3 ms·

Aesthetics are important. Everyone enjoys looking at a golf course, even non-golfers. Nobody wants to look at a datacenter. My general thought is, what’s the a

Aesthetics are important. Everyone enjoys looking at a golf course, even non-golfers. Nobody wants to look at a datacenter. My general thought is, what’s the argument for placing them in populated areas to begin with? Why dedicate land use for it in Nashville? Wouldn’t putting it 40 miles outside town work just as well? Why don’t we create development zones specifically for these things? In Dallas we have a similar thing for our distribution hub, it’s south of downtown kind of in the outskirts and in an economically struggling area. Same for industrial areas, it’s usually something that’s zoned to a particular area so residential neighborhoods aren’t really affected. It’s not land where the community may benefit more by literally anything else (sometimes even a Walmart is better than a datacenter). I assume that’s where this is all headed, cities need to roll out their long term vision of where datacenters fit into their city, if at all. Until then, it’s all these small battles and the information used by opponents doesn’t really matter. If enough people don’t want it, it should probably go somewhere else. This is not serving any community benefit so I don’t see any reason why it has to exist where the developers want it to. Expecting rational opposition is actually irrational. They just don’t want it. The why is varied and probably based more on emotion than anything else.

kube-system 2mo ago
> what’s the argument for placing them in populated areas to begin with? Colos advertise their proximity to populated areas. It is desirable for physical access, latency, and connectivity.
- hackernud3s 2mo ago
  Right? How do people not understand this? Have fun with your super-high latency when the DCs leave your city.
  - kube-system 2mo ago
    It’s not necessarily “super high” latency to connect to data centers at a distance. Whether or not it matters depends on the application, and for most consumer applications it isn’t a huge issue. For AI data centers it doesn’t really matter.
  - deleted 2mo ago
    [deleted]
  - 3eb7988a1663 2mo ago
    The signal speed in fiber is some 200k km/s. If you go 10 miles outside of a city, you are adding 0.1ms ping, and you will have dramatically fewer pitch forks. The ping between New York and LA is ~70msec. Chatting with a LLM is not latency sensitive.
    - bryan_w 2mo ago
      Is this DC even for LLMs? I've not seen any sign of that. Considering that the initial build out was only 10MW, it seems unlikely that was the primary usecase.
    - kube-system 2mo ago
      But if it’s a colo it’s unlikely to have many LLMs running there. The big AI datacenters are mostly purpose built.
- otherme123 2mo ago
  That makes no sense: are they going to use this datacenter exclusively for Nashville people use? We regularly access data from datacenters thousands of kilometers away, and the latency is acceptable. Not even pro-gamers would notice the latency increase if the datacenter moved 10 kilometers further in any direction, which is virtually empty in Nashville. I live in Spain, and my latency to my VPS at Germany, 3,000 kilometers away, is 40 milliseconds. Good enough. A traceroute shows that I have to pass through Madrid (400 km away), with a ping of 5 ms. Do anyone believe that moving datacenters within neighborhoods to shave additional 5 or 10 km is noticeably good for the latency, when 100 km mean extra 1 ms on average? Apparently the Nashville neighbors don't give a shit about -0.1 ms latency. We have a couple of small datacenters nearby. Luckily they are somewhat isolated from where people live, because the things are noisy at all times, and each year they add more capacity, more refrigeration towers and more noise (all efficiency gained at the CPU/GPU level is used to increase density, not to lower consumption or cooling needs). Nobody would want to live less than 200 meters away from them.
  - kube-system 2mo ago
