3 ms·

Have you considered you have cause-and-effect backwards? Any human advancement hurts the planet and then the burden is on environmentalists to bring awareness?

Have you considered you have cause-and-effect backwards? Any human advancement hurts the planet and then the burden is on environmentalists to bring awareness? Why would a for-profit not hurt the environment for more profit if it isn't illegal and won't get them sued (for more than they profited)? There's a rich history of them doing exactly that. Similarly, governments have done horrific environmental damage and it was up to environmentalists to create the awareness to make it stop. I honestly don't know how you can look at a world with record numbers of wildfires, communities fighting over water supplies, and for-profit companies say that water beyond subsistence levels isn't a human right and think "oh yeah, environmentalists are looking for a reason why this water-consuming thing is bad". Especially when the same technology could be powered in a way that doesn't pollute as much and cooled in a way that doesn't consume as much water -- if only the environment was more important than shareholders.

bilsbie 1y ago
Like I said I’m on your team and extremely pro environment. I just see media alarmism in this issue and think there are more important things to focus on. but I’m willing to ask: what’s your data on how water is being used improperly on these data centers? And what is the documented harm? Are plants and animals downstream of a data center dying from lack of water? Also keep in mind the funny thing about water alarmism is that even after water is used it stays in earths water cycle. Watering crops returns to aquifers. Evaporated water rains down somewhere else. It’a not like oil we used once and it’s gone.
- healsdata 1y ago
  You commented on an article that contains data and said it was alarmist. From my perspective, that means you're not even open to hearing data because you've already decided. If you had problems with the data provided, you would have refuted it instead of resorting to ad hominem attacks.

bilsbie 1y ago

Like I said I’m on your team and extremely pro environment. I just see media alarmism in this issue and think there are more important things to focus on. but I’m willing to ask: what’s your data on how water is being used improperly on these data centers? And what is the documented harm? Are plants and animals downstream of a data center dying from lack of water? Also keep in mind the funny thing about water alarmism is that even after water is used it stays in earths water cycle. Watering crops returns to aquifers. Evaporated water rains down somewhere else. It’a not like oil we used once and it’s gone.

healsdata 1y ago
You commented on an article that contains data and said it was alarmist. From my perspective, that means you're not even open to hearing data because you've already decided. If you had problems with the data provided, you would have refuted it instead of resorting to ad hominem attacks.