5 ms·

These problems feel like they should be solveable. Communities should set strict noise limits and fine the heck out of data centers for exceeding them. Data cen

These problems feel like they should be solveable. Communities should set strict noise limits and fine the heck out of data centers for exceeding them. Data centers should be required to provide their own power, like this datacenter [1] in Ireland (and ideally a large portion of it should be renewable). They should also be required to minimize water usage, like this Microsoft design that uses closed-loop cooling [2]. It will increase costs, but so be it. If you're going to build these things, then do it right. A bigger problem, however, is that this requires functional government working in the interests of its residents. [1] https://www.computeforecast.com/news/pure-dc-avk-europe-data-center-microgrid-dublin/ https://www.computeforecast.com/news/pure-dc-avk-europe-data... [2] https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-cloud/blog/2024/12/09/sustainable-by-design-next-generation-datacenters-consume-zero-water-for-cooling/ https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-cloud/blog/2024/12...

ryukoposting 5mo ago
should is carrying the weight of the universe here.
- freetime2 5mo ago
  What's the alternative - give up all hope of civilization being able to accomplish anything good? I get it - there's lobbyists and "enshitification" and a million other things wrong with the world to contend with. But there's an awful lot of good things that humans have built, too. Despite certain aspects of life getting shittier, I still don't want to go back in time and live in any other point in history. And I can't even if I did. I guess one alternative would be to just stop building data centers altogether. But to me that feels like giving up on progress. I'd rather try to figure out ways to make data centers suck less.
  - fellowmartian 5mo ago
    It’s debatable whether data centers is “civilization”. Civilization, in theory, should be a a benefit to all. Data centers provide basically zero benefit to communities where they get built. They don’t even get to tax the value the compute inside creates. It’s just an ugly, loud, power and water hungry box as far as they’re concerned.
  - ryukoposting 5mo ago
    > What's the alternative Protest? Picket? Boycott? Hold your boss accountable for this shit? Come on, the type of person who browses HN is just about the only type of person who has both the desire to impart change, and the means to do so.
analog31 5mo ago
My dad was on his city's environmental control board. He learned that noise is actually quite hard to regulate. And every locality has to figure out their own unique noise ordinance. It should be solveable, but it might be realistically hard to solve.
- lofaszvanitt 5mo ago
  What is hard to regulate? You point a directional mike towards the data center and towards the plains where sheeps roam. Compare, send the cheques and nuke them.
  - pllbnk 5mo ago
    I think that it's because noise is regulated in terms of decibels while humans only perceive noise by the sound's frequency and profile. For example, a fairly low frequency constant 30 dB low-frequency sound might be perceived very differently than the sound of the same parameters but following a footstep pattern, and I am speaking from my own anecdotal experience here. So, what we can measure is sound, but we don't have a good standard for measuring noise.
protocolture 5mo ago
>Data centers should be required to provide their own power, like this datacenter [1] in Ireland Data Centers should buy power at whatever the going rate of electricity is. It is advantageous for some data centers to build their own power, but its not the norm nor should any industry be required to. Whats next Aluminium smelting? Oil production? Big box retail? Just because an industry that uses power has become the enemy of the week doesnt exclude them from market access. That should be obvious. >A bigger problem, however, is that this requires functional government working in the interests of its residents. It requires governments reacting to random populist impulses that don't fundamentally aid the community to ban random industries from the grid. Why not pressure the government to react to power price increases with additional supply like anyone who spends 20 seconds considering this issue would come up with?
- freetime2 5mo ago
  > Whats next Aluminium smelting? Oil production? Big box retail? Yes I would say any large construction project that carries a risk of negatively impacting its community should be required to mitigate those issues in order to gain approval. Otherwise you are just passing on those negative "externalities" to someone else.
  - protocolture 5mo ago
    >Yes I would say any large construction project that carries a risk of negatively impacting its community should be required to mitigate those issues in order to gain approval. Otherwise you are just passing on those negative "externalities" to someone else. Common utilities are common to everyone. Signing a contract for supply of power is what they should be doing. The only "negative externality" is that extra supply might, in whatever jurisdiction this is, not be brought online as demand increases. That's a feature of however your polity has designed their power market. The "negative externality" was brought into existence when that system was designed. The same effects occur regardless of who purchases the power, including residences. Not to mention that, it literally benefits you to have this generation on grid, instead of running privately where only the datacentre can access it. Growing the common utility is better than demanding the monster of the week goes off and sources their own generation. Dress it up in whatever language you want but this is just populism, trying to punish whatever the media has made you angry at today.

