all 2 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 6 points 5 months ago*

"making a company PAY for something? That's commiesocialmarxism!" - a republican somewhere (and, for some reason an alarming amount of democrats)

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago*

    Adam Schiff is a piece of shit and this "bring your own power" thing is bullshit. It just means that the datacenters will do what Elon Musk did in Memphis and install a bunch of unregulated turbine generators to spew poisonous nox into the air.

    This bullcrap is supported by Trump's "Crypto/AI tsar" David Sachs.

  • source
  • 70 comments in c/politics@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 108 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    Fuck it. Make them use renewables as well.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 77 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    One step further.

    Data centers must provide more clean energy to the grid than they remove.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 5 months ago*

    Trying to think of a monkey’s paw situation :

    The AI companies would nuke cities to change the other side of the equation.

    Edit: that doesn’t work.

    They would nuke the solar panels not on their property. They don’t need to provide any renewable energy if they don’t draw in any.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago

    I'd say make them fund the creation of power plants that will produce 200% of their 24 hour usage in 24 hours.

    They shouldn't just make what they use. They should be improving the communities where they operate.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 63 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    Pay!? Make them BUILD 2x the capacity they need and give the rest away to the grid. Don't let them get away with using money to escape the social consequences of their choices. The responsibility to ensure they have no impact should be forced to be theirs and theirs alone.

    Write laws that make them cease to exist if they don't do this.

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

    Given we have the technology, any new construction should be required to be environmentally neutral at a minimum, ideally with ongoing improvement.

    If they need to use millions of gallons of groundwater? Great, go fucking wild, but directly fund managed aquifer recharge projects to replace that groundwater at an equal or greater rate.

    Increases in resource consumption should be covered entirely by the data center plus improvements to benefit the community.

    No longer should big business be used as a means to siphon the value of labor and natural resources and concentrate it for selfish use by the worst of humanity.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 47 points 5 months ago

    How is this not the default?

    We are doomed, what a bunch of clowns

  • source
  • [–] 45 points 5 months ago (4 children)

    Why aren’t they paying for their own power?

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 5 months ago

    They're not paying for additive demand. If grid updates or plant expansions cost $1b then that's distributed across all customers equally based on their consumption. So let's say there's 1m customers and the utility spread the costs over 10 years... $100 more per customer assuming equal consumption across.

    Schiff is proposing the data center itself is saddled with the $1b and all other customers bills are held flat.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 29 points 5 months ago

    Data Centers should be forced to pay to return the cost of power by consumers to normal. So as Datacenters buy power at the going rate, increasing price, they will also subsidize consumers to the point that power costs are the same as if there were no Datacenter.

    Also, LLMs are worthless and will burn life away from this planet.

  • source
  • [–] 58 points 5 months ago (4 children)

    How about pay for ALL the power?

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    Nah, I think we should give them all the power. All at once.

    🤨 1
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 5 months ago

    Not just pay for their own power, TAX THE FUCK OUT OF THEM.

    They're in a hurry because there's a FUCKTON of cash in it, we need to TAX them like we ACTUALLY KNOW THAT.

  • source
  • [–] 23 points 5 months ago* (7 children)

    I don't get it. Why aren't they already paying for their power? Why is this bill necessary? It sounds like common fucking sense to me, so why isn't that the default?

    So who's paying for their power now?

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 5 months ago (4 children)

    They do pay for their power. The bill would require them to pay for grid upgrades that their usage makes necessary.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    Well yeah, but my question was: why does this need a bill at all? By default they should pay for their own shit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 5 months ago

    At least my provider, when they need to build a new plant or do capacity upgrades, they get the PSC to give them blanket increases in service charge or kWh-rate, on the basis that everybody contributes to the higher demand. Now we've got single customers claiming they want the full output of two or three power plants, and why should I pay the mortgage on those plants for 20 years? When the data center will be gone in 5?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    The grid itself is public property serviced by contractors using public funds. Datacenters will overwhelm that grid without extreme improvements.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 19 points 5 months ago

