Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Wisconsin communities signed secrecy deals for billion-dollar data centers

wpr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 383 posts

Re: Wisconsin communities signed secrecy deals for billion-dollar data centers

#151

Post by snarky_dog »

jandrewrogers wrote: post #86
emsign wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Data centers raise electricity bills and use too much ground water. Due to the AI bubble more data centers need to be built in areas that cannot support these facilities, deregulation, investor and political pressure ensures this, i.e. corruption. The last remaining spots are near residential areas. So people are pissed because of: * noise pollution, infrasound from HVAC travelling long distances making people sick *…

> use too much ground water Data centers use little water. Less than using the same land for anything involving agriculture, for example. The idea that a data center uses too much water is recently invented propaganda that is readily verifiable as fiction. Cui bono?

[dead]

Re: Wisconsin communities signed secrecy deals for billion-dollar data centers

#152

Post by 52-6F-62 »

riskable wrote: post #101
StarterPro wrote: post #92

There is no need for this many data centers. LLMs are a scourge on humanity as they are currently implemented, and what will they do when these are no longer needed? I can't wait until OpenAI, NVIDIA and Microsoft all go belly up.

> what will they do when these are no longer needed? Bitcoin—>Altcoin—>NFTs—>StableCoin—>AI—>They'll just invent something new to over-hype and spend billions on. It won't end until we reach the Shoe Event Horizon.

I'm not sure it's that linear

https://www.thenerdreich.com/network-state-comes-for-venezue...

Re: Wisconsin communities signed secrecy deals for billion-dollar data centers

#153

Post by Noaidi »

cowpig wrote: post #143
GorbachevyChase wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A scourge? I get some kind of valuable use from it almost every day. This criticism sounds completely out of touch.

You are capable of considering effects of systems outside of your immediate, moment-to-moment needs?

[flagged]

Re: Wisconsin communities signed secrecy deals for billion-dollar data centers

#154

Post by infecto »

cmxch wrote: post #119
infecto wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is always left unclear in these anti data center articles is how much the public is left in the dark? It’s not out of the normal for large developments to be kept under NDA until hitting a threshold of certainty, usually that does not mean the residents are left out of voicing their opinions before ground breaks.

What kind of say do the residents have when it’s nearly a done deal? Unless the residents have a strong enough chance to veto, they’re just speaking into the void as far as the company is concerned.

Typically constituents don’t have any ability to veto. I imagine there are some cases in CA, thinking of that amusing article about an ice cream shop getting blocked by another ice cream shop.

It’s usually an indirect vote with your voice. To be frank, people don’t have that much of a role in what business gets built if it aligns with the states economic goals and zoning is not being critically changed.

I think the bigger discussion is if resources are going to be constrained can we make sure the use is being properly charged for resource buildout. It’s the same problem with building sports arenas or sweetheart tax deals for manufacturing plants, they often don’t pan out.

Re: Wisconsin communities signed secrecy deals for billion-dollar data centers

#155

Post by eigencoder »

dguest wrote: post #39

I'd like to hear the argument for why this is needed. I can imagine a number of reasons, but this is all I found in the article: > If I’m a company considering making strategic investments... I don’t want my competition to know where I’m going, what I’m doing, what pace I’m doing it at... You want to make sure everything is buttoned up and bow tied before that type of information is put into the public realm. I'm hav…

Let me give you an anecdote that illustrates why it was needed in Eagle Mountain, Utah. One of my friends works for the city there and he told me about how the development went down.

When the city council first heard that Facebook wanted to build a data center, they shot it down solely because of Facebook's reputation. A year or two later, Facebook proposed the exact same project to the city council, while keeping their name secret under an NDA. Then, when the city council was only considering the economics of it, they jumped at the chance for the tax revenue and infrastructure investment. With essentially the same exact plan as before, one of the council members who rejected it before the NDA said "this is exactly the kind of deal a city should take."

I think in many ways, these companies are fighting their own reputations.

