Live data from Hacker News

Americans don't know how to fight AI so they're fighting data centers

vox.com

171–180 of 219 posts

Re: Americans don't know how to fight AI so they're fighting data centers

#171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Farming consumes more water than datacenters. Infrasound is pseudoscience. The biggest issue imo is that they use a ton of electricity and this country has forgotten how to expand electricity supply so prices go up. The solution to that is to create more electricity though, not ban datacenters

Make the companies constructing a DC pay a bond or whatever for the new power plant, and don't give them tax subsidies. Easy enough?

The companies building data centers have made it clear they're willing to pay to build out the grid. The problem isn't money, it's bureaucracy.

Re: Americans don't know how to fight AI so they're fighting data centers

#172
post #108

Electricity costs make the headlines, but I have also heard that the datacenters apparently make a loud perpetual buzzing noise that is audible from a large distance. That sounds like reason enough to oppose one being built near me.

Data centers behave as acoustic weapons: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_bP80DEAbuo

This video is pseudoscience https://blog.andymasley.com/p/contra-benn-jordan-data-center...

Re: Americans don't know how to fight AI so they're fighting data centers

#173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm no expert, but I'd have a few prerogatives: - Look into ways to restricting executive power, or more rightly revert it to its previous state as described by the constitution. - Repeal the pardon power (or at least seriously amend it) - Find a way to limit the use or impact of executive orders. I'm honestly not sure of the best way to do this, but executive orders have exploded basically at the same rate that cong…

Oh sorry I just mean: with respect to AI

Oh, I'm not sure the government can fix this sort of problem. I'd still like to prevent any data centers in my state, which is a bit more tangible.

A major challenge of the past ~30 years is that new technologies can totally transform society, and really no company cares whatsoever if that transformation is for the worse. If a company poisons my products with PFAS and I'm not even aware of it, there is little I can do but find out eventually and just avoid those products when possible. If social media and smart phones destroy societal cohesion, we seem to be powerless to stop it and most people don't even want to stop it.

If the worst / greatest predictions of LLMs come to pass, then I imagine we'll be in a similar state.

Re: Americans don't know how to fight AI so they're fighting data centers

#174
post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is this different than a cornfield? A data center is probably a better neighbor because it doesn't kick up dirt, pesticides, and fertilizer into the air.

Generally people enjoy being around them, looking at them, and eating what they produce. How does HN feel about ai written blogs? Who wants to go stand next to a 30' warehouse?

Most corn is not for eating.

Re: Americans don't know how to fight AI so they're fighting data centers

#175

At the end it's a facility that costs the locals and benefits non-locals. Even if AI is the truly greatest productivity booster, the benefits are still distributed over all its customers, and the environmental impacts are mostly local. It's like if someone is building a landfill in your hometown to bury the whole country's waste. Or it's like a factory that creates zero job.

Except datacenters are actually very low environmental impact. As long as they provide their own power, they have MUCH lower impact than most farms would.

> As long as they provide their own power

How is running local gas turbines more efficient than relying on centralised power generation?

Even the transport costs of getting kerosene to them is considerable.

Re: Americans don't know how to fight AI so they're fighting data centers

#176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Data centers behave as acoustic weapons: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_bP80DEAbuo

This video is pseudoscience https://blog.andymasley.com/p/contra-benn-jordan-data-center...

The article you linked doesn't do much to refute "data centres are acoustic weapons", just insists that symptoms are explainable by audible noise pollution. Sure, that makes it better?

Re: Americans don't know how to fight AI so they're fighting data centers

#177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends, is the net improvement of the internet, electricity, agriculture, steam engine also in the room?

Asbestos is the miracle material it is advertised as. It really is great insulation, and really is absolutely fireproof. Thousands of industrial uses are readily apparent. Despite this, because of its other effects, the cost to clean up and stop using asbestos is greater than the sum total of any benefit from all mined asbestos worldwide. Even a miracle technology can still be a net disaster.

