These data centers should be required to support social programs for the communities where they are being built. They will increase the costs for electricity and water, so they should have to help these communities.
These ai data centers need to be stopped. Full stop. I'm talking about the hyperscalers. Yes, we've had data centers for decades, and I have no problem there. But these behemoth hyperscalers that use millions of gallons of water per day and massive amounts of electricity we do not need. Why are these massive, unsustainable hyperscalers popping up all over, hidden by NDAs? Surveillance. We do not need them nor do we want them. Period.
The article makes an important point that data centers don’t serve the communities (often rural) on which they are imposed but serve the investors and tech billionaires and those corporate interests fund political campaigns to serve their interests. Case in point: Vivek Ramaswami who is a spineless apology for a human being with no ethics or values whatsoever is running for Ohio governor and stands to directly benefit from allowing polluting energy hungry data centers to be built in Ohio. This is all fine and I agree we as Americans should support the interests of the people in those communities and not the obscenely rich elite tech billionaires and hedge fund investors.
But we also need to get our facts right. The article mentions gigawatts and loosely confuses that with the energy needed to power 800,000 homes. I quote:
“To comprehend the scale of the potential energy use: 1-gigawatt is the equivalent of the energy used to power as many as 800,000 homes. So, it follows that a 10-gigawatt data center would use enough energy to power 8 million homes.”
Watt is a measure of power which is the rate of energy production in this case. Energy would be measured in gigawatt hours GWh. One cannot compare the power rating of a plant directly with the energy to operate homes. You have to introduce a time scale somewhere!
I’m not trying to be persnickety or put down this reporting. But when the current administration disregards fact and evidence completely, we cannot go down that same path or be accused of doing so.
Let’s get our facts straight. Then our arguments will be more convincing. We’ll set a standard for all to look up to and follow.
Me without reading the article: "of course they are"
If AIPAC is funding the candidates that won't push against Israel, billionaires and tech giants are going to push for data centers. This is why certain municipalities have started allowing companies to even vote in local elections. Delaware is an example. Voting in municipalities means artificially inflating the numbers to make it seem like this is popular when this is quite likely the most nonpartisan issue out there.
The irony of companies voting but people being up in arms for the nonissue of immigrants voting (nonissue because it isn't happening) is not lost on me.
These data centers should be required to support social programs for the communities where they are being built. They will increase the costs for electricity and water, so they should have to help these communities.
These ai data centers need to be stopped. Full stop. I'm talking about the hyperscalers. Yes, we've had data centers for decades, and I have no problem there. But these behemoth hyperscalers that use millions of gallons of water per day and massive amounts of electricity we do not need. Why are these massive, unsustainable hyperscalers popping up all over, hidden by NDAs? Surveillance. We do not need them nor do we want them. Period.
The article makes an important point that data centers don’t serve the communities (often rural) on which they are imposed but serve the investors and tech billionaires and those corporate interests fund political campaigns to serve their interests. Case in point: Vivek Ramaswami who is a spineless apology for a human being with no ethics or values whatsoever is running for Ohio governor and stands to directly benefit from allowing polluting energy hungry data centers to be built in Ohio. This is all fine and I agree we as Americans should support the interests of the people in those communities and not the obscenely rich elite tech billionaires and hedge fund investors.
But we also need to get our facts right. The article mentions gigawatts and loosely confuses that with the energy needed to power 800,000 homes. I quote:
“To comprehend the scale of the potential energy use: 1-gigawatt is the equivalent of the energy used to power as many as 800,000 homes. So, it follows that a 10-gigawatt data center would use enough energy to power 8 million homes.”
Watt is a measure of power which is the rate of energy production in this case. Energy would be measured in gigawatt hours GWh. One cannot compare the power rating of a plant directly with the energy to operate homes. You have to introduce a time scale somewhere!
I’m not trying to be persnickety or put down this reporting. But when the current administration disregards fact and evidence completely, we cannot go down that same path or be accused of doing so.
Let’s get our facts straight. Then our arguments will be more convincing. We’ll set a standard for all to look up to and follow.
Thanks for your reporting.
It's all about the grift. When did we leave the American people out of American priorities.
Me without reading the article: "of course they are"
If AIPAC is funding the candidates that won't push against Israel, billionaires and tech giants are going to push for data centers. This is why certain municipalities have started allowing companies to even vote in local elections. Delaware is an example. Voting in municipalities means artificially inflating the numbers to make it seem like this is popular when this is quite likely the most nonpartisan issue out there.
The irony of companies voting but people being up in arms for the nonissue of immigrants voting (nonissue because it isn't happening) is not lost on me.