    If it’s a colo… yes, it would be primarily local customers. Data centers are not just for consumer B2C services. There’s a lot of stuff that runs in data centers that are both more important and more sensitive to latency or connectivity than video games. Even for something as simple as a business that needs somewhere to run critical VDI hosts — then yes, they need low latency and somewhere that their techs can physically get to if they need to fix something. You may also need interconnects to specific physical networks that are only available in certain places. You may need direct connections to partner equipment. This requires physical presence. Colo space is not something you rent if a VPS is good enough for what you’re doing.
    - conductr 2mo ago
      If they zoned it, then the city is saying “you will commute”. It doesn’t have to be unreasonably far away, just less convenient than a Walmart. Most people commute for work anyway, business rent storage/warehouse space in cheaper part of town than their office space, etc. Its hyperlocalness isn’t crucial to its function.
jmkb 2mo ago
I do not enjoy looking at a golf course. (A minigolf course is a different kettle of fish.. of course.)
no-name-here 2mo ago
> placing them in populated areas The photo at the very top of the OP article shows a very low-density area. If someone was expecting to see urban-type density, it isn’t in the location shown in the photo. It's mostly trees, industrial facilities, and a train line.
deleted 2mo ago
[deleted]
darth_avocado 2mo ago
Try living next to a constant 80-100 dB hum 24x7. You’d not be complaining about people being irrational.
- bruce511 2mo ago
  I'm sure there are data centers that make a noise. And if you're firing up a generator that's a separate issue. But the noise from computer fans and power supplies is easy to ameliorate and can be a trivial permit requirement. The noise is all high-frequency which means most anything will stop it. Frankly building an earth berm around the site would kill all the noise and make it better to look at. Throw in some trees and you're done. I get the water and power concerns. But (in the right locations) both are solvable. Power can be balanced with power generation (off site) especially solar and wind. Water isn't really "used" it's just necessary as a heat-sink so as long as it's available it can stay available. Yes, govt should write permits carefully. And there are locations it is not suitable. But opposition to data centers in general is just hype.
  - lovich 2mo ago
    > The noise is all high-frequency which means most anything will stop it. Frankly building an earth berm around the site would kill all the noise and make it better to look at. Throw in some trees and you're done. Have any of these data centers done this? All the ones I’ve seen haven’t even put up a sound baffling wall. If a data center’s owner has taken steps to ameliorate or completely prevent their negative externalities then opposition to them definitely looks like NIMBYism. If, however, you’re just saying they _could_ prevent the problems, but then never do, I’m even more inclined to support the people telling them to fuck off.
    - bruce511 2mo ago
      The developer (likely) won't do it in isolation. But the point of building permits, and building regs and so on is to create requirements that let the development live in harmony with the community. If local govt is not stipulating the requirements then that's on them. People don't need to be "against data centers" they need to be "for no noise" and so on.
kasey_junk 2mo ago
https://amp.thenewstribune.com/news/local/community/gateway/g-news/article315967017.html https://amp.thenewstribune.com/news/local/community/gateway/...
Mikhail_Edoshin 2mo ago
A normal computer company mixes finely with residential and commercial spots: clean and quiet operation, employees can live closely, etc. A woodworking shop would be noisier. But it has to be normal, not a cryptominer or something like that.
kortilla 2mo ago
Most of the datacenters I’m seeing protested out in the west are already in zoned areas for industry or are in the middle of nowhere and people still reject it.
- conductr 2mo ago
  Software eating the world was a cute saying until it physically manifested as datacenter proliferation. I think it’s the case that people simply don’t like tech right now. The industry has gone from hero to villain in many people’s minds. When the narrative is openly, we’re all in on AI, and AI will take your job, then they say “can we build a datacenter in your neighborhood?” pushback should be expected. Even if this specific DC is not AI focused, when people hear datacenter that’s where their mind goes.

