5 ms·

What is the advantage to not keeping them a secret? The populist movement against AI is growing rapidly, and is supported by bunk science which affirms people's

What is the advantage to not keeping them a secret? The populist movement against AI is growing rapidly, and is supported by bunk science which affirms people's pre-existing biases (like the idea that data centers suck up all the water in a community, or raise the ambient temperature by a single-double digit number of degrees F). AI is a genuine source of economic growth. I can understand wanting to curtail it, but in return you are getting fewer jobs, less economic growth, more money to other countries who don't allow protesting or even complaining about data centers, etc.

lcfcjs6 4mo ago
[dead]
everdrive 4mo ago
>but in return you are getting fewer jobs, Certainly not in any meaningful way.
iijaachok 4mo ago
You're conflating AI and AI Data centres. What kind of "jobs" does AI data centre creates? More jobs for factory workers who assemble video cards to be shipped and installed in a rack?
- legitster 4mo ago
  I think OP is talking about the downstream implications of productivity growth. Which is still yet hypothetical.
  - insane_dreamer 4mo ago
    AI is designed to funnel productivity growth away from workers (less labor, downward pressure on remaining jobs) and to shareholders so not only is it hypothetical but if it becomes a reality (which seems probable), it is highly destructive to the average person
  - croon 4mo ago
    The downstream portion isn't proven, and more importantly, even if it was, it's not localized to where the data center is built (and its effect on the local population).
- redox99 4mo ago
  Data centers don't grow on trees.
- chickenpotpie 4mo ago
  Data centers require lots of technicians to install, maintain, and decommission servers. Who do you think installs those video cards?
  - nonethewiser 4mo ago
    How many technicians? And from where? Its unclear to me how often this stuff actually needs to be done. And how resilient the overall system is to failure. Is it imperative to swap out one point of failure immediately or can you let them batch up and send Joe from California out qaurterly?
    - chickenpotpie 4mo ago
      Technicians are constantly behind in work. Many data centers are pulling 24/7/365 shifts to keep up with demand. Larger data centers have hundreds of full time employees. Yes many servers are left in fail over states for long periods of time, but that can only be done because new capacity is actively being deployed to make up for that fail over. Modern data centers are far too big for a single person to be repairing things every once in a while. Stuff is breaking every hour of every day
      - nonethewiser 4mo ago
        Thanks for the info. So the technicians are there on site daily? dozens? hundreds? Im not too surprised there is quite a bit to replace. Sure the failure rate should be low but the scale is massive. Its interesting to get an order of magnitude though. Every hour is more frequent than I thought.
      - RajT88 4mo ago
        100-200 FTE's per data center by one estimate. I have let's say 17 data centers being built in my town. 1700 jobs is not enough according to the people in opposition. The real number is likely higher, and my town is under 30k people.
        4mo ago
deleted 4mo ago
[deleted]
Karrot_Kream 4mo ago
The US has deindustrialized and since the rise of NIMBY politics hasn't built new industry in any scale at all. The first freeway revolts happened in 1959. In the meantime, basically everyone has agreed that industrial growth and manufacturing as an abstract concept is Good (TM) but definitely not in my backyard. For a long time these kinds of things were just being built in neighborhoods where the residents were too poor/politically disconnected to organize, but eventually that too became difficult. Since automation became big in industrial processes, most industrial development has been labor-poor (few workers) but continues to be land intensive. That means while industry might generate tax revenue, it doesn't have a coalition of labor advocates willing to champion the capacity because not many jobs are created. So we find ourselves in 2026 with an inability to actually build new industrial capacity in any form. The anti-tech crowd is angry at the data centers, but the same exact thing is happening when it comes to permitting new power generation and transmission lines. In fact many of the concerns related to data center power usage could be allayed if we had more power generation but nobody wants power generation in their backyard. For decades now the US has been dancing around the idea that there is no by-right way to build anything anymore, so building any new large structure becomes a collective action problem that just ends up failing. Even when things get built, costs are massive. This has even affected things that the US is ostensibly really good at making such as highways, as evident in the recent Texas highway expansions ongoing.
- nonethewiser 4mo ago
  This is an excellent analysis. The NIMBYism is pretty self-evident I think but I never thought about the disconnect automation may have caused between industry and advocates for industry.
- legitster 4mo ago
