U.S. gov't moves to suppress pushback on data centers • Hacker News Board

Re: U.S. gov't moves to suppress pushback on data centers

#141

Post by preg_match » Wed, Aug 26, 2026, 7:42 PM UTC

consensus1 wrote: post #137

preg_match wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's very simple: just take some of the existing capital and invest it towards the grid, then build the datacenter. The problem with the grid isn't electricity stealing. It's that the grid literally cannot support the amount of datacenters being built. It's not a matter of opinion, just numbers. So why won't AI companies do just that, invest in the grid? Well they want the datacenters now , not 10 years from now. I t…

That's how it works already. You pay the power company and that money is invested into the grid. Somehow this has worked in Ashburn VA for their massive data center build out so I don't see why it can't work in other places too. Obviously nobody wants to wait 10 years and it has nothing to do with stupidity or fear.

Okay that’s very obviously not the same thing I’m proposing, and you know that. Paying for electricity is normal. But that doesn’t magically increase the capacity. It does, in time. A lot of time.

Which is why we’re using diesel generators and not building data centers. We don’t have the power, we just don’t.

Re: U.S. gov't moves to suppress pushback on data centers

#142

Post by NishanStepak » Wed, Aug 26, 2026, 7:47 PM UTC

inglor_cz wrote: post #90

NishanStepak wrote: post #51

Many data centers will move north into the Nordic countries where the climate is colder and there is a lot of hydroelectric and wind power. Canada and the Nordic countries will end up building a lot of data centers in remote areas where they are less visible. At the same time, the more the US government acts to support data centers, the greater the reaction will be against them. It is the classic situation where the…

The question is who will service massive data centers in northern Québec or Norwegian mountains in winter. They will have to be robotized to a large degree. And the few humans necessary will have to be very well paid. The social cost is real.

With the Nordic area, it is already happening. I am not sure it will be as much of a problem, because there will be a lot less jobs with automation. The promise of a good job even in a cold climate will draw people. It will be like the oil fields, except with hydroelectric, wind, and cold climates which will help sustainability. Nvidia and many of the large data companies have already been moving north. North will probably include Alaska as well, because of the cold weather, large amounts of hydroelectric power, and the people used to working remotely.

Re: U.S. gov't moves to suppress pushback on data centers

#143

Post by jayGlow » Wed, Aug 26, 2026, 8:04 PM UTC

watwut wrote: post #138

jayGlow wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always hear about how concerned everyone is about water usage from data centers, however I haven't heard any of these people mention the amount of water we lose to leaking pipes. we lose 3x the amount of water to leaking pipes as data centers would use so if they're so concerned about water usage wouldn't fixing those be higher priority?

Bad faith argument. There are places with water shortages and other places with leaking pipes. The datacanters consuming water in place with drought is issue. Leaking pipe next to a lake is not.

That's great news that California no longer has a water shortage, I was under the impression they were in a drought but since the have leaking pipes that can't be the case! Besides that I've seen people complaining about water usage from data centers in the great lakes region so it's absolutely not something limited to drought stricken regions.

https://graphics.latimes.com/la-aging-water-infrastructure/

https://www.wateronline.com/doc/california-drought-crisis-bi...

Re: U.S. gov't moves to suppress pushback on data centers

#144

Post by smitty1e » Wed, Aug 26, 2026, 8:25 PM UTC

The political thing to do here is run for office on a "Data Centers are teh Devil" platform; harness the angst; win; and then do the opposite and approve them all.

Teach the peasantry the value of their benighted opinions.

Re: U.S. gov't moves to suppress pushback on data centers

#145

Post by Tangurena2 » Wed, Aug 26, 2026, 8:32 PM UTC

digitaltrees wrote: post #63

flanked-evergl wrote: post #4

This degrowth anti-technology mindset just does not make sense to me, and I think it's mostly astroturfed from TikTok.

It’s not degrowth. It’s anti monopoly, anti wealth concentration. Anti tax avoidance. Anti price on water and electricity. Anti raising the ambient temperature of a community. Let’s put the data center in Palo alto or Atherton.

In my state, when a data center needs a lot of new electricity generation, the way utilities are regulated, the existing customers pay for the new generation capacity. The new customer doesn't get the bill. Bills at the state legislature that would have changed this were effectively stopped by lobbyists.

Re: U.S. gov't moves to suppress pushback on data centers

#146

Post by Gormo » Wed, Aug 26, 2026, 8:39 PM UTC

gopher_space wrote: post #130

Gormo wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Clearly you don't. Obviously, since I'm the one discussing it here. The broader question is whether the people who are conflating them together are doing so out of honest confusion or out of ulterior motives. > For others, it's opposition to power hungry, polluting, noisy, developments that are concentrating digital power in the hands of a few, raising local heat levels (if topology domes heat), consuming memory an…

The people presenting these different concerns are all individuals with their own agendas. You're the person lumping them all into one confusing mass so you don't have to deal with each viewpoint. When people are assholes across multiple domains they get pushback from each of them. This isn't emergent behavior, it's emergent consequences.

> You're the person lumping them all into one confusing mass so you don't have to deal with each viewpoint.

Rather, I was responding to the comment that did explicitly lump all of these concerns together in a single sentence that was trying to explain and/or justify opposition to AI per se, in a thread that originated from merely discussing how it makes sense to attribute pollution to data centers, without bringing up those other concerns.

> When people are assholes across multiple domains they get pushback from each of them. This isn't emergent behavior, it's emergent consequences.

That's true. But the issues are about neither about people being assholes, nor people giving pushback, but rather addressing legitimate concerns, each within its own domain. The fact that some of the people involved are assholes makes it more likely, not less so, that opposition is originating from emotional rather than objective factors, and makes it more necessary to disentangle the issues from each other and deal with them each appropriately.

Re: U.S. gov't moves to suppress pushback on data centers

#147

Post by Gormo » Wed, Aug 26, 2026, 8:42 PM UTC

goatlover wrote: post #135

Gormo wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Clearly you don't. Obviously, since I'm the one discussing it here. The broader question is whether the people who are conflating them together are doing so out of honest confusion or out of ulterior motives. > For others, it's opposition to power hungry, polluting, noisy, developments that are concentrating digital power in the hands of a few, raising local heat levels (if topology domes heat), consuming memory an…

Ask the people living near them what their agenda is regarding the different issues they're dealing with.

Which ones? The people living near the thousands of data centers that have already been running for decades, the people living near the sites of proposed data centers that include plans for repurposed jet engines to run continuously to power them, or the people living near the sites of proposed data centers that plan to be powered normally in ways that don't generating any localized pollution?

I'd expect the different issues involved in each of these distinct scenarios to be, well, different. And it doesn't quite make sense that someone living near the proposed site of a normal data center would oppose that project on account of some other project proposal, from someplace else, including something outlandish.

Re: U.S. gov't moves to suppress pushback on data centers

#148

Post by consensus1 » Wed, Aug 26, 2026, 9:13 PM UTC

preg_match wrote: post #141

consensus1 wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's how it works already. You pay the power company and that money is invested into the grid. Somehow this has worked in Ashburn VA for their massive data center build out so I don't see why it can't work in other places too. Obviously nobody wants to wait 10 years and it has nothing to do with stupidity or fear.

Okay that’s very obviously not the same thing I’m proposing, and you know that. Paying for electricity is normal. But that doesn’t magically increase the capacity. It does, in time. A lot of time. Which is why we’re using diesel generators and not building data centers. We don’t have the power, we just don’t.

I am well aware that's not what you are proposing. What you are proposing includes "wait 10 years" which absolutely no reasonable person is going to accept.