top 95 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 223 points 7 months ago (5 children)

Hear me out...

How do we know it wasn't a peaceful person leaving a hand written note begging for no more datacentres, when their nemesis, Dr Datacentre, drove past and started shooting at him?

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 140 points 7 months ago
    [–] 53 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    Wait, did the shooter walk up to the house, politely place the note under the mat, then start blasting?

    Or did they light the place up before dropping off the note?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 52 points 7 months ago (11 children)

    Its almost like fucking over all of us with rolling blackouts , skyrocketing power bills, sucking up water, and creating heat islands would upset us. Oh and further enriching billionaires with stolen land. Wow. Weird.

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 7 months ago (10 children)
  • [–] 5 points 7 months ago (9 children)

    I'll watch, but it sounds a lot like people who think wind generators cause headaches and such.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago

    It's not the same, they're loud high velocity small spinning blades. It's the same concept as a box fan, very large diameter fan moving slowly is quiet, small high velocity fan is much louder. And they're ground level and much closer to people and stacked together very closely instead of far apart.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    I am lazy. Is pseudoscience, mad science or just barnyard gossip?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Barnyard gossip with a pinch of divination. Mad science is actual science but for the explicit purpose of being evil or off the walls whacky; given enough time or a proper application mad science can turn into normal science.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infrasound

    it's been acknowledged by the scientific community as having an effect on humans and animals for decades.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago

    "Having an effect" is completely different then saying it makes people sick, and the wiki article alternates between citing studies that it does cause discomfort to it doesn't cause discomfort, and for the studies/experiments that actually proving it does have an effect it was very strong and specifically intended to cause discomfort.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 48 points 7 months ago (8 children)

    The old delivery method for these kinds of ominous threatening notes was tied to a rock. This is new.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 33 points 7 months ago (4 children)

    Isn't a bullet basically a very fast little rock if you think about it?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 7 months ago* (2 children)

    I believe the classical interpretation is to nail your 95 complaints to the door with a dagger.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Pfff... You kids and your modern day doodads.

    Baaaaack in my day, we would carve words into a flat rock and hurl it into the hut of our enemy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago

    Ah, you're young enough that language was developed "back in your day."

    I had to shit in my hand and throw it at someone if I wanted to show displasure at someone. Fancy words and carving hadn't been invented yet. You want to go insult thaag, hope you had plenty of fiber the night before...

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 130 points 7 months ago (8 children)

    The four boxes of liberty-

    1. Soap box
    2. ballot box
    3. jury box
    4. ammo box
  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 7 months ago (7 children)

    We're at the last one because they've removed all the others.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 7 months ago (6 children)

    That's literally not true. The current administration is in power because 86 million eligible people didn't bother to vote.

    If "Did Not Vote" had been a candidate:

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

    I'd be interested in an interactive version of this where you could assign a percentage of those votes to the person who lost the state as a naive proxy for "what would have happened if the people who thought their vote didn't matter because [D|R] would win anyway". I know it wouldn't be an actual measure but it'd be fun to mess with anyway.

    In particular I find it kinda interesting that CA and TX are both didn't vote and both historically considered "easy wins".

    This image is just generally interesting because it also turns the idea of swing states around a bit. If neither candidate motivated enough people in all of those states could we consider them swing states?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    I think you are on to something, but I'd say it actually largely deflates the 'people didn't vote and if they had, maybe the outcome would have been different' narrative.

    "Did not vote" rules in non-swing states. I wager that, for example, most people didn't vote in california not because they see their candidate as a lost cause, but because they know "their" candidate has carried the state for sure.

    So in a shift to proportional electoral vote or popular vote, you'd probably get a lot more voters engaged in California, Hawaii, NY, and pick up democrat votes but you'd also get more red voters from Alaska, Texas, Utah, Kansan, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Alabamba, Tennesse... etc... I'm not sure which group manages to bring out more non-voters in that scenario...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

    I wager that, for example, most people didn’t vote in california not because they see their candidate as a lost cause, but because they know “their” candidate has carried the state for sure.

    That's a natural interpretation as well. I wonder if it'd be possible to at least guess at whether it was that or "my person won't win so what's the point". There are probably so many other factors. For example the "did not vote map" looks surprisingly similar to the SOVI map: https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/place-health/php/svi/svi-interactive-map.html. I'm not entirely sure what to make of that, my knee jerk thought is that you could see more "what's the point they're both the same" or "neither side actually cares about my needs" among disenfranchised people in general combined with maybe more voter suppression efforts in disenfranchised areas? Would voting being a federal holiday or easier to vote by mail make those areas specifically better?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (2 children)

    The only difference is that the Democrats wouldn't be threatening to end the civilization. AIPAC and thus Israel has our country by the proverbial testicles.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (1 child)

    AIPAC & Israel? This post is about domestic data centers. It's easy to say "bOtH SiDeS" and that nothing would be different if we had successfully kept Trump from returning to power...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • Between work, here, and other things pulling at me, got confused what it was about. My apologies.

    For the actual topic, though, I still don't see Dems are more than the control opposition party. You throw enough at most of them and they'll let you do something.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 37 points 7 months ago
    [+] 33 points 7 months ago* (1 child)
  • [–] 31 points 7 months ago
    [–] 29 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    A thing I was wondering why haven't have happened already have happened.

    Now I wonder when a terminal cancer patient will use their last strength to drive a fuel truck into a datacenter.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 50 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    Small price to pay for 2nd amendment

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 48 points 7 months ago* (2 children)

    It's what Kirk would have wanted RIP

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 49 points 7 months ago (9 children)

    Eco-terrorists do your thing. No one else will stop this stupid forward momentum on AI as it needs to suck in huge resources just so some dipshit can request porn comics.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    I actually think the market will beat them too it. Between Sora being taken out behind the barn, the laundry list of layoffs that indicate these companies are getting high off their own supply, and lastly the very real realization that all this "investment" is a massive billion dollar circle jerk.