  I think it's good to remind people that the industrial revolution was very close to never happening. This is from Dud Dudley writing in 1665, whose own ventures to manufacture steel en masse before Abraham Darby succeeded. > "I have been opposed by many adversaries, as by wood colliers, mine owners, and others who, being poor men, did, by misguided advice, throw down and destroy two of my furnaces and my works, and caused much of my pigs and bar iron to be carried away." There were plenty of examples through history of "near-misses" where establishment land/wealth holders suppressed nascent steel industries. It was almost an accidental series of coincidences that the industrial revolution happened - the Glorious Revolution in England and Abraham Darby's secret financing network.
blanched 4mo ago
Why are they bunk science? I’m not an environmental expert, but the research papers and policies I’ve read don’t seem to be egregiously wrong. I’m asking genuinely, I’m open to changing my mind here.
- Karrot_Kream 4mo ago
  Andy Massey writes about this stuff and is generally heavily disliked by the anti-data-center folks * https://blog.andymasley.com/p/data-center-land-use-issues-are-fake https://blog.andymasley.com/p/data-center-land-use-issues-ar... * https://blog.andymasley.com/p/i-might-have-found-the-specific-way https://blog.andymasley.com/p/i-might-have-found-the-specifi...
- atleastoptimal 4mo ago
  Regarding water usage, in general data centers do not use more water than other types of heavy manufacturing > The Georgia data center is only using ~2% of the county’s water. For comparison, a pharmaceutical manufacturing plant is using ~4% of the county’s water. A construction plant for Rivian cars is using about the same amount of water as Meta’s data center. The data center is functioning like any other normal industry in the county. https://blog.andymasley.com/p/the-ai-water-issue-is-fake https://blog.andymasley.com/p/the-ai-water-issue-is-fake Regarding data centers increasing ambient temp, the paper is simply measuring the surface temperature of the buildings, going against the claim that a data center, merely by its presence in a community, raises the ambient temperature by a few degrees or more https://andymasley.com/writing/data-centers-heat-exhaust-is-not/ https://andymasley.com/writing/data-centers-heat-exhaust-is-... I know both sources are from the same guy, but he cites many primary sources in his articles
  - blanched 4mo ago
    Thanks for the reply and links, I’ll give it a read today.
  - nonethewiser 4mo ago
    >Regarding water usage, in general data centers do not use more water than other types of heavy manufacturing Are the claims really that "Data centers use more water than other types of heavy manufacturing"? I dont think so. Even if thats true, that doesn't mean they cant have a disastrous effect on the local water supply. This isnt a good rebuttal. Frankly I tend to think the anti-datacenter crowd is overreacting. But I don't think you've addressed the real criticisms being levied. In some passing research I saw the datacenters do continuously consume water (its not a one time cost like some claims I've read). And smaller size ones may use water equivalent to around 1000 households, and larger ones may consume closer to the equivalent of around 20,000 households. Evidently the massive one in Utah will at least double the state's entire consumption of water. Can all of these places handle it? I dont know. But that's the question, not if other types of heavy manufacturing have higher demands. And frankly it's inevitable that at least some locations cannot handle it. Which doens't mean you should be anti-datacenter in general. It means you can't just blanket dismiss the water concern for all locations.
esafak 4mo ago
Since electricity demand has outpaced supply they are increasing prices: https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2025-ai-data-centers-electricity-prices/ https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2025-ai-data-centers-elec...
kys11 4mo ago
[dead]
expedition32 4mo ago
more money to other countries who don't allow protesting or even complaining about data centers, The point of living in a rich country is that you don't lower your standards to shit holes with corrupt governments...
insane_dreamer 4mo ago
> I can understand wanting to curtail it, but in return you are getting fewer jobs, since AI -- as designed to be deployed -- is taking away jobs, then by enabling data centers you are in fact getting fewer jobs yours is the same perverse argument that was used to build Walmart Supercenters (lower prices! they'll create jobs!) which literally destroyed the economy of many small towns and communities, and paved the way for every other big box retailer to do the same so don't be surprised that people aren't eager to enable something that is designed to destroy their livelihood
doom2 4mo ago
> AI is a genuine source of economic growth. If only they could spur even more economic growth with the planning and construction of more fabs for all the RAM it will need (assuming the level of growth that their S-1s are claiming)

lcfcjs6 4mo ago

[dead]

everdrive 4mo ago

>but in return you are getting fewer jobs, Certainly not in any meaningful way.

