Ehh, this post just makes me wish they had finished a badass canal network
post
My closest city is actually filled with 100+ year old buildings that have old pictures of the building in various points in history. Someone went through a lot of trouble about a decade ago to get everyone on board with displaying historical stuff.
There's a road that follows one of the old canals, and a tunnel still technically accessible beneath the main downtown road where deliveries were hauled in order to keep the road up top for PEOPLE to walk on, and carriages were rare until the 1900s.
Then everything changed in the early-mid 1900s and no hint of canals even exists today in the city, other than one road named "canal" and one named "water". But without knowing the history, they're just names.
So, not finishing much-hyped projects is a species thing and not just a personal flaw of mine?
Good to know, I think?
We did finish the railways. We just ripped them out when we built the interstates
It's a bit like here in the UK. There used to be a lot more rail tracks but got removed, presumably when cars because common and lorries were capable of carrying large amounts of goods.
It's a huge shame because a lot of places which were connected no longer are. I would love to be able to hop on a train and get to smaller rural areas rather than large towns and cities on a route which heads to London and back.
There is some success though, if anybody is interested then look at Swanage railway. They managed to get everything undone and reconnect to the national network and is now a hotspot for old steam engines.
Totally random and fun fact- Chinatown (the hard boiled detective movie) had a sequel written with the troubled detective investigating a dirty judge who was paid off by the car companies to allow them to buy up and tear out the trolly system in LA in favor of their highway designs. The judge had his own possy who acted as enforcers for the car company as they pushed their scheme to force the colored section of town to sell their land and make way for the highways.
The sequel didn't happen, but the script was rewritten into what we now know as Who Framed Rodger Rabbit?. If you go back and rewatch it knowing that, it all makes so much more sense. The cartoon facade is just the face for the dirty truth of what happened in America in the 1950's, but add in the happy ending of stopping the dirty judge and saving the 'colored' toon town.
I live right near a canal that was completed in 1832, and it was essential and a massive success.
Many people know the story of Canada (or Britain and its North American colonists) burning down the White House. It wasn't just the White House though, it was a bunch of public buildings in Washington including the White House, the Capitol and the Washington Navy Yard. What people don't know is that this was in retaliation for the Americans burning and looting York (today's Toronto), which was at that point a small town and the capital of the province of Upper Canada. The Americans broke the laws of war when they did that, so there was a temptation to do the same to them in Washington, but cooler heads prevailed and only the public buildings were burned.
After the war of 1812 ended, the British realized how vulnerable Canada was to the Americans. In particular, the only way to ship things from Montreal to the strategically important towns to the west (Kingston, York, etc.) was down the Saint Lawrence seaway, and the Americans controlled the lower bank of that route. As a result, the British decided to build the Rideau Canal, so goods could be shipped from Montreal to Kingston (and then from there onto the Great Lakes) while avoiding the choke points on the St. Lawrence.
The Canal was finished in 1832 and it was a huge success. Not only did it protect Canadian shipping from a possible US attack, it also avoided all the rapids, etc. on the St. Lawrence. For a few decades it was the main way to move goods and people west, allowing for areas to the west of Montreal to be settled. Canada's capital, Ottawa, wouldn't exist if it weren't for the Rideau Canal. Kingston, at the mouth of the Canal gained a lot of economic significance because of the Canal and was a unified Canada's capital from 1841 to 1844. And Toronto was settled by people moving through the Canal, it nearly doubled in size between 1832 and 1834.
By the late 1850s, a railway was built between Bytowne / Ottawa and the St. Lawrence, and this railway was used instead of the canal. But, the demand might not have existed for the railway if people hadn't been able to move west thanks to the canal.
It may be that people saw the success of that canal, and of other important canals, and that there was an overbuilding as a result of that. And, that when the railways came there was a more effective way of doing some of the same things. But, canals were incredibly important for a few decades and shape the world we live in now. So, how dare you compare them to AI datacentres, you jerk.
And despite the canal not being heavily used for shipping anymore, it can provide lots of community value for water sports and winter skating. I don’t know that obsolete data centres will bring us this degree of recreation
I mean, they'll be great places to provide free housing to the homeless.
Err, no. ICE will probably just hollow them out and turn them into concentration camps.
Guess it depends which way the pendulum swings.
Datacenter buildings aren't suitable to be homes. Warehouses maybe, factories with some adjustment.
Suitable? They're talking about ICE.
For homes?
Datacenters don't belong to ice, at least not directly and not yet
Bruh, let me introduce you to civil asset forfeiture
I mean those would be great for the sail boats we need to fix the climate crisis
In the 1800s canal boats were pulled by horses and people, sailing is pretty impractical for a straight narrow waterway
The US has so many large natural waterways and so much coastal land that canals were largely unnecessary and only really dug where it would be beneficial to avoid detours and dangerous areas like rapids or shoals. Plus much of the early US economy (in the colonial era, at least) was focused on the export of exotic goods to Europe, so colonies that became major cities like NYC were often built at the mouth of a river where river barges could unload valuable goods like beaver pelts right next to boats getting ready to make their way across the Atlantic.
