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

Why We've Filed a Referendum

stopstratos.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 51 posts

Re: Why We've Filed a Referendum

#31

Post by gensym »

timmg wrote: post #2

Obviously, it's fine to be wary of any development in your area. But it seems like there is a certain amount of irrational(?) fear of datacenters. And I really don't understand it. I saw a poll recently that people would rather live near a nuclear power plan than a datacenter. That's... their choice, of course, but doesn't seem logical to me. I have heard several "concern stories" about them on NPR recently. Maybe th…

It’s pretty simple. People think that AI will take their jobs and maybe murder them, probably because the people developing AI have said it’s going to take their jobs and maybe murder them.

Opposing data centers is the biggest lever most people have to impede AI development.

Re: Why We've Filed a Referendum

#32

Post by Tanoc »

timmg wrote: post #2

Obviously, it's fine to be wary of any development in your area. But it seems like there is a certain amount of irrational(?) fear of datacenters. And I really don't understand it. I saw a poll recently that people would rather live near a nuclear power plan than a datacenter. That's... their choice, of course, but doesn't seem logical to me. I have heard several "concern stories" about them on NPR recently. Maybe th…

Datacenters are financially a net negative for whichever municipality they end up in. They're operated mostly remotely with little staff and they have no tangible production, meaning any wealth they generate ends up vast distances away. Meanwhile the municipality ends up with increased costs because of the inefficiencies of bruteforcing computation, and because of the subsidies and tax breaks that the companies not only expect but demand for construction, there's no revenue being generated even for the local government.

That alone is enough of an argument against them.

Re: Why We've Filed a Referendum

#33

Post by danaris »

gruez wrote: post #17
shimman wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be helpful if you didn't post rebuttals from people with a massive financial incentive to do so.

Ad homniems aside, is the accusation even accurate? So far as I can tell he doesn't obviously have "a massive financial incentive to do so", like he's a VC investor in anthropic or whatever. He does seem to be bullish on AI in general, but I'm not sure why that'd be a disqualification for someone on the pro-ai camp any more than someone who's interested in retaining their property values or whatever would be a disqua…

That's not an ad hominem, though?

Ad hominem would be if shimman had said something like "don't post rebuttals from people who are stupid meanyheads". Identifying a characteristic of the posters that affects their incentives is a perfectly legitimate reason to discredit their posts, or at least call their impartiality into question.

Re: Why We've Filed a Referendum

#34

Post by simianwords »

Tanoc wrote: post #32
timmg wrote: post #2

Obviously, it's fine to be wary of any development in your area. But it seems like there is a certain amount of irrational(?) fear of datacenters. And I really don't understand it. I saw a poll recently that people would rather live near a nuclear power plan than a datacenter. That's... their choice, of course, but doesn't seem logical to me. I have heard several "concern stories" about them on NPR recently. Maybe th…

Datacenters are financially a net negative for whichever municipality they end up in. They're operated mostly remotely with little staff and they have no tangible production, meaning any wealth they generate ends up vast distances away. Meanwhile the municipality ends up with increased costs because of the inefficiencies of bruteforcing computation, and because of the subsidies and tax breaks that the companies not o…

Why did you not include the tax they bring in? I think this is a serious omission and points at motivated reasoning.

Can you do one where you account for the tax dollars and compare it to similar industries?

Re: Why We've Filed a Referendum

#36

Post by pipes »

shimman wrote: post #14
dannyobrien wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you read the responses to (at least) the first of these videos? https://blog.andymasley.com/p/contra-benn-jordan-data-center... Also, I thought the response by Benn Jordan on Bluesky was informative. https://blog.andymasley.com/p/contra-benn-jordan-data-center...

It would be helpful if you didn't post rebuttals from people with a massive financial incentive to do so.

No it wouldn't. I want to hear his argument.

Re: Why We've Filed a Referendum

#37

Post by razakel »

recursivecaveat wrote: post #30
timmg wrote: post #2

Obviously, it's fine to be wary of any development in your area. But it seems like there is a certain amount of irrational(?) fear of datacenters. And I really don't understand it. I saw a poll recently that people would rather live near a nuclear power plan than a datacenter. That's... their choice, of course, but doesn't seem logical to me. I have heard several "concern stories" about them on NPR recently. Maybe th…

I think it's as simple as people generally believe that electricity is good for the world, and AI is bad for it. In the former case you're kindof taking-one-for-the-team. Even places that have nasty nasty stuff like tailings ponds generally have a kind of civic pride that coal mining or whatever was a necessity and the sacrifice of their local environment made a lot of other people's comfy lives possible. Data-center…

For some strange reason people aren't all that keen on building something that'll increase their utility bills, pollute everything, and threatens to take their job.

Re: Why We've Filed a Referendum

#38

Post by freedomben »

llbbdd wrote: post #28
newtonianrules wrote: post #13

Utah hasn’t voted for a Democrat president since Johnson. Reap what you sow.

Utah is such a special, creepy little standout enclave among the states. I've worked with a few Mormon coworkers who are genuinely wonderful people whom I adore, but they are, as a group, militant in a way that's hard to describe.

You should at least try to describe it more specifically if you're casting shade on a huge population. Otherwise you just look like a bigot assigning traits to tens of millions of people based on a few people with the same religion that you know. I grew up Mormon and I've also lived and worked among mostly non Mormon populations, and I would say most Mormons are actually not militant.

Turns out Mormons are just people too with a huge diversity of personality.

Re: Why We've Filed a Referendum

#40

Post by timmg »

tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: post #22
timmg wrote: post #2

Obviously, it's fine to be wary of any development in your area. But it seems like there is a certain amount of irrational(?) fear of datacenters. And I really don't understand it. I saw a poll recently that people would rather live near a nuclear power plan than a datacenter. That's... their choice, of course, but doesn't seem logical to me. I have heard several "concern stories" about them on NPR recently. Maybe th…

Aside from "moral outrage" style concerns ("AI is bad for the environment", power consumption, water consumption, or "datacenters benefit rich people, rich people bad, so datacenters bad"), I've heard of specific bad examples how datacenters (allegedly) negatively impacted the surrounding population: - Noise (from fans to generators to possible infrasound concerns) - Air pollution (from data centers semi-permanently…

All of these concerns are valid. But none of them are unique to datacenters.

A golf course uses a lot of water. A factory can use a lot of power -- and generate pollution. A chemical factory could have all kinds of externalities (if not properly managed.) Heck, switching to electric heat (over gas) or electric cars over ICE for an area will also drive up power usage.

But we don't freak out when someone builds a golf course or a factory or switch to electric.

We have rules about all those things. Sound is one: you need to be within reasonable limits. Electricity usage is another: power operators always need to manage their load and expand generation (that's why we keep adding solar and wind everywhere.) Air pollution is similarly managed.

I can understand if people are concerned about "infrasound" -- why not pass a law that regulates it -- like other noise limits?

Datacenters may have specific potential issues. But none of them are unique to datacenters. And we've been managing these issues for hundreds of years.

Post reply on HN