ryukoposting 5mo ago

should is carrying the weight of the universe here.

freetime2 5mo ago
What's the alternative - give up all hope of civilization being able to accomplish anything good? I get it - there's lobbyists and "enshitification" and a million other things wrong with the world to contend with. But there's an awful lot of good things that humans have built, too. Despite certain aspects of life getting shittier, I still don't want to go back in time and live in any other point in history. And I can't even if I did. I guess one alternative would be to just stop building data centers altogether. But to me that feels like giving up on progress. I'd rather try to figure out ways to make data centers suck less.
- fellowmartian 5mo ago
  It’s debatable whether data centers is “civilization”. Civilization, in theory, should be a a benefit to all. Data centers provide basically zero benefit to communities where they get built. They don’t even get to tax the value the compute inside creates. It’s just an ugly, loud, power and water hungry box as far as they’re concerned.
- ryukoposting 5mo ago
  > What's the alternative Protest? Picket? Boycott? Hold your boss accountable for this shit? Come on, the type of person who browses HN is just about the only type of person who has both the desire to impart change, and the means to do so.

analog31 5mo ago

My dad was on his city's environmental control board. He learned that noise is actually quite hard to regulate. And every locality has to figure out their own unique noise ordinance. It should be solveable, but it might be realistically hard to solve.

lofaszvanitt 5mo ago
What is hard to regulate? You point a directional mike towards the data center and towards the plains where sheeps roam. Compare, send the cheques and nuke them.
- pllbnk 5mo ago
  I think that it's because noise is regulated in terms of decibels while humans only perceive noise by the sound's frequency and profile. For example, a fairly low frequency constant 30 dB low-frequency sound might be perceived very differently than the sound of the same parameters but following a footstep pattern, and I am speaking from my own anecdotal experience here. So, what we can measure is sound, but we don't have a good standard for measuring noise.

protocolture 5mo ago

>Data centers should be required to provide their own power, like this datacenter [1] in Ireland Data Centers should buy power at whatever the going rate of electricity is. It is advantageous for some data centers to build their own power, but its not the norm nor should any industry be required to. Whats next Aluminium smelting? Oil production? Big box retail? Just because an industry that uses power has become the enemy of the week doesnt exclude them from market access. That should be obvious. >A bigger problem, however, is that this requires functional government working in the interests of its residents. It requires governments reacting to random populist impulses that don't fundamentally aid the community to ban random industries from the grid. Why not pressure the government to react to power price increases with additional supply like anyone who spends 20 seconds considering this issue would come up with?

freetime2 5mo ago
> Whats next Aluminium smelting? Oil production? Big box retail? Yes I would say any large construction project that carries a risk of negatively impacting its community should be required to mitigate those issues in order to gain approval. Otherwise you are just passing on those negative "externalities" to someone else.
- protocolture 5mo ago
  >Yes I would say any large construction project that carries a risk of negatively impacting its community should be required to mitigate those issues in order to gain approval. Otherwise you are just passing on those negative "externalities" to someone else. Common utilities are common to everyone. Signing a contract for supply of power is what they should be doing. The only "negative externality" is that extra supply might, in whatever jurisdiction this is, not be brought online as demand increases. That's a feature of however your polity has designed their power market. The "negative externality" was brought into existence when that system was designed. The same effects occur regardless of who purchases the power, including residences. Not to mention that, it literally benefits you to have this generation on grid, instead of running privately where only the datacentre can access it. Growing the common utility is better than demanding the monster of the week goes off and sources their own generation. Dress it up in whatever language you want but this is just populism, trying to punish whatever the media has made you angry at today.