iijaachok 4mo ago

You're conflating AI and AI Data centres. What kind of "jobs" does AI data centre creates? More jobs for factory workers who assemble video cards to be shipped and installed in a rack?

legitster 4mo ago
I think OP is talking about the downstream implications of productivity growth. Which is still yet hypothetical.
- insane_dreamer 4mo ago
  AI is designed to funnel productivity growth away from workers (less labor, downward pressure on remaining jobs) and to shareholders so not only is it hypothetical but if it becomes a reality (which seems probable), it is highly destructive to the average person
- croon 4mo ago
  The downstream portion isn't proven, and more importantly, even if it was, it's not localized to where the data center is built (and its effect on the local population).
redox99 4mo ago
Data centers don't grow on trees.
chickenpotpie 4mo ago
Data centers require lots of technicians to install, maintain, and decommission servers. Who do you think installs those video cards?
- nonethewiser 4mo ago
  How many technicians? And from where? Its unclear to me how often this stuff actually needs to be done. And how resilient the overall system is to failure. Is it imperative to swap out one point of failure immediately or can you let them batch up and send Joe from California out qaurterly?
  - chickenpotpie 4mo ago
    Technicians are constantly behind in work. Many data centers are pulling 24/7/365 shifts to keep up with demand. Larger data centers have hundreds of full time employees. Yes many servers are left in fail over states for long periods of time, but that can only be done because new capacity is actively being deployed to make up for that fail over. Modern data centers are far too big for a single person to be repairing things every once in a while. Stuff is breaking every hour of every day
    - nonethewiser 4mo ago
      Thanks for the info. So the technicians are there on site daily? dozens? hundreds? Im not too surprised there is quite a bit to replace. Sure the failure rate should be low but the scale is massive. Its interesting to get an order of magnitude though. Every hour is more frequent than I thought.
    - RajT88 4mo ago
      100-200 FTE's per data center by one estimate. I have let's say 17 data centers being built in my town. 1700 jobs is not enough according to the people in opposition. The real number is likely higher, and my town is under 30k people.
      - 4mo ago

deleted 4mo ago

[deleted]

Karrot_Kream 4mo ago

The US has deindustrialized and since the rise of NIMBY politics hasn't built new industry in any scale at all. The first freeway revolts happened in 1959. In the meantime, basically everyone has agreed that industrial growth and manufacturing as an abstract concept is Good (TM) but definitely not in my backyard. For a long time these kinds of things were just being built in neighborhoods where the residents were too poor/politically disconnected to organize, but eventually that too became difficult. Since automation became big in industrial processes, most industrial development has been labor-poor (few workers) but continues to be land intensive. That means while industry might generate tax revenue, it doesn't have a coalition of labor advocates willing to champion the capacity because not many jobs are created. So we find ourselves in 2026 with an inability to actually build new industrial capacity in any form. The anti-tech crowd is angry at the data centers, but the same exact thing is happening when it comes to permitting new power generation and transmission lines. In fact many of the concerns related to data center power usage could be allayed if we had more power generation but nobody wants power generation in their backyard. For decades now the US has been dancing around the idea that there is no by-right way to build anything anymore, so building any new large structure becomes a collective action problem that just ends up failing. Even when things get built, costs are massive. This has even affected things that the US is ostensibly really good at making such as highways, as evident in the recent Texas highway expansions ongoing.

