7 ms·

What part confuses you? The threat to stable and affordable electricity and water supply? The water, light and noise pollution? The threat to jobs? The threat t

by goda90 21d ago

What part confuses you? The threat to stable and affordable electricity and water supply? The water, light and noise pollution? The threat to jobs? The threat to truth and transparency? The threat to privacy?

flanked-evergl 21d ago
> The threat to stable and affordable electricity and water supply The only threat to stable and affordable electricity supply is government regulations. The idea that we will from here on just have degrown and decline is insane. I'm not up for that. Which means we will always need more electricity, so time to get building more power plants. There is no bounds to how much electricity humans need, and the more we have the more prosperity we will have As for water supply. Data centers barely make a blip on the water usage. > The water, light and noise pollution? The only one of these which actually has any validity is noise pollution, and the US has one of the lowest population densities of any country in the world, and data centres don't need to be close to population centres. > The threat to jobs? CEOs saying they are laying people off because of AI is not the same as anyone losing their job because of AI, but even if that was the case, it's about as smart as not using an electric drill to save jobs. > The threat to truth and transparency? AI does not only not threaten truth and transparency, it makes it easier to find the truth and to circumvent transperency restrictions. > The threat to privacy? It's not.
- vrganj 21d ago
  > The only threat to stable and affordable electricity supply is government regulations That is straight up not true. Theres currently a threat due to the imprudently started war in the Middle East, there will be more once rivers start drying up and hydropower becomes unreliable or nuclear power plants can no longer be cooled. > Which means we will always need more electricity, so time to get building more power plants. There is no bounds to how much electricity humans need, and the more we have the more prosperity we will have This is an ideological dogma smuggled in as a self-evident truth. Please do make a point, not just an unsupported declaration.
  - flanked-evergl 21d ago
    > That is straight up not true. Theres currently a threat due to the imprudently started war in the Middle East The US does not use crude oil from the Gulf to generate electricity. The US could scale electricity production at least 100 times without needing to import anything from the Middle East. > there will be more once rivers start drying up Rivers will not be drying up because of data centers.
    - vrganj 21d ago
      > The US does not use crude oil from the Gulf to generate electricity. And yet, reserves are at historic lows. Markets are weird, huh? > Rivers will not be drying up because of data centers. That wasn't the claim made, rivers will be drying up because of climate change (they are already!), which is a threat to energy supply. Data centers will accelerate said climate change, but that's not even relevant to disprove your previous assertion of regulation being the only factor. I'll also note you still haven't justified your core ideological assertion you tried smuggling in earlier in any way.
- goda90 21d ago
  > There is no bounds to how much electricity humans need, and the more we have the more prosperity we will have There are bounds to the Earth's capacity for our consumption. We won't be prosperous if ecosystems collapse.
  - budman1 21d ago
    Dyson Sphere is the end game. Once you capture and use all of the sunlight hitting the earth, what do you do?
    - goda90 21d ago
      On our present course we're probably not going to reach Type I on the Kardashev scale, let alone Type II, because of collapse. We need to embrace long term planning instead of short term profits if we want to avoid that.
      - flanked-evergl 21d ago
        Of course we won't make Type I on the Kardashev scale if we abandon technological progress like AI. "Long-term planning" has never once given us a quantum leap in technology. Having humans "plan" AI evolution is dumb. This stuff is happening. You can cry about it, but nothing you do will stop it from happening. The best you can do is stop it from happening in your country, and the only result will be that your country will become completely insignificant within a couple of years.
ButlerianJihad 21d ago
> stable and affordable electricity and water supply Look, I think you misspelled "demand" there. It's an understandable error; those keys are so close together. Data centers present a demand on resources. A demand that wasn't there previously. You hook a DC up to the grid, and it will demand more electricity from existing generation capability. The DC proposals, without provision for their own generation, present extra demand. So yeah, unless the supply of those resources can be commensurately increased in some way, the DCs will present extra demand on what we already have, and that means someone, somewhere, will have less available.
- jayGlow 21d ago
  if there is extra demand then typically more infrastructure is built to increase supply. we were able to increase it to meet the power consumption demands of manufacturing its only recently that we actually stopped improving our capacity. Increased demand here would actually drive us to increase our capacity instead of stagnating.