    Do water too.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 5 months ago (6 children)

    I hear data centers are exceedingly vulnerable to sabotage

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 5 months ago (4 children)

    You mean vulnerable to power outages? Because "sabotage" would be illegal and all of that

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (2 children)

    What are you talking about? We just want to get a bunch of traditional wooden shoes. You know, sabots? Then take pictures of them doing silly things around and maybe hopefully in a bunch of datacenters. Then make collages from those photos. Where did you go to clown college?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

    Well they're very accident prone. Lots of dangerous rednecks out there in the deserts shooting wildly without knowing what's beyond their targets. So much delicate equipment exposed to the rain of stray bullets. And it'd really suck to work there and find your car's radiator coolant pouring out from a .30 caliber hole.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 5 months ago

    We can’t afford the pedophile class anymore

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    It amazes me that they don’t. You’d think it would be ideal in fact so they can be self sufficient.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 5 months ago

    It's way more complicated to build a GW-scale power plant than a GW-scale data center, mostly because the power plant is subject to environmental studies, fuel supply, etc, so a DC looking for investors that can just say they're going to build a big warehouse, fill it with computers, and get electricity, magically, from the local utility, gets to outsource the hardest problem, and stands a better chance of getting their funding (regardless of whether they actually build anything).

    I forget where I keep seeing that some huge fraction of proposed DCs will/are never built, suggesting that many of them are just investor scams. Showing their work on power supply would (presumably) make the scam harder to run.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    That's shit.

    We need it to be renewable power.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 10 points 5 months ago*

    If I’m not sharing the dollars, I’m not paying for the volts.

    Or the stuff that transmits/makes the volts.

    But data center owners will sue and it’ll go to the SC and they’ll rule corporations are citizens and therefore tax payers pay.

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 5 months ago

    Same should go for any utility.

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    I don't understand. Did we not already have that rule?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago*

    No, electricity bills have been skyrocketing all over the US because electric companies have been passing the costs incurred by AI data centers onto the nearby residents. The AI companies don't want to pay for it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    Please don't let this blasphemy go. They're using your fresh water, at your expense, for THEIR benefits. For AI clankers who cant fix an Excel sheet properly.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago

    My company already does this.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    are they making their own H2O, too?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago

    Or in other words, as the cons would say - Schiff and other Democrats are extremists.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago

    And water too! Especially if they waste it!

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago

    Right now a data center will come in and demand the power grid be expanded. They will bribe local officials whovwill then allow the electric company to massively increase rates to cover the new infrastructure the data center needs. Its pretty much the same as how the water service is handled.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago

    Schiff Proposes Bill Requiring Easy Mode Copper Mines to Pay for Own Power

  • source
  • [+] -6 points 5 months ago (14 children)

    Lousy dEmOCrAtZ fascist lite GeNoSiDEee

    down with the oppressor bourgeoise swine-pigs! I know everything about the American politics! voting is a scam! Newsome is evil genosider! Etc etc

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 5 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (9 children)
  • [–] 0 points 5 months ago (8 children)

    I mean . . . I feel like it was pretty prominent. But, yes.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago (7 children)

    Clearly you're new to the fediverse.

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

    We use tone modifiers? </sassy gassy urethra turtle>

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

    Clearly you're confused about my point. I'm saying that the /s is not "prominent" or obvious because we do in fact have idiots who think exactly what the user said in his initial comment.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 5 months ago (2 children)
  • 2 comments in c/politics@lemmy.dbzer0.com view that post
    [–] 2 points 5 months ago

    How is this not already a fucking requirement?

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago

    Yeah that seems reasonable, I don't think any sort of deal for power would outweigh any impact on local people for power increase.

    Hell I'd say they need to pay a percentage of any power increase (like not all but something reasonable, I really have no idea like 40-60%?). I have no idea of true impacts of differences but my understanding is we have so many people living close to the line of poverty, why have a datacenter if it makes everything so much more expensive for people not using it? Especially when it's not like that center is going to do anything but suck power and provide few local jobs.

  • source