If there’s really trillions of dollars of market cap to be had, why not just build in the middle of nowhere northern Québec and Ontario and build your own damn dams and infrastructure?
You’ve got a ton of water. A ton of famously cheap hydro electricity potential. An entire service industry for remote mines (who will build your roads and power). And you’re not being an unwanted bastard.
My sense is that the answer is very simple: because they can just use someone else’s.
> They should invest money into improving electric and community infrastructure
The problem with electric and community infrastructure is that very few electric infrastructure is owned by the community, but that's not the core issue because the other infrastructure that is indeed owned by community has people in the community split on what's useful and what not.
Imagine how difficult it is to decide where to go out to lunch in a group of people. Now up the stakes to getting people to agree on whose backyard and where holes and trenches and dug and electric poles and power stations are put up.
Negative comments on data centers, or power plants, or day care, or apartment buildings, or coffee shops, or new fire hydrants are exactly what you'd expect from the (demented, sometimes literally) municipal public comment process, which sharply biased towards negative comments structurally --- people turn out because they're risk-averse and don't want to see change that could impact their own homes, and virtually nobody turns out for the abstract upside of new development --- and also demographically: public comment skews sharply older, wealthier, and towards homeowners.
The public comment process is an anti-democratic pox on our system (all the political systems that support it) and we should all be shifting to a mode where we more openly impeach it. Public comment is one of the first principal components of the American housing shortage.
What's the alternative? Without public comment, politicians will just do whatever they want without accountability or open opposition. With public comment, politicians will still just do whatever they want without accountability but at least there is a record of opposition.
From tptacek’s previous comments on the topic, he is deeply suspicious of any democratic process that leads to an outcome he disagrees with. He has constructed a framework that makes it easier for politicians to ignore any dissent from their constituents.
I think he very much means well, but if he were ever to run for office or lobby in an area that impacted me I would fight him tooth and nail because I think his outlook and methodology is dangerous (even though from what I can tell we agree on many issues).
Specifically if you are trying to convince public officials that it’s ok to ignore dissenters showing up to town meetings, writing letters, or sending phone calls, you are undermining democracy. I don’t care what your motivations are.
I’m not sure there is a good alternative, but it is a problem. So many public infrastructure projects in the US are shot down or neutered because of short term issues outweighing long term upsides.
Datacenters are not really public infrastructure though. They are private infrastructure and even though the outcome could well be similar there is no link between the two.
Where I live data centers are extremely unpopular with the general population simply because the process around the decision making for these is opaque, the benefits do not seem to be shared with those that suffer the consequences and we've been telling people for the last 40 years or so that they need to conserve energy because of global warming. In that climate (heh) pushing data centers is an uphill battle, and it probably should be.
Not talking about data centers specifically here, there’s a few public transit projects near me that got killed/neutered because people didn’t want to live near a construction site, while it would have been beneficial long term.
So, that sounds like a great opportunity to engage the younger, poorer and the homeless then. That will certainly give a lot more perspective, but I doubt the outcome would be very different when it comes to datacenters. With respect to the housing shortage I suspect it would give a completely different outcome.
Also: you can't really blame those who do show up for a democratic process for having the wrong ideas relative to those that don't show up.
Public comment is a feature of the democratic process, I don't see how it could ever be seen as anti-democratic.
Some people have opinions that are perfectly human, but that you may certainly disagree strongly with. And yes, some people have straight up crazy opinions. And yes, some people have selfish opinions.
So... your answer is "fuck the people"? What are you even talking about? This is a necessary part of government. You are not the keeper of Correct Opinions. You're suggesting doing the thing that citizens historically get their weapons out to (rightfully) eject from civilization.
Data centers and power plants to power them are the new oil.
Also, just like oil is dirty, bad for the environment and kills people, so will the data centers. And the power plants to power them.
Our options are not to not have Data centers and their power plants but whether to have them built elsewhere (even outside the US) and pay rent or own them and get paid the rent.
Arguments about having more efficient or green Data centers and power plants miss the point. Engineering is a process of iterative improvement - you don't begin with the perfect product, you begin with one that crashes, burns and breaks some bones.
It's understandable though that no one one wants to be "it".
If there’s really trillions of dollars of market cap to be had, why not just build in the middle of nowhere northern Québec and Ontario and build your own damn dams and infrastructure?
You’ve got a ton of water. A ton of famously cheap hydro electricity potential. An entire service industry for remote mines (who will build your roads and power). And you’re not being an unwanted bastard.
My sense is that the answer is very simple: because they can just use someone else’s.
There's not infinite hydro... net new energy is coming from increased efficiency (insulation etc) and upgraded turbines
Is there a network backbone running through the middle of nowhere northern Québec and Ontario?
They are running loads of fiber. If it's worth the trillions then it's worth some easement beside a railroad.
