3 ms·

I just wanted to take the opportunity to say something positive about these companies, since it's so rare that I find anything positive to say. I applaud these

I just wanted to take the opportunity to say something positive about these companies, since it's so rare that I find anything positive to say. I applaud these efforts. The amount of energy that's going to be burned by these things is crazy. Whether or not that energy use is wasted is an open question. I think it's a positive thing if the companies making these bets don't offload the costs of those bets onto public utilities, and also that they're looking at energy sources that have less of an adverse environmental impact than things like coal. Kudos, guys.

hetrem 2y ago
> since it's so rare that I find anything positive to say Wonder why that is? > I think it's a positive thing if the companies making these bets don't offload the costs of those bets onto public utilities This is written as if with concern for public utilities which makes me wonder: Do you think they’ll stop using public utilities? Do public utilities want that? How long until these companies try to outright replace public utilities? Still want that public money. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/10/03/nuclear-microsoft-ai-constellation/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/10/03/nuclear-m... > Whether or not that energy use is wasted is an open question. Slop is a waste for us, but a boon in: data harvesting, surveillance, labor and union costs; for them. > also that they're looking at energy sources that have less of an adverse environmental impact than things like coal. You think these companies made this decision with altruistic concern for the environment?! M$FT makes recall a required dependency in explorer.exe -> “I'm so glad I can finally compliment these guys for caring about the environment.” Make it make sense.
- nine_k 2y ago
  > Do you think they’ll stop using public utilities? They likely will stop using electric utilities. It's just simpler this way, more predictable. > Do public utilities want that? Maybe they do; a huge consumer usually negotiates special rates, and may require more costly infrastructure work because the capacity is not sufficient for them. > made this decision with altruistic concern for the environment?! No, more likely with an egotistic concern for the environment. Billionaires don't have a spare copy of Earth (Mars is even worse), and if you've got billions and can actually move the needle of the climate change to keep Earth in a better shape for you and your children, won't you?
- JohnFen 2y ago
  You seem to think that I'm praising these companies. I'm certainly not. I think they're a net negative on society. That said, it's as important to acknowledge when they do something positive, even a little bit, as it is to call them out when they do bad things. More important, even, since if all a person can do is condemn then that person becomes less effective in terms of encouraging change. You want both carrot and stick. > You think these companies made this decision with altruistic concern for the environment?! Of course not. Nothing any of these companies do is altruistic. It's all about the Benjamins, baby.

hetrem 2y ago

> since it's so rare that I find anything positive to say Wonder why that is? > I think it's a positive thing if the companies making these bets don't offload the costs of those bets onto public utilities This is written as if with concern for public utilities which makes me wonder: Do you think they’ll stop using public utilities? Do public utilities want that? How long until these companies try to outright replace public utilities? Still want that public money. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/10/03/nuclear-microsoft-ai-constellation/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/10/03/nuclear-m... > Whether or not that energy use is wasted is an open question. Slop is a waste for us, but a boon in: data harvesting, surveillance, labor and union costs; for them. > also that they're looking at energy sources that have less of an adverse environmental impact than things like coal. You think these companies made this decision with altruistic concern for the environment?! M$FT makes recall a required dependency in explorer.exe -> “I'm so glad I can finally compliment these guys for caring about the environment.” Make it make sense.

nine_k 2y ago
> Do you think they’ll stop using public utilities? They likely will stop using electric utilities. It's just simpler this way, more predictable. > Do public utilities want that? Maybe they do; a huge consumer usually negotiates special rates, and may require more costly infrastructure work because the capacity is not sufficient for them. > made this decision with altruistic concern for the environment?! No, more likely with an egotistic concern for the environment. Billionaires don't have a spare copy of Earth (Mars is even worse), and if you've got billions and can actually move the needle of the climate change to keep Earth in a better shape for you and your children, won't you?
JohnFen 2y ago
You seem to think that I'm praising these companies. I'm certainly not. I think they're a net negative on society. That said, it's as important to acknowledge when they do something positive, even a little bit, as it is to call them out when they do bad things. More important, even, since if all a person can do is condemn then that person becomes less effective in terms of encouraging change. You want both carrot and stick. > You think these companies made this decision with altruistic concern for the environment?! Of course not. Nothing any of these companies do is altruistic. It's all about the Benjamins, baby.