nonethewiser 4mo ago
This is an excellent analysis. The NIMBYism is pretty self-evident I think but I never thought about the disconnect automation may have caused between industry and advocates for industry.
legitster 4mo ago
I think it's good to remind people that the industrial revolution was very close to never happening. This is from Dud Dudley writing in 1665, whose own ventures to manufacture steel en masse before Abraham Darby succeeded. > "I have been opposed by many adversaries, as by wood colliers, mine owners, and others who, being poor men, did, by misguided advice, throw down and destroy two of my furnaces and my works, and caused much of my pigs and bar iron to be carried away." There were plenty of examples through history of "near-misses" where establishment land/wealth holders suppressed nascent steel industries. It was almost an accidental series of coincidences that the industrial revolution happened - the Glorious Revolution in England and Abraham Darby's secret financing network.

blanched 4mo ago

Why are they bunk science? I’m not an environmental expert, but the research papers and policies I’ve read don’t seem to be egregiously wrong. I’m asking genuinely, I’m open to changing my mind here.

Karrot_Kream 4mo ago
Andy Massey writes about this stuff and is generally heavily disliked by the anti-data-center folks * https://blog.andymasley.com/p/data-center-land-use-issues-are-fake https://blog.andymasley.com/p/data-center-land-use-issues-ar... * https://blog.andymasley.com/p/i-might-have-found-the-specific-way https://blog.andymasley.com/p/i-might-have-found-the-specifi...
atleastoptimal 4mo ago
Regarding water usage, in general data centers do not use more water than other types of heavy manufacturing > The Georgia data center is only using ~2% of the county’s water. For comparison, a pharmaceutical manufacturing plant is using ~4% of the county’s water. A construction plant for Rivian cars is using about the same amount of water as Meta’s data center. The data center is functioning like any other normal industry in the county. https://blog.andymasley.com/p/the-ai-water-issue-is-fake https://blog.andymasley.com/p/the-ai-water-issue-is-fake Regarding data centers increasing ambient temp, the paper is simply measuring the surface temperature of the buildings, going against the claim that a data center, merely by its presence in a community, raises the ambient temperature by a few degrees or more https://andymasley.com/writing/data-centers-heat-exhaust-is-not/ https://andymasley.com/writing/data-centers-heat-exhaust-is-... I know both sources are from the same guy, but he cites many primary sources in his articles
- blanched 4mo ago
  Thanks for the reply and links, I’ll give it a read today.
- nonethewiser 4mo ago
  >Regarding water usage, in general data centers do not use more water than other types of heavy manufacturing Are the claims really that "Data centers use more water than other types of heavy manufacturing"? I dont think so. Even if thats true, that doesn't mean they cant have a disastrous effect on the local water supply. This isnt a good rebuttal. Frankly I tend to think the anti-datacenter crowd is overreacting. But I don't think you've addressed the real criticisms being levied. In some passing research I saw the datacenters do continuously consume water (its not a one time cost like some claims I've read). And smaller size ones may use water equivalent to around 1000 households, and larger ones may consume closer to the equivalent of around 20,000 households. Evidently the massive one in Utah will at least double the state's entire consumption of water. Can all of these places handle it? I dont know. But that's the question, not if other types of heavy manufacturing have higher demands. And frankly it's inevitable that at least some locations cannot handle it. Which doens't mean you should be anti-datacenter in general. It means you can't just blanket dismiss the water concern for all locations.

esafak 4mo ago

Since electricity demand has outpaced supply they are increasing prices: https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2025-ai-data-centers-electricity-prices/ https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2025-ai-data-centers-elec...

kys11 4mo ago

[dead]

expedition32 4mo ago

more money to other countries who don't allow protesting or even complaining about data centers, The point of living in a rich country is that you don't lower your standards to shit holes with corrupt governments...

insane_dreamer 4mo ago

> I can understand wanting to curtail it, but in return you are getting fewer jobs, since AI -- as designed to be deployed -- is taking away jobs, then by enabling data centers you are in fact getting fewer jobs yours is the same perverse argument that was used to build Walmart Supercenters (lower prices! they'll create jobs!) which literally destroyed the economy of many small towns and communities, and paved the way for every other big box retailer to do the same so don't be surprised that people aren't eager to enable something that is designed to destroy their livelihood

doom2 4mo ago

> AI is a genuine source of economic growth. If only they could spur even more economic growth with the planning and construction of more fabs for all the RAM it will need (assuming the level of growth that their S-1s are claiming)