Re: Wisconsin communities signed secrecy deals for billion-dollar data centers

#156

Post by EvanAnderson »

I live near one of these in Ohio. The municipality entered into an NDA with the buyer and the local community is having a hell of a time getting answers to questions.

The buyer bought all the farms and homesteads in an 160 acre parcel (a quarter section, in surveying terms) and paid well above market rate for a lot of it. This year is a re-valuation for property tax in my county and we've seen massive valuation increases. There is speculation that the valuation algorithm is using these "motivated buyer" sales to inflate other property values even though the likelihood of similar sales occurring in the future is very slim.

Re: Wisconsin communities signed secrecy deals for billion-dollar data centers

#157

Post by infecto »

state_less wrote: post #130
infecto wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is always left unclear in these anti data center articles is how much the public is left in the dark? It’s not out of the normal for large developments to be kept under NDA until hitting a threshold of certainty, usually that does not mean the residents are left out of voicing their opinions before ground breaks.

Obviously data center bidders would prefer their activity to be kept in the dark, but does that make for good outcomes for anyone else except the bidders. First, the community would like to weigh in on whether they want a data center or not, often they don't. Then if they do, they'd rather have a bidding war than some NDA backroom deal with a single entity. All this does is serve Big Tech and Big Capital, and they do…

You make this sound like a conspiracy. This is normal practice in economic development, check off boxes until announcing to the public. The public rarely has much power in voicing their opinion but data centers are the current evil entity.

Re: Wisconsin communities signed secrecy deals for billion-dollar data centers

#158

Post by analog31 »

dguest wrote: post #39

I'd like to hear the argument for why this is needed. I can imagine a number of reasons, but this is all I found in the article: > If I’m a company considering making strategic investments... I don’t want my competition to know where I’m going, what I’m doing, what pace I’m doing it at... You want to make sure everything is buttoned up and bow tied before that type of information is put into the public realm. I'm hav…

A palpable fear in Wisconsin is access to water. Another is the potential abuse of eminent domain.

When Foxconn made a deal with the state to build a factory for large screen TVs, water was a major part of the deal. They were given an exemption on obeying state environmental laws. They also condemned farms and properties in order to buy the land from owners who didn't want to sell it.

A potential further reason for secrecy is that water use in the Great Lakes watershed is governed by a treaty with Canada, and the people in the Great Lakes region are quite united on being protective of our water even when we disagree on a lot of other political issues.

Re: Wisconsin communities signed secrecy deals for billion-dollar data centers

#159

Post by topaz0 »

mkarrmann wrote: post #135
dguest wrote: post #39

I'd like to hear the argument for why this is needed. I can imagine a number of reasons, but this is all I found in the article: > If I’m a company considering making strategic investments... I don’t want my competition to know where I’m going, what I’m doing, what pace I’m doing it at... You want to make sure everything is buttoned up and bow tied before that type of information is put into the public realm. I'm hav…

Idk why it's hard to believe another company would try to outbid. Discovering good locations for data centers is genuinely a difficult problem. They're relatively scarce. Bidding wars seem completely plausible.

In which case doing this in the dark is clearly bad for the community -- if that location is what's scarce then they should be demanding a better deal.

Re: Wisconsin communities signed secrecy deals for billion-dollar data centers

#160

Post by mistrial9 »

Supermancho wrote: post #66
dguest wrote: post #39

I'd like to hear the argument for why this is needed. I can imagine a number of reasons, but this is all I found in the article: > If I’m a company considering making strategic investments... I don’t want my competition to know where I’m going, what I’m doing, what pace I’m doing it at... You want to make sure everything is buttoned up and bow tied before that type of information is put into the public realm. I'm hav…

> I don’t want my competition to know where I’m going, what I’m doing, what pace I’m doing it at This is likely a misdirection. The "competition" is for the water and power, ie the local communities. This is a NIMBY issue with practical consequences. That's how it has been used in one part of North Dakota. Applied Digital is building in a town (~800 ppl) named Harwood after being unhappy with Fargo tax negotiations.…

Hollywood in its heights also uses this kind of opportunistic abuse in siting movies and TV
Post reply on HN