    It looks too bubbly to me, we can only hope the pop happens fast enough that these companies cant cannabalize eachother, but thats wishful thinking.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (6 children)

    Please people, you need to stop spreading this misinformation.

    AI is not killing the environment. If you track the sources of these claims, you will find that they first were spread by McKinsey and Bloomberg, who have a vested interest in publicly traded oil companies and other polluting corporations. They love to spread this misinformation because it distracts from the REAL environmental harms being caused by fossil fuels, meat farming, and concrete production. See drawdown.org for the specific numbers.

    We need to stay focused on climate change and not get distracted. Our efforts should be focused on stopping new coal plants and factory farms. Datacenters, and especially the one in indianapolis which wouldn’t even have used water for cooling, have minimal environmental impact compared to trump’s coal, oil, and farming policies which will kill tens of millions in the long run and have already sparked wars.

    We can fix climate change. We were so close to replacing fossil fuels that oil companies got scared; we can’t afford to give up at the last mile.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (5 children)

    The opportunity cost for AI is pretty high. That's a lot of resources spent on something that's bad for the world, even if it's not specifically the worst for climate change reasons in a first order sense.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (4 children)

    And you as a commenter have an opportunity cost too. You could be spending your time raising money for PETA or Oxfam, or researching climate change, or commenting about the effects of factory farms, but instead you’re just griping about the current popular thing to gripe about.

    I donate 100% of my salary (I’m retired but still work) to fighting income inequality, climate change, animal abuse, and transphobia. It’s so frustrating to see people waste their time hating on things they don’t even understand just to fit in. Maybe this doesn’t describe everyone commenting, but if it does maybe they should get off their high horse. Sometimes the best thing a person can do for the world is shut up and give space for an actual expert to talk.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (3 children)

    I really don't think the billions of dollars spent on AI is equivalent or at all analogous to the time I spend posting on the toilet or while waiting for things to happen at work.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago* (2 children)

    Honest question, you used the word opportunity cost, but do you not understand what that is? With an opportunity cost, you compare two possible actions that you can take. It doesn’t make sense to compare your action (supporting those that propagate misinformation) to the actions of an entire economy (investing in ai infrastructure), because the actor is not the same in both.

    With an opportunity cost, you can only compare the actions that you can take, and you alone. I listed a few comparable actions in my previous comment: research climate change, research the climate effects of ai, post about factory farms, read up on solar, invite others to donate money to clean water causes. These can all be done on the toilet. Any of these is a better use of your time than joining a mob of people against a cause you don’t even fully understand.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (1 child)

    There is opportunity cost of Microsoft et al investing billions in AI instead of doing anything else. That money could have been spent on renewable energy research, improving efficiency of existing hardware, supporting work from home to reduce commuting, whatever. Those opportunities are lost because they went with AI instead.

    I didn't mean my opportunity cost from the toilet.

    AI is a poor use of limited resources and opportunity.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 17 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    It's nice they set the note on the ground, under their mat. Instead of on a rock, through their window.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 66 points 7 months ago* (7 children)

    p r a x i s

    didn't make 'a good point', homie made THIRTEEN of 'em

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Why we talkin bout the Klingon dilithium mining moon?

    Everything's fine on Praxis, don't need help nope it's all good thanks move along

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 41 points 7 months ago
    1. nobody died

    2. cause is good

    Verdict- Doesn't look like anything to me.

  • source
  • [–] 43 points 7 months ago
    [–] 50 points 7 months ago (7 children)

    The Free Market in action. If you keep behaving in conflict with the people, eventually the people are going to stop it. Ask that health care CEO. This was a threat this time. It won't be a threat next time.

    This guy is a politician, and a constituent is telling him the position he should take. He should do his job, and listen to his constituent.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    Violence is never the answer, except when it is.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (2 children)

    The problem with violence being the answer is that you need a specific scope and endpoint for it. Otherwise it becomes it's own problem.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago

    Valid. It is a useful tool, to be employed in the proper circumstances, to achieve a specific objective.

    Unfortunately, these MAGA Morons have no idea what any of that means. Violence is just "Wicked Cool!" to them.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 7 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 8 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    I bet this isn't what really happened. It has the feel of a scam. The payout this guy has been promised for helping get that slop farm built must be huge.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 25 points 7 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 31 points 7 months ago (8 children)

    No one leaves notes, it's not the 60's anymore. This looks like a inside job or a setup to paint anti data center people as violent people.

    The reality is if you are FOR data centers, you are the problem and need to do more research. No one should be for any data centers to be built in this country, I wouldn't want to live near one. I also hate paying the electric bill for billionaires, they need to pony up all the money, they have plenty!

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 7 months ago

    Or put them in places humans can't easily live.

    It could be in cold remote areas where they could get the sun for several months at a time, charge huge batteries, and run on battery during the dark months.

    They'd have colder ambient air so cheaper to cool.

    Or.. return to efficient software values, live within our means, and serve applications from more easily cooled low power chips.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    I'm curious what you mean by "no data centers should be built in this country".

    Almost everything on the Internet exists because a data center is hosting it.

    If all of the data centers exist outside of the country, not only latency issues would arise but data security and availability concerns as well.

    If there were no datacenters anywhere, the Internet would be a much slower, unreliable, and sparesly populated place.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago

    They're pushing hard for them in Georgia. I get a lot of ads on YouTube about how Georgia Power has recently locked in a rate for three years. (I believe they're ignoring that it shot up a lot prior to this, but I might be mistaken.) It's so weird seeing ad campaigns that are targeting businesses instead of individuals (or at least individuals working for businesses).

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›