The Mississippi River, the second largest river in the US, is over 3,765 km long, stretching almost from Canada all the way to the Gulf of Mexico. Why build a canal when nature has already done the work for you?
Canals were really the technology of the 18th century. In 1827 the Baltimore and Ohio was opened as the first passenger and freight railroad and railroads started popping up extrenely rapidly, initially chartered by basically every city to be built along existing roads, then later built with their own right of way.
West of Appalachia, the land is relatively flat and the existing permanent native American settlements were sparse since their population had collapsed from disease brought by colonists centuries earlier. Railroads engaged in real estate speculation platting out and selling land in cities every 10-20 miles (because the early steam locomotives needed water every 10-20 miles, so might as well have them take on passengers/freight too!) and the federal government was practically paying railroads to take land to better establish the United States' claim to the land. This rail building boom peaked around the 1860s around which point consolidation started reducing the quantity of rails as railroads consolidated and began building more focused trunks out of their existing right of way.
In fact, because of how the land grants were written most railroads built a single track in a straight line as fast as possible between their start and end, then once they'd secured the grant for connecting the two points by the extremely aggressive deadline, only then would they start actually rebuilding the track so that it would actually be usable for real rail service.
So in short, it was a combination of lack of existing (white) cities, land grants by a new government trying to secure its land claims that it believed were it's manifest destiny, plus innovations in steam engines to make steam locomotives truly viable right at the time when the flegling nation had its feet under it and was ready to start investing heavily into itself.
TL;DR Right place, right time, right legal environment and right technology
Also should acknowledge that the Great Lakes and Mississippi River (and major tributaries) made for efficient water shipping to a lot of the major cities of 19th century America. Cincinnati, Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit, and Milwaukee all have ports.
And yeah, as you say, there just weren't major settlements of European Americans anywhere else yet except in the plantation south. California wound up aggressively settled before transcontinental rail, but even there was largely along the coasts. Our national population remains pretty coastal alongside density in the great lakes and major tributaries of the Mississippi.
Native Americans did in fact have permanent cities, like notably Cahokia in what's now Illinois. There were also some earlier colonial settlements along major waterways like the Mississippi. It's likely there were quite a few permanent cities that were lost to time because they weren't built with materials that would last centuries of abandonment. Notably there are thousands of effigy mounds dotted across the landscape of basically the entire Midwest, which is a very permanent sign of long term habitation or at least locations returned to frequently enough to be worth creating such a monument
I wonder how the local climate would change with a national canal network... All that water evaporating will change some things.
I grew up on the Wabash/Erie canal. It was finished and brought a load of commerce to the region. This is not a post about data centers.
Canals and trains are still the two of the most important parts of the goods transport network. It's not a good analogy, cities who finished the canals and trains did better.
Moving Goods by water is the most economical way to move them, trains are next, trucks are last, I mean after like wagons and shit. We do things the inefficient way because vested interests make money doing it that way. Good luck trying to be more efficient. It's not going to fucking happen. Not with these fucking clowns in charge. Or the previous clowns that are supposed to be our clowns.
Existing water*
Diging canals is dangerous and expensive.
Depends if there's malaria.
We have tech that can solve most of the dangers, except malaria.
We have drugs and plants that can be taken as a prophalactic against Malaria.
In fact, the colonists never could penetrate the tropic and subtropics well until they found out about quinine from the peruvian natives. They took it all the time to ward off the parasite.
Malaria can be treated with those same drugs an plants as well. Artemisia and Mexican Prickly Poppy both work.
Yeah, I meant we don't have a vaccine.
And those prophylactics have a lot of negative side effect's. We're certainly better than before, but Malaria still kills a lot of people today
I know quinine has some side effects, not sure about mexican prickly poppy or artemisia, could look it up.
There is a malaria vaccine, it just isn't that effective, I think there are more than one. 30% effective if I recall, and even then it might just have lessened the effects and not prevented the infection. I want to say Sanofi but I don't recall.
As to the deaths, it really matters what strain of malaria, there are a lot, and also what they use to treat it. Because using drugs, the parasite gets immune to it, especially when they don't use them in combination with another antimalarial to prevent resistance forming, which I believe is one reason some parts of Africa have up to half of kids with brain damage from this fucking parasite, (it breaks from liver into bloodstream and colonizes the brain and the body lights us with fever over 106 degrees, which is brain damage.)