Yes
https://map.kmcd.dev/
Is it somehow not being represented here?
I'm pro AI and data center but a lot of construction is short sighted.
They should invest money into improving electric and community infrastructure. There are so many win-wins to be had and they fumbled
> They should invest money into improving electric and community infrastructure
The problem with electric and community infrastructure is that very few electric infrastructure is owned by the community, but that's not the core issue because the other infrastructure that is indeed owned by community has people in the community split on what's useful and what not.
Imagine how difficult it is to decide where to go out to lunch in a group of people. Now up the stakes to getting people to agree on whose backyard and where holes and trenches and dug and electric poles and power stations are put up.
Negative comments on data centers, or power plants, or day care, or apartment buildings, or coffee shops, or new fire hydrants are exactly what you'd expect from the (demented, sometimes literally) municipal public comment process, which sharply biased towards negative comments structurally --- people turn out because they're risk-averse and don't want to see change that could impact their own homes, and virtually nobody turns out for the abstract upside of new development --- and also demographically: public comment skews sharply older, wealthier, and towards homeowners.
The public comment process is an anti-democratic pox on our system (all the political systems that support it) and we should all be shifting to a mode where we more openly impeach it. Public comment is one of the first principal components of the American housing shortage.
What's the alternative? Without public comment, politicians will just do whatever they want without accountability or open opposition. With public comment, politicians will still just do whatever they want without accountability but at least there is a record of opposition.
From tptacek’s previous comments on the topic, he is deeply suspicious of any democratic process that leads to an outcome he disagrees with. He has constructed a framework that makes it easier for politicians to ignore any dissent from their constituents.
I think he very much means well, but if he were ever to run for office or lobby in an area that impacted me I would fight him tooth and nail because I think his outlook and methodology is dangerous (even though from what I can tell we agree on many issues).
Specifically if you are trying to convince public officials that it’s ok to ignore dissenters showing up to town meetings, writing letters, or sending phone calls, you are undermining democracy. I don’t care what your motivations are.
I’m not sure there is a good alternative, but it is a problem. So many public infrastructure projects in the US are shot down or neutered because of short term issues outweighing long term upsides.
Datacenters are not really public infrastructure though. They are private infrastructure and even though the outcome could well be similar there is no link between the two.
Where I live data centers are extremely unpopular with the general population simply because the process around the decision making for these is opaque, the benefits do not seem to be shared with those that suffer the consequences and we've been telling people for the last 40 years or so that they need to conserve energy because of global warming. In that climate (heh) pushing data centers is an uphill battle, and it probably should be.
Short term how? As in "you'll get used to it"?
Not talking about data centers specifically here, there’s a few public transit projects near me that got killed/neutered because people didn’t want to live near a construction site, while it would have been beneficial long term.
So, that sounds like a great opportunity to engage the younger, poorer and the homeless then. That will certainly give a lot more perspective, but I doubt the outcome would be very different when it comes to datacenters. With respect to the housing shortage I suspect it would give a completely different outcome.
Also: you can't really blame those who do show up for a democratic process for having the wrong ideas relative to those that don't show up.
Public comment is a feature of the democratic process, I don't see how it could ever be seen as anti-democratic.
This is hard to follow.
Some people have opinions that are perfectly human, but that you may certainly disagree strongly with. And yes, some people have straight up crazy opinions. And yes, some people have selfish opinions.
So... your answer is "fuck the people"? What are you even talking about? This is a necessary part of government. You are not the keeper of Correct Opinions. You're suggesting doing the thing that citizens historically get their weapons out to (rightfully) eject from civilization.
> The public comment process is an anti-democratic pox on our system
This just sounds like your ideas are bad and you’re upset that no one supports them.
So, what? We just ignore them?
Data centers and power plants to power them are the new oil.
Also, just like oil is dirty, bad for the environment and kills people, so will the data centers. And the power plants to power them.
Our options are not to not have Data centers and their power plants but whether to have them built elsewhere (even outside the US) and pay rent or own them and get paid the rent.
Arguments about having more efficient or green Data centers and power plants miss the point. Engineering is a process of iterative improvement - you don't begin with the perfect product, you begin with one that crashes, burns and breaks some bones.
It's understandable though that no one one wants to be "it".
This is Andrew, Founder/CEO of the team behind American Sentiment. Analysis tweet thread: https://x.com/andrewfang/status/2117048211051532555
Findings include:
-73% of meetings had 0 people for data centers
-Water use was the #1 issue.
-Elon Musk was mentioned more than Sam Altman, Peter Thiel, Mark Zuckerberg, Jeff BEzos, Bill Gates, and Kevin O'Leary combined.
-Only 1 in 5 comments mention AI!
-Data center opposition is heavily bipartisan.
https://xxcancel.com/andrewfang/status/2117048211051532555
Helpful charts, thank you!