3 ms·
This article seems like more of at attempt on the part of the Wall Street Journal and the prestige media memeplex it represents to characterize AI as harmful an
by JuniperMesos 9mo ago
This article seems like more of at attempt on the part of the Wall Street Journal and the prestige media memeplex it represents to characterize AI as harmful and unpopular - particularly unpopular among rural Trump voters - than it is reporting on organic rural opposition to data centers being built. It's heavy on quotes from think tank people, community organizers who clearly talk about rural Republicans as an outgroup, polticians making relatively bland statements, etc., who are talking about AI being bad in a general sense or talking in a meta way about rural opposition to datacenters being a phenomenon that exists. It doesn't have much reporting on local people specifically objecting to data centers near them, or any indication of how many people actually object to this.
My own thinking is that the prestige media memeplex really hates AI and has a big problem with silicon valley tech companies, and this colors all their reporting about AI datacenters. See for instance https://andymasley.substack.com/p/the-ai-water-issue-is-fake https://andymasley.substack.com/p/the-ai-water-issue-is-fake, and https://www.wired.com/story/karen-hao-empire-of-ai-water-use-statistics/ https://www.wired.com/story/karen-hao-empire-of-ai-water-use..., particularly the parts about prestige media journalist Karen Hao getting the amount of water datacenters use wrong by multiple orders of magnitude in order to make AI datacenters seem like a problem. Plenty of people who clearly hate the concept of AI also throw around "datacenter water use" as a general attack against AI, completely thoughtlessly.
I strongly suspect that the prestige media journalists Anvee Bhutani and Amrith Ramkumar who wrote this article are doing something similar. Are there really significant numbers of people in rural areas who object to a thousand-acre data center project? That's not that big in a rural farmland context.
The one thing that strikes me as something rural people might organically care about is if the presence of a data center near them appreciably raises their power bills or makes the local electric grid less reliable. Data centers really do use a lot of electricity, and that's the specific issue the Republican Missouri senator was quoted as addressing. Still, if power bills are actually going up in a way that meaningfully affects people, it shouldn't be hard to find quotes from people who have seen their power bills go up. Increased local energy cost should be the focus of this entire article if that is in fact a problem, and I'm suspicious of the fact that it isn't.