181–190 of 190 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
not really. datacenters require greater weight, power and cooling density per square foot than the typical commercial office space was built to accomodate..
Then they can put less stuff in each one. Destroying nature to maximize corporate value is not ok.
[flagged]
> Elons datacenters in space are looking smarter and smarter by the day. Where would the heat go?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Elons datacenters in space are looking smarter and smarter by the day. Where would the heat go?
Where does the heat always go? It goes into the environment. In space the environment is space. It goes from high-temperature GPU made for space to a large metamaterial coated heatsink with optimal geometry to radiate into space.
Into other surrounding materials. Of which there are none, in a vacuum.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not sure how to answer this. It's pretty well documented that datacenters (esp the AI variety) are offloading grid expenses to customers as higher baseline costs. The issue is that these DCs are not paying for the cost of the necessary grid upgrades but are instead having the power cos pass these costs off to all consumers as base increases.
> It's pretty well documented that datacenters (esp the AI variety) are offloading grid expenses to customers as higher baseline costs. I'm sure you can present this documentation, then.
Harvard University Law Press: https://eelp.law.harvard.edu/extracting-profits-from-the-pub...
Bloomberg: https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2025-ai-data-centers-elec...
CNBC: https://www.cnbc.com/2026/03/13/ai-data-centers-electricity-...
There are many more if you care to look
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So by your logic if a massive company came and said they want to setup an oil refinery or coal power plant you'd say they should say yes just because they could get tax revenue? You always have to way the pros and cons of such massive projects. Plus, this isn't a ban it's just a one year moratorium so impact etc can be studied.
A datacenter ranks close to zero on the pollution scale. By comparison a golf course looks like a Superfund site.
"AI" data centers consume massive amounts of energy per square foot, have been caught using LNG generators for power, have polluted ground water, material usage, habitat destruction, etc
How about you provide some proof?
(PS I'm not advocating that golf courses are good for the environment - they're not - but data centers are absolutely not "zero on the pollution scale" that is laughable)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where does the heat always go? It goes into the environment. In space the environment is space. It goes from high-temperature GPU made for space to a large metamaterial coated heatsink with optimal geometry to radiate into space.
> Where does the heat always go? Into other surrounding materials. Of which there are none, in a vacuum.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That clears things up. You want to use the cudgel of the state's power regarding zoning issues to address ventures which you find morally objectionable in some way.
Other than your sanctimonious tone, did you have a point? And your sanctimonious attitude is wrong. This isn't about morality. It's literally about economic devastation being caused by VC's using the violence of the state to eminent domain houses to make right away for power lines, inctease power prices, etc. Of course, you don't believe corporate socialism is wrong, you just call it free market capitalism. Well go r…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Local municipalities are having to upgrade municipal infrastructure as a result of these projects Then they could pass a law requiring the data centers to pay for these instead of banning them outright, should sort itself out no?
Will they also pay for rolling back the infrastructure and restoring the land to its previous state after they go bust and no longer need the data centre?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Local municipalities are having to upgrade municipal infrastructure as a result of these projects Then they could pass a law requiring the data centers to pay for these instead of banning them outright, should sort itself out no?
Part of the idea behind a moratorium is to allow time for impact analysis so those regulations can be written appropriately. Part of the reason we have big tech getting away with regulatory capture in the US is because they have enough capital to entrench themselves in the economy faster than regulators can react.
They couldn't do that in 20 years of having data centers?
We aren't even trying any more. China and the east are the future.
I'm not convinced that communism is the future. I'm happy to stick with democracy where the government doesn't just force harms on the public whenever it will make them more money and voter's concerns about health and environmental impacts are listened to.
This is exactly what just happened in Utah et. al. with the new Stratos data center under western liberal democracy, btw.