavily advertising a story last week about the big bad data centres coming to suburbia. You can be critical of Australia's local governments all you want, but at least in the big cities, no one is going without water or power for any appreciable amount of time due to data centres or anything else.
A senator down south has been repeating the noise concern trolling from the USA, but wont even go to his local DC <3 minutes from his office to have a listen. I saw someone defend the noise complaints by saying "Oh but we are getting one of those gas turbine ones" and when I looked at the project it was being built really far away from habitation to take advantage/mutually invest in Gas and Renewable power nearby. (The gas being used as a method to fill a pumped hydro project). Both power sources were approved before the DC.
You just cant win. The stupid is the product.
It really is just a case of opportunistic politicians feeding the mob.
1. use all the water
2. Increase electric costs but a large amount
3. Increase noise in the neighborhood
If the above was false, no one would care. Plus these data centers provides almost no jobs, so there is no benefit to the community. Granted there is more tax revenue, but the people paying taxes do not see their tax burden go down.
So the wonder why ??
I eagerly await your response.
Anyone bringing it up does not actually care about the water usage. It’s just a politically easy topic to get traction with. If anyone starts off their anti-datacenter screed with this, it instantly outs them as someone you can ignore as unserious person on the topic.
Plenty of other legitimate reasons to be anti-datacenter but this isn’t one of them.