Stellar Wind (code name)

I'm doing neither. I'm saying that nothing Binney has said or that has been leaked thus far shows evidence of a program that is designed to comprehensively intercept internet traffic between US persons and that doing so covertly is technically and politically impossible because of the number of intercept points required, not because they lack the software (we know it exists via Binney), or have a place to store it (they do-in Utah).

Putting taps on undersea cables is risky. Cables are closely monitored and quite frequently are owned by multi-country consortiums so if you don't want a party to the consortium to find out you might not want to stick a tap in the landing station. Also, you might only care about public IP traffic and not want to see piles of corporate MPLS traffic. I'm not saying that's what happened, just that there are valid reasons why tapping fiber coming into the country wouldn't be desirable.

It is entirely possible that you are claiming a "there exists" and I'm arguing against a "for every". I'm sure we both agree that there exists a NSA program that happens to intercept some US traffic. That's what Binney and others have claimed. I'm arguing that going beyond that isn't supported by the leaks OR the nature of the internet.

I run operations at small regional Tier 2 ISP/transport provider with 25 provider edges on that AS graph that I mentioned before. I've personally installed, repaired, or inspected all cable and gear that 12 of those links traverse end to end and there weren't any secret spy boxes. So, no, I'm not just guessing. I can guarantee that quite a few people aren't having their bits snarfed wholesale when they email (local ISP mail to school mail), post on locally hosted community forums, or reserve a book at their local library.

My network may be too small to matter, but any comprehensive intercept regime would require myself and every other Tier 2 (transit + unpaid peering) ISP to cooperate.

I'm confused now, to the point where I don't understand why you are commenting.

The topic asked about "bearings on constructing the new data center in Utah".

This specific branch started with "Low population density is almost redundant with "Cheap land"'. You said 'Not is the case where resources are found under said land or the land is farm land.'

That's two different cases: 1) resources are found under said land, and 2) said land is farm land.

I pointed out that category #2, "farm land", is generally not expensive compared to the price of building a data center. There are places where farm land costs $100,000/acre, but those are also places with high population density. Hence, I am in complete agreement with the statement that "low population density is almost redundant with farm land that doesn't have resources under said land."

You continue to talk about land which is in both category #1 and category #2. But that is not what my comment is about, and I never meant to imply that.

However, when I research it, I find that oil lands are not enough to greatly affect land which is both farm land and oil land. (BTW, not all farm land is oil land, and not all oil land is farm land.) I therefore would like more than your un-attributed claim that there is cropland going for $30K/acre in ND. The only examples I can find are for places which also have buildings on the land, which are included in the price.

I think would be misleading to include a $80,000 home on 5 acres of land for a total price of $100,00 as meaning that the land itself is worth $20,000 per acre. That isn't the situation we're discussing, since few would spend $100,00 on 5 acres with a house, only to tear down the house to build a data center, if 5 acres of land are available nearby for only $20,000.

I say these prices with some certainty having looked at news releases like http://www.ag.ndsu.edu/news/newsreleases/2013/april-1-2013/n... , which says:

"North Dakota cropland values increased by about 42 percent during 2012, according to Andrew Swenson, North Dakota State University Extension Service farm management specialist. ... The drivers that have pushed land values have been well-documented. Grain prices from 2007 to the present have been much higher than any year prior to 2007. Also, yields generally have been strong. For example, the three highest wheat yields ever have occurred within the past four years. This combination has provided several years of strong profit for crop producers, which has fueled their financial ability and desire to buy land. ... A factor that has been just as important in driving land values has been low interest rates. Interest rates to finance land purchases are attractive, while returns and confidence on alternative investments have been weak."

You'll notice that oil is not mentioned in that list as a major factor affecting farm prices.

That document also links to a PDF showing "the average per-acre values of cropland in North Dakota from 2007 to 2013." The highest average prices are in the South Red River Valley at just under $4,200 per acre. In western ND the highest average prices are $1,500/acre.

These numbers are so far from $30K that your $30K number must be an unusual outlier. It's certainly not high enough to affect someone's decision to build a data center in western ND.

Please provide some evidence which confirms your understanding.