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

The 500k-ton typo: Why data center copper math doesn't add up

investinglive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 152 posts

Re: The 500k-ton typo: Why data center copper math doesn't add up

#31

Post by literalAardvark »

ironbound wrote: post #4
tlb wrote: post #3

Checking the arithmetic in every paper published seems like an good use case for LLMs. Has someone built a better version than uploading a PDF to ChatGPT and asking it to check the arithmetic?

LLM's are why we're in this mess, they can't do math or count r's

They can't do math?

ChatGPT 5.2 has recently been churning through unsolved Erdös problems.

I think right now one is partially validated by a pro and the other one I know of is "ai-solved" but not verified. As in: we're the ones who can't quite keep up.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.07421

And the only reason they can't count Rs is that we don't show them Rs due to a performance optimization.

Re: The 500k-ton typo: Why data center copper math doesn't add up

#32

Post by blueg3 »

9dev wrote: post #14
nine_k wrote: post #10

> If the "half a million tons" figure were accurate, a single 1 GW data center would consume 1.7% of the world's annual copper supply. If we built 30 GW of capacity—a reasonable projection for the AI build-out—that sector alone would theoretically absorb almost half of all the copper mined on Earth. Quickly doing such "back of an envelope" calculations, and calling out things that seem outlandish, could be a useful f…

Using your brain is so vastly more energy efficient, we might just only need half of that 30 GW capacity if fewer people had these leftpad-style knee-jerk reactions.

A Gemini query uses about a kilojoule. The brain runs at 20 W (though the whole human costs 100 W). So, the human is less energy if you can get it done in under 50 seconds.

Re: The 500k-ton typo: Why data center copper math doesn't add up

#33

Post by fedeb95 »

crote wrote: post #27

With regards to the copper market: it keeps surprising me that some people seem to assume copper is a hard requirement for conducting electricity. In reality copper is just convenient . We use it because it's easy to work with, a great conductor, and (until recently) quite affordable. But for most applications there's no reason we couldn't use something else! For example, a 1.5mm2 copper conductor is 0.0134kg/m, whic…

interesting, thanks!

Re: The 500k-ton typo: Why data center copper math doesn't add up

#35

Post by candiddevmike »

crote wrote: post #27

With regards to the copper market: it keeps surprising me that some people seem to assume copper is a hard requirement for conducting electricity. In reality copper is just convenient . We use it because it's easy to work with, a great conductor, and (until recently) quite affordable. But for most applications there's no reason we couldn't use something else! For example, a 1.5mm2 copper conductor is 0.0134kg/m, whic…

AFAIK Aluminum wires will become a heat liability, especially at higher amps

Re: The 500k-ton typo: Why data center copper math doesn't add up

#36

Post by dzink »

crote wrote: post #27

With regards to the copper market: it keeps surprising me that some people seem to assume copper is a hard requirement for conducting electricity. In reality copper is just convenient . We use it because it's easy to work with, a great conductor, and (until recently) quite affordable. But for most applications there's no reason we couldn't use something else! For example, a 1.5mm2 copper conductor is 0.0134kg/m, whic…

You just have to not mix and match. If you mix them the two need special bonding at every single connector or they can cause arching and fires.

Re: The 500k-ton typo: Why data center copper math doesn't add up

#37

Post by y-curious »

crote wrote: post #27

With regards to the copper market: it keeps surprising me that some people seem to assume copper is a hard requirement for conducting electricity. In reality copper is just convenient . We use it because it's easy to work with, a great conductor, and (until recently) quite affordable. But for most applications there's no reason we couldn't use something else! For example, a 1.5mm2 copper conductor is 0.0134kg/m, whic…

I am not an electricity/wiring guy so maybe you can help me understand. I thought aluminum is dangerous to wire with because it is a fire hazard (I bought a home this year and this was a prominent warning in my reading). Is that because it needs to be done very carefully? I imagine most data centers would not mess with a fire risk on such a scale.

Re: The 500k-ton typo: Why data center copper math doesn't add up

#38

Post by lostlogin »

RobotToaster wrote: post #11
blitzar wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Olympic swimming pools for liquids, times around the the earth for length and number of double decker busses for height.

For smaller lengths and radiation bananas are also acceptable.

A good physicist can calculate banana equivalent dose other head. Always ask for it when dealing with radiation.

Re: The 500k-ton typo: Why data center copper math doesn't add up

#39

Post by tlb »

program_whiz wrote: post #25
wongarsu wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Each person uses about 100W (2000kcal/24h=96W). Running all of humanity takes about 775GW. Sure, using or not using your brain is a negligible energy difference, so if you aren't using it you really should, for energy efficiency's sake. But I don't think the claim that our brains are more energy efficient is obviously true on its own. The issue is more about induced demand from having all this external "thinking" cap…

Is there an AI system with functionality at or equal to a human brain that operates on less than 100W? Its currently the most efficient model we have. You compare all of humanity's energy expenditure, but to make the comparison, you need to consider the cost of replicating all that compute with AI (assuming we had an AGI at human level in all regards, or a set of AIs that when operated together could replace all huma…

No one will ever agree on when AI systems have equivalent functionality to a human brain. But lots of jobs consist of things a computer can now do for less than 100W.

Also, while a body itself uses only 100W, a normal urban lifestyle uses a few thousand watts for heat, light, cooking, and transportation.

Re: The 500k-ton typo: Why data center copper math doesn't add up

#40

Post by potato3732842 »

kergonath wrote: post #26
nine_k wrote: post #10

> If the "half a million tons" figure were accurate, a single 1 GW data center would consume 1.7% of the world's annual copper supply. If we built 30 GW of capacity—a reasonable projection for the AI build-out—that sector alone would theoretically absorb almost half of all the copper mined on Earth. Quickly doing such "back of an envelope" calculations, and calling out things that seem outlandish, could be a useful f…

It’s one of the useful functions of an engineer.

It's almost always the engineers, analysts and MBA spreadsheet pushers and other people removed from the physical consequences outputting these mistakes because it's way easier to not notice a misplaced decimal or incorrect value when you deal in pure numbers and know what they "should" be than you are the person actually figuring out how to make it happen the difference between needing 26666666.667 and 266666666.667 of is pretty meaningful. Engineers don't output these mistakes as often as analysts or whatever because they work in organizations that invest more in catching them, not because they make them all that much less.

Whether talking weight or bulk a decimal place is approximately the difference between needing a wheelbarrow, a truck, a semi truck, a freight train and a ship.

Post reply on HN