But the plants that treat it, they produce several related drugs around 10% of alkaloids or active ingredient, then a dozen or more at 1% or so, 80% being the main compound. Ie quinine bark the main one is chloroquinine or whatever. Anyway, prevents resistance from forming like with just the isolated chloroquinine, of which malaria is mostly immune to now.
We use trucks because of the "last mile" problem. Ships are the most efficient. But you ain't pulling up a container ship to your front door. Same with trains. Both are great at moving a lot of stuff from one major point to another. But not good at all for local delivery.
Nor are they good for fast delivery of smaller amounts. And y'all want your Amazon shit delivered as fast as possible to your door. Or the arugula and potatoes you will buy at your local grocery for supper tonight. I'm not pumping up trucks, but they make that possible.
Logistics is tiered and integrated every last inch of the way.
Never have I seen so many ships carrying goods in my life than on the ChangJiang, when I lived in Wuhan.
Absolutely mind-blowing. A line of ships going both ways all the way to the horizon, all day, every day. I can't even fathom the quantities being carried.
I'm thinking data centres might be like landlines. For a while they were the only option, but then mobiles came along.
In today's context, the mobile is analogous to a fast home computer that can run AI locally.
We might end up with more telephone exchanges than we need.
(for the international audience, mobile = cell phone / handy; landline = inland phone, PSTN.)
Similar analogy can apply to trains etc.
We don't have time for a handy, Jim
My ideal scenario:
- As technology improves, it becomes increasingly easy to run AI locally at home.
- The hardware companies/data center AI companies eventually fuck each other over because big corporations always fuck everyone else over eventually and it stops becoming profitable.
- NVIDIA etc. come crawling back to the consumer market, offering things at reasonable prices again. Data centers sell off all their shit and absolutely flood the market with cheap RAM & graphics cards.
- Some other company has started making the hardware in the meantime and the public tells NVIDIA to go fuck themselves and we watch them go into a slow IBM style decline.
Although what will probably happen is the companies will fuck each other over, prices will stay high forever and the data centers that go out of business will just burn all their hardware and all of this will have meant nothing.
I agree with almost all of this, however, much of the RAM during data centre selloffs would be in the SOCAMM format, so not useful for anything consumer nor anything older than a couple years in the enterprise space. If there is such an influx however, I suspect that SOCAMM might become a new format for consumer and enterprise electronics after some time. Other than that, there would also be standard DDR5 DIMMs.
Oh, Nvidia want's locally ran ai, but not on your hardware. They want their locked down hardware on your property, using your power and resources.
Gonna rate my take on this point by point because you're speaking my language and I like where your head is at
AI will by nature become easier to run. We're pushing Moore's law already but technology will in general keep improving. I don't know how worth it it'll be, and most companies seem to be into the idea of the average consumer not actively owning the computing power, instead of doing everything on the cloud. Time will tell how that goes.
Big corporations will likely eat each other when the AI bubble pops, whatever that looks like. Should be a fun time though.
NVIDIA will do the same thing over and over. We saw it with crypto, same with AI. They will surrender to whichever monetary source is biggest at the time, and dumpster the loyal customers. If they change for the better, it's either by accident or because customers lost faith in the company and went elsewhere. I don't have high hopes for that company.
We are seeing china start to make ram, I vaguely remember seeing another graphics card manufacturer? It's very possible that there's a market niche that will be filled here.
As technology improves, it becomes increasingly easy to run AI locally at home.
Yes, but what ai? Yes, more models will be easier to run at home as hardware increments over time. However training is the expensive part, plus they’re probably expecting that to keep scaling with ever higher end models
It's much more likely to be like internet fiber. Some was needed/used.
datacenters will always leverage scale, and AI is only economic at 16+ concurrent users. delivers 3x the tokens/s of a single user. Current rental rates for H200s are below their runcosts. Capacity is already too high in US. Innovations for smaller, faster, cheaper models are providing significant value for less hardware. Gemini flash 3.5 is very small and fast, at much lower cost as top 2 US labs. Deepseek v4 has massive cost reductions that will filter down to rest on industry, especially for context compression which is what allows more users on a single GPU cluster. Qwen 3.6 does bring size down enough to run 3-4 month old state of the art models on consumer hardware, but again multi user service at (pro instead of industrial) 96gb ram.
MTP and Turboquant are other technologies that increase tps delivery at less ram. Software stacks making better use of GPUs is eating token demand growth by itself even as exaggerated capacity comes online at slower pace than hardware investment values justified.
Who uses handy? I've never heard that before. Now I've heard it I think we need to use handy and landy.
Germans do. And prolly german-speaking countries like Austria and Switzerland as well.
Fun fact: the "walkie talkie" was the backpack radio (scr-300) in WWII, and the smaller handheld (scr-536) was the "handie talkie", but the former became the common phrase phrase used for handheld radios.
Man has an AI pfp though... Is he anti or pro?
top 91 comments