by goda90 21d ago

flanked-evergl 21d ago

> The threat to stable and affordable electricity and water supply The only threat to stable and affordable electricity supply is government regulations. The idea that we will from here on just have degrown and decline is insane. I'm not up for that. Which means we will always need more electricity, so time to get building more power plants. There is no bounds to how much electricity humans need, and the more we have the more prosperity we will have As for water supply. Data centers barely make a blip on the water usage. > The water, light and noise pollution? The only one of these which actually has any validity is noise pollution, and the US has one of the lowest population densities of any country in the world, and data centres don't need to be close to population centres. > The threat to jobs? CEOs saying they are laying people off because of AI is not the same as anyone losing their job because of AI, but even if that was the case, it's about as smart as not using an electric drill to save jobs. > The threat to truth and transparency? AI does not only not threaten truth and transparency, it makes it easier to find the truth and to circumvent transperency restrictions. > The threat to privacy? It's not.

vrganj 21d ago
> The only threat to stable and affordable electricity supply is government regulations That is straight up not true. Theres currently a threat due to the imprudently started war in the Middle East, there will be more once rivers start drying up and hydropower becomes unreliable or nuclear power plants can no longer be cooled. > Which means we will always need more electricity, so time to get building more power plants. There is no bounds to how much electricity humans need, and the more we have the more prosperity we will have This is an ideological dogma smuggled in as a self-evident truth. Please do make a point, not just an unsupported declaration.
- flanked-evergl 21d ago
  > That is straight up not true. Theres currently a threat due to the imprudently started war in the Middle East The US does not use crude oil from the Gulf to generate electricity. The US could scale electricity production at least 100 times without needing to import anything from the Middle East. > there will be more once rivers start drying up Rivers will not be drying up because of data centers.
  - vrganj 21d ago
    > The US does not use crude oil from the Gulf to generate electricity. And yet, reserves are at historic lows. Markets are weird, huh? > Rivers will not be drying up because of data centers. That wasn't the claim made, rivers will be drying up because of climate change (they are already!), which is a threat to energy supply. Data centers will accelerate said climate change, but that's not even relevant to disprove your previous assertion of regulation being the only factor. I'll also note you still haven't justified your core ideological assertion you tried smuggling in earlier in any way.
goda90 21d ago
> There is no bounds to how much electricity humans need, and the more we have the more prosperity we will have There are bounds to the Earth's capacity for our consumption. We won't be prosperous if ecosystems collapse.
- budman1 21d ago
  Dyson Sphere is the end game. Once you capture and use all of the sunlight hitting the earth, what do you do?
  - goda90 21d ago
    On our present course we're probably not going to reach Type I on the Kardashev scale, let alone Type II, because of collapse. We need to embrace long term planning instead of short term profits if we want to avoid that.
    - flanked-evergl 21d ago
      Of course we won't make Type I on the Kardashev scale if we abandon technological progress like AI. "Long-term planning" has never once given us a quantum leap in technology. Having humans "plan" AI evolution is dumb. This stuff is happening. You can cry about it, but nothing you do will stop it from happening. The best you can do is stop it from happening in your country, and the only result will be that your country will become completely insignificant within a couple of years.

ButlerianJihad 21d ago

> stable and affordable electricity and water supply Look, I think you misspelled "demand" there. It's an understandable error; those keys are so close together. Data centers present a demand on resources. A demand that wasn't there previously. You hook a DC up to the grid, and it will demand more electricity from existing generation capability. The DC proposals, without provision for their own generation, present extra demand. So yeah, unless the supply of those resources can be commensurately increased in some way, the DCs will present extra demand on what we already have, and that means someone, somewhere, will have less available.

jayGlow 21d ago
if there is extra demand then typically more infrastructure is built to increase supply. we were able to increase it to meet the power consumption demands of manufacturing its only recently that we actually stopped improving our capacity. Increased demand here would actually drive us to increase our capacity instead of stagnating.