It's a good point I have to say

Re: Americans don't know how to fight AI so they're fighting data centers

#178
post #28
post #12

No, it's not a proxy fight about AI. The data centers are just bad, for several, easy-to-explain reasons: 1. They get massive tax breaks; 2. Everyone else pays for the electricity infrastructure that they need to suppor tthem; 3. They pollute water supplies; 4. Everybody's electricity prices go up while the DC has a sweetheart deal that, again, everyone else is paying for; 5. There are no jobs unlike, say, if someone…

In theory, let's say that a data center was proposed that: 1. got no tax breaks 2. self-generated electricity with greenest of green generation 3. did not pollute water supplies 4. made electricity prices go down somehow 5. (can't figure out a theoretical version where there are lots of jobs, sorry) 6. was extremely quiet Would people still be mad about them? I'm trying to figure out if the bad reasons are the _actua…

What you seem to be asking asking is if this is just NIMBYism or not. And it's not. At least, I'm not a NIMBY. As an example, just recently I commented on how NIMBYism added billions of points to the UK's HS2 project by building a completely unnecessary tunnel to protect the views of some of the UK's wealthiest landowners [1].

Tax breaks for business have always been ontroversial. I think it's always been a false economy and businesses have effectively played 50 states off of each other to get tax breaks they don't need and they don't pay tor themselves. Some of the examples of this are almost comical. A great example of the hundreds of millions spent to entice businesses back and forth between Kansas City, KS and Kansas City, MO, which are literally right next to each other [2].

Oh, and the tax breaks given to stadiums are particularly disgusting unless th emncipality owns the team in question in part or in whole and AFAIK in any top tier sports league, there's only one example of that (ie the Green Bay Packers) and the NFL has made that ownership structure illegal.

But anyway, data centers don't create employment so the usual arguments of "they'll go elsewhere" that were used at the time it was a factory or an auto plant don't apply. Yet they get pedlled out anyway. Residents don't want them and it still happens.

Two points I want to comment on from your list.

The first is you qualified self-generated electricity as green. this is a good and important qualifier. The alternative is what Elon did in Memphis [3], which should be illegal regardless.

The second is the water. That's going to be difficult no matter where you build these things. The big issue there is that data centers add pollutants to the water to keep their pipes clean. That too should be illegal. If you were just, for example, using cold sea or river or lake water for cooling then it wouldn't be a big deal. But data centers don't want that. It might corrode their precious pipes. They might need maintenance more often. Or you could use a heat exchange system where water is used for cooling and you can add what you want to it but it's in a closed loop and external water is used to cool it. This is what nucleaer reactors do. But that too is more expensive.

Now if someone was going to build one of these things out in New Mexico or Arizona that have large stretches of uninhabited land and plentiful sunshine (for solar) it would be a different conversation. Of course, water would be an issue there.

Data centers are a massive wealth transfer from the poor to the wealthy. That's really the crux of the problem.

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48350761

[2]: https://www.mackinac.org/the-left-and-right-agree-to-end-tax...

[3]: https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/22/epa-thwarts-musks-d...

Re: Americans don't know how to fight AI so they're fighting data centers

#179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Water consumption and localized atmospheric heating have been cited elsewhere as drawbacks. There have been some articles citing noise/vibration pollution (subsonic?) but I'm not completely convinced on that front. Personally, I would add electric grid load to the list. In the worst case, if your local municipality sides with business over the little guy, that means potential brownouts and water shortages for you.

Farming consumes more water than datacenters. Infrasound is pseudoscience. The biggest issue imo is that they use a ton of electricity and this country has forgotten how to expand electricity supply so prices go up. The solution to that is to create more electricity though, not ban datacenters

> Farming consumes more water than datacenters.

But you don't see center-pivot or linear-movement farmland built up in areas with high population density, nor do you see them using the municipal, potable water supply for irrigation. That is where datacenters are being built and what datacenters are doing, however, and it is why datacenters are blamed for the exacerbation of municipal water systems in these communities. Groundwater, surface water, harvested rainwater, and reclaimed wastewater are the major sources used by farms. Dasani is the major source of water for datacenters, and it makes a massive difference on the water use math.

Re: Americans don't know how to fight AI so they're fighting data centers

#180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, and it should be. But the USA, at least in this current moment, builds regulations catering to corporations and the rich over people's general needs. So the regulations that are on the table at the national level are ineffective. It's easier for normal people to influence local regulations, but local regulations just push the problem somewhere else. However disdain for AI is so widespread that this is actually…

disdain for dumping industrial sludge into rivers is quite high too. if you don’t demand regulated domestic production it will just get moved to the least regulated place with the best underlying economics, I imagine you know this though…

Yeah, I agree with you! Regulation of that kind of environmental problem works better the more land is covered. National is best, statewide is meaningful (if you are in a geographically large state). Local is better than doing literally nothing, but it does have the nasty side effect of pushing the problem out of people's sight :(
Post reply on HN