kube-system 2mo ago

> what’s the argument for placing them in populated areas to begin with? Colos advertise their proximity to populated areas. It is desirable for physical access, latency, and connectivity.

hackernud3s 2mo ago
Right? How do people not understand this? Have fun with your super-high latency when the DCs leave your city.
- kube-system 2mo ago
  It’s not necessarily “super high” latency to connect to data centers at a distance. Whether or not it matters depends on the application, and for most consumer applications it isn’t a huge issue. For AI data centers it doesn’t really matter.
- deleted 2mo ago
  [deleted]
- 3eb7988a1663 2mo ago
  The signal speed in fiber is some 200k km/s. If you go 10 miles outside of a city, you are adding 0.1ms ping, and you will have dramatically fewer pitch forks. The ping between New York and LA is ~70msec. Chatting with a LLM is not latency sensitive.
  - bryan_w 2mo ago
    Is this DC even for LLMs? I've not seen any sign of that. Considering that the initial build out was only 10MW, it seems unlikely that was the primary usecase.
  - kube-system 2mo ago
    But if it’s a colo it’s unlikely to have many LLMs running there. The big AI datacenters are mostly purpose built.
otherme123 2mo ago
That makes no sense: are they going to use this datacenter exclusively for Nashville people use? We regularly access data from datacenters thousands of kilometers away, and the latency is acceptable. Not even pro-gamers would notice the latency increase if the datacenter moved 10 kilometers further in any direction, which is virtually empty in Nashville. I live in Spain, and my latency to my VPS at Germany, 3,000 kilometers away, is 40 milliseconds. Good enough. A traceroute shows that I have to pass through Madrid (400 km away), with a ping of 5 ms. Do anyone believe that moving datacenters within neighborhoods to shave additional 5 or 10 km is noticeably good for the latency, when 100 km mean extra 1 ms on average? Apparently the Nashville neighbors don't give a shit about -0.1 ms latency. We have a couple of small datacenters nearby. Luckily they are somewhat isolated from where people live, because the things are noisy at all times, and each year they add more capacity, more refrigeration towers and more noise (all efficiency gained at the CPU/GPU level is used to increase density, not to lower consumption or cooling needs). Nobody would want to live less than 200 meters away from them.
- kube-system 2mo ago
  If it’s a colo… yes, it would be primarily local customers. Data centers are not just for consumer B2C services. There’s a lot of stuff that runs in data centers that are both more important and more sensitive to latency or connectivity than video games. Even for something as simple as a business that needs somewhere to run critical VDI hosts — then yes, they need low latency and somewhere that their techs can physically get to if they need to fix something. You may also need interconnects to specific physical networks that are only available in certain places. You may need direct connections to partner equipment. This requires physical presence. Colo space is not something you rent if a VPS is good enough for what you’re doing.
  - conductr 2mo ago
    If they zoned it, then the city is saying “you will commute”. It doesn’t have to be unreasonably far away, just less convenient than a Walmart. Most people commute for work anyway, business rent storage/warehouse space in cheaper part of town than their office space, etc. Its hyperlocalness isn’t crucial to its function.

jmkb 2mo ago

I do not enjoy looking at a golf course. (A minigolf course is a different kettle of fish.. of course.)

no-name-here 2mo ago

> placing them in populated areas The photo at the very top of the OP article shows a very low-density area. If someone was expecting to see urban-type density, it isn’t in the location shown in the photo. It's mostly trees, industrial facilities, and a train line.

deleted 2mo ago

[deleted]

darth_avocado 2mo ago

Try living next to a constant 80-100 dB hum 24x7. You’d not be complaining about people being irrational.

bruce511 2mo ago
I'm sure there are data centers that make a noise. And if you're firing up a generator that's a separate issue. But the noise from computer fans and power supplies is easy to ameliorate and can be a trivial permit requirement. The noise is all high-frequency which means most anything will stop it. Frankly building an earth berm around the site would kill all the noise and make it better to look at. Throw in some trees and you're done. I get the water and power concerns. But (in the right locations) both are solvable. Power can be balanced with power generation (off site) especially solar and wind. Water isn't really "used" it's just necessary as a heat-sink so as long as it's available it can stay available. Yes, govt should write permits carefully. And there are locations it is not suitable. But opposition to data centers in general is just hype.
- lovich 2mo ago
  > The noise is all high-frequency which means most anything will stop it. Frankly building an earth berm around the site would kill all the noise and make it better to look at. Throw in some trees and you're done. Have any of these data centers done this? All the ones I’ve seen haven’t even put up a sound baffling wall. If a data center’s owner has taken steps to ameliorate or completely prevent their negative externalities then opposition to them definitely looks like NIMBYism. If, however, you’re just saying they _could_ prevent the problems, but then never do, I’m even more inclined to support the people telling them to fuck off.
  - bruce511 2mo ago
    The developer (likely) won't do it in isolation. But the point of building permits, and building regs and so on is to create requirements that let the development live in harmony with the community. If local govt is not stipulating the requirements then that's on them. People don't need to be "against data centers" they need to be "for no noise" and so on.

kasey_junk 2mo ago

https://amp.thenewstribune.com/news/local/community/gateway/g-news/article315967017.html https://amp.thenewstribune.com/news/local/community/gateway/...

Mikhail_Edoshin 2mo ago

A normal computer company mixes finely with residential and commercial spots: clean and quiet operation, employees can live closely, etc. A woodworking shop would be noisier. But it has to be normal, not a cryptominer or something like that.

kortilla 2mo ago

Most of the datacenters I’m seeing protested out in the west are already in zoned areas for industry or are in the middle of nowhere and people still reject it.

conductr 2mo ago
Software eating the world was a cute saying until it physically manifested as datacenter proliferation. I think it’s the case that people simply don’t like tech right now. The industry has gone from hero to villain in many people’s minds. When the narrative is openly, we’re all in on AI, and AI will take your job, then they say “can we build a datacenter in your neighborhood?” pushback should be expected. Even if this specific DC is not AI focused, when people hear datacenter that’s where their mind goes.