4 ms·

Maybe everyone in this village already has their own local AI rig. From a technical perspective, data centers aren't providing public goods - rather they're mor

Maybe everyone in this village already has their own local AI rig. From a technical perspective, data centers aren't providing public goods - rather they're more like attractive nuisances that foster centralized control.

thewebguyd 5mo ago
Mentioned earlier in the thread, but maybe these data centers should start providing public goods to the towns/counties in which they build? Free high speed internet, heavily subsidized compute, maybe partner with local colleges to offer labs & internships, etc. There's no reason they can't be economic accelerators for the towns they are in.
- mindslight 5mo ago
  I agree it would help their image, but this all sounds like more corporate centralization to me. I've got a functioning electric coop that provides gigabit internet for a flat fee every month. I think they're even doing trial runs of 10Gb, but I haven't looked into it because I simply don't need it. Internet access can be a solved problem these days, where there is the political will. And if anything local colleges should be offering compute resources to the larger community, not themselves relying on scraps of generosity from commercial buildouts.
  - trollbridge 5mo ago
    With a new data centre, your electric coop rates can go up with no benefit to you whatsoever.
    - jeffbee 5mo ago
      In America electric rates are increasing due to 20 years of stagnation and failure to invest in transmission, and new data centers are on average associated with lower, not higher retail electric rates. This is because large consumers drive down marginal prices. In your country things may be proceeding differently, but that's the story here.
      - mindslight 5mo ago
        This doesn't really hold when we're talking about discrete pieces of infrastructure that may need to be built. If the current transmission infrastructure is fine for the current users, and then a new large user comes along that necessitates new infrastructure, that is a huge new cost that simply that simply didn't exist without that large user. I believe in many areas this is the kind of infrastructure investment that regulated utilities can easily pass onto existing rate payers, which is where the problem/narrative comes from in the first place. So your theory doesn't match the actual results people are complaining about. Same thing when datacenters take power generation into their own hands and build new gas turbines rather than solar/batteries or paying to expedite grid construction. And I'm willing to believe these problems happen in a minority of cases, but the problem is that they seemingly do happen and existing residents are left without recourse.
        jeffbee 5mo ago
        Your model of the infrastructure as a perpetually sustaining asset is not correct. These assets must be continually refreshed and improved or their value disappears. The emergence of the data center as a point load has merely coincided with the existing grid infrastructure falling to pieces. The places with the highest marginal energy prices such as California are the places with the fewest data centers. Large consumers invest in transmission assets that benefit everybody.
        mindslight 5mo ago
        You would seem to be saying that grid infrastructure needs continual refreshing and improvement to continue carrying the same amount of power? That strikes me as a tall claim, given what I already know about electricity (electronic design and house wiring). I am open to entertaining it, but you've got to provide a reference or at least just describe the mechanism. This is talking about the capital assets themselves, which are of course separate from regular maintenance like tree trimming. About the only thing I can think of is something like a bulk of the grid infrastructure was built out 30/40/50/whatever years ago, and is now all reaching its expected lifetime all at once, and perhaps some types of equipment are strictly retired at the end of their lifespan lest they fail catastrophically.

thewebguyd 5mo ago

Mentioned earlier in the thread, but maybe these data centers should start providing public goods to the towns/counties in which they build? Free high speed internet, heavily subsidized compute, maybe partner with local colleges to offer labs & internships, etc. There's no reason they can't be economic accelerators for the towns they are in.

mindslight 5mo ago
I agree it would help their image, but this all sounds like more corporate centralization to me. I've got a functioning electric coop that provides gigabit internet for a flat fee every month. I think they're even doing trial runs of 10Gb, but I haven't looked into it because I simply don't need it. Internet access can be a solved problem these days, where there is the political will. And if anything local colleges should be offering compute resources to the larger community, not themselves relying on scraps of generosity from commercial buildouts.
- trollbridge 5mo ago
  With a new data centre, your electric coop rates can go up with no benefit to you whatsoever.
  - jeffbee 5mo ago
    In America electric rates are increasing due to 20 years of stagnation and failure to invest in transmission, and new data centers are on average associated with lower, not higher retail electric rates. This is because large consumers drive down marginal prices. In your country things may be proceeding differently, but that's the story here.
    - mindslight 5mo ago
      This doesn't really hold when we're talking about discrete pieces of infrastructure that may need to be built. If the current transmission infrastructure is fine for the current users, and then a new large user comes along that necessitates new infrastructure, that is a huge new cost that simply that simply didn't exist without that large user. I believe in many areas this is the kind of infrastructure investment that regulated utilities can easily pass onto existing rate payers, which is where the problem/narrative comes from in the first place. So your theory doesn't match the actual results people are complaining about. Same thing when datacenters take power generation into their own hands and build new gas turbines rather than solar/batteries or paying to expedite grid construction. And I'm willing to believe these problems happen in a minority of cases, but the problem is that they seemingly do happen and existing residents are left without recourse.
      - jeffbee 5mo ago
        Your model of the infrastructure as a perpetually sustaining asset is not correct. These assets must be continually refreshed and improved or their value disappears. The emergence of the data center as a point load has merely coincided with the existing grid infrastructure falling to pieces. The places with the highest marginal energy prices such as California are the places with the fewest data centers. Large consumers invest in transmission assets that benefit everybody.
        mindslight 5mo ago
        You would seem to be saying that grid infrastructure needs continual refreshing and improvement to continue carrying the same amount of power? That strikes me as a tall claim, given what I already know about electricity (electronic design and house wiring). I am open to entertaining it, but you've got to provide a reference or at least just describe the mechanism. This is talking about the capital assets themselves, which are of course separate from regular maintenance like tree trimming. About the only thing I can think of is something like a bulk of the grid infrastructure was built out 30/40/50/whatever years ago, and is now all reaching its expected lifetime all at once, and perhaps some types of equipment are strictly retired at the end of their lifespan lest they fail catastrophically.