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

Letter to Governor Abbott on responsible AI infrastructure in Texas

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–246 of 246 posts

Re: Letter to Governor Abbott on responsible AI infrastructure in Texas

#241

Post by NewJazz »

whatthesmack wrote: post #195
NewJazz wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel your concern/doom, but... It's a letter to texas... Know your audience and all that...

I know it’s cool with the kids to talk down Texas and its folks, but you might be surprised that Texas… - produces more electricity from wind generation than any other US state. - consumes more electricity from wind generation than any other US state (3x the next biggest, Iowa). - has more installed wind generation capacity than any other state. - energy usage leads all other US states by being comprised of 22% wind…

Yeah but how often does the governor brag about that? Using renewable energy and championing the use of renewable energy are different things in the political world. One reduces costs, one invites the crazies.

Re: Letter to Governor Abbott on responsible AI infrastructure in Texas

#242

Post by AnthonyMouse »

foco_tubi wrote: post #233
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that's supposed to explain it then why is housing also expensive in Massachusetts or Colorado? It's ~18% more in California than Massachusetts but ~313% more in Massachusetts than Oklahoma.

Massachusetts and Colorado arrived at expensive housing markets through other means, but as far as I know they don’t have any sort of massive lock-in incentive like Prop 13.

The lock-in incentive is counterproductive but the main cause is still zoning.

Prop 13 makes it so long-term owners don't want to sell because moving triggers a huge tax hike even at the same property value, and the most idiotic thing about it is that you also get the tax hike if you build anything new on the land. It would actually have been a major pro-housing rule if adding new units kept the low taxes.

But that still doesn't reduce turnover to zero, and with prices as high as they are there, that would mean developers snapping up any property that comes onto the market and turning it into multiple units that are each worth the original price. Unless prevented from doing so by zoning, which is the actual problem and the same one causing it in other states.

The main contribution of Prop 13 isn't a direct effect, it's that it makes residents more inclined to support the restrictive zoning rules that actually cause the problem.

Re: Letter to Governor Abbott on responsible AI infrastructure in Texas

#243

Post by aceazzameen »

rayiner wrote: post #218
aceazzameen wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The world and its people would continue to thrive if AI data centers magically vanished tomorrow. They are not necessary infrastructure. They're only necessary for wall street right now.

Sure, but we’re going to thrive more because of AI, just as we thrived more because of the Internet, cell phones, etc.

There's no evidence to support that. There's even arguments to be made that Internet and cell phones have ruined segments of society. We need to take a step back and make sure new life changing technologies are properly regulated, and built safely with communities in mind. Instead, we're going all in gung-ho, because we think its some kind of winnable race, while ignoring all the damage (environmental, privacy, tax payer cost, consumer cost, etc etc). AI will never fix those items.

The reality is we're not doing AI safely because our 401ks and the folks with 12 digits in the portfolio wouldn't grow as quickly as they are if it were regulated.

Re: Letter to Governor Abbott on responsible AI infrastructure in Texas

#244

Post by platevoltage »

andsoitis wrote: post #189
platevoltage wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you name a politician who's been elected based on their promise to put datacenter in their community?

> Can you name a politician who's been elected based on their promise to put datacenter in their community? That's not a useful question. What's the point you're trying to make?

You called it "experimenting". People vote for candidates because they want them to do what they campaigned on, not experiment on them. As far as I'm aware, no candidate has campaigned on building datacenters next to their constituents' houses.

Re: Letter to Governor Abbott on responsible AI infrastructure in Texas

#245

Post by foco_tubi »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #242
foco_tubi wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Massachusetts and Colorado arrived at expensive housing markets through other means, but as far as I know they don’t have any sort of massive lock-in incentive like Prop 13.

The lock-in incentive is counterproductive but the main cause is still zoning. Prop 13 makes it so long-term owners don't want to sell because moving triggers a huge tax hike even at the same property value, and the most idiotic thing about it is that you also get the tax hike if you build anything new on the land. It would actually have been a major pro-housing rule if adding new units kept the low taxes. But that s…

You're right that zoning plays a major role in housing shortages. It's just my opinion that had Prop 13 not been codified into the state constitution, residential development may have flourished under the extreme demand.

1978 was a bad year not only because of the passage of Prop 13, but the subsequent municipal votes in SF and LA to force them into compliance with the statewide zoning restrictions of the Consistency Law. CEQA became weaponized and successfully used by NIMBYs to thwart new development.

However, specific to post-1978, municipalities saw residential areas as a tax burden and enacted growth caps and levied "impact" fees. This was a direct effect on housing development as governments did not want to bring in new residents without the property tax base to support infrastructure, education, etc. It wasn't just an inclination to support restrictive zoning, it mandated lowering density. Meanwhile commercial zoning flourished as commercial taxes became more relatively viable. As a result, LA now has 1 house for every 2-3 people, and nearly 2 parking spaces for every 1 person.

Zoning is a problem. I just think that maybe it wouldn't have turned out this way without Prop 13.

Re: Letter to Governor Abbott on responsible AI infrastructure in Texas

#246

Post by pstuart »

rayiner wrote: post #116
coldbrewed wrote: post #4

This is a collection of "OpenAI will boldly act in the abstract to provide air coverage for Texas leadership." With data centers under construction one would think they would have examples of successes or projects in progress available for reference. They'd claim credit if they had it so the silence is telling. Big tech has consistently valued profit and growth above good stewardship; the onus is entirely on OpenAI t…

Building stuff is good stewardship. We complain about NIMBYs. But with a few relatively modest regulations data centers can be quite friendly. They don’t generate traffic, congestion, etc. They don’t strain school or police infrastructure. Basically need some noise regulations. But the NIMBYs will kill it.

So you'd be ok with a data center across the street from your house?
Post reply on HN