this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2026
512 points (99.0% liked)
Technology
85837 readers
3370 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It’s pretty easy to regulate this:
I'd say your list is a bit too short. Some more considerations (not comprehensive):
Edit:
Data centers ought to only be allowed in rural areas to begin with. Even if the noise/vibration/heat/etc. weren't an issue they're still a goddamn hole with zero foot traffic, and that's just bad urbanism. They're like public storage warehouses, but even worse.
They need access to the Internet backbone, but that doesn't mean they have to be in cities. Put 'em somewhere along the fiber halfway between.
I have first-hand experience living near a source of infrasound, and oh my god, it's terrible. Here's a good video about the infrasound generated by data centers.
Jobs are a necessary evil, not a goal in itself. The goal should be to eliminate all jobs.
Until that time we should figure out a better way to share the burden of the work that nerds to be done as well as better way to distribute resources. Trying to preserve jobs is not the way.
It's more about resource allocation, who gets to control of how much. You can eliminate jobs and have most people scratching out a meager existence or you can elinimate jobs and have everyone on a level playing field. I think we'd mostly agree we want the latter but currently looks like we'd need a war against the already wealthy to avoid the former.
Still missing heat increase, up to 26°F in the surrounding area. All that heat from the gpus and cpus is a lot. I've heard of people using their gpus to heat their apartments.
There was a Bitcoin mining computer being marketed as a dual-purpose space heater lol
What type of generation are you envisioning here? What type of cooling systems?
Datacenters aren’t responsible for workers displaced by automation.
Construction and noise aren’t special to datacenters and don’t need special regulation.
On this particular topic, the more red tape the better. These companies are shady and will find any loophole available to circumvent any protection the current laws are meant to provide.
That’s how you end up getting republicans elected into local office: by putting up unnecessary or complicated barriers.
Additionally, I believe we’ll be in a really bad situation in the next 10-25 years in regards to access to advanced CPUs. The more we onboard now the more we’ll have later.
It’s also a concern of national security if we put up enough barriers that people and companies put their resources in datacenters in other countries that can’t defend them against attack.
you like boot huh
I need to switch to voyager so I can tag you as "likes boot"
I try to be realistic. I dream of having every thing perfect to my liking but then I look at my neighbors and understand that we have to live together somehow.
Mmmm pleather 🤤
Per itar regulations, government data already has to live in the US. They will never change that law in order to store it in another country's DC.
And putting barriers on multi bullion dollar businesses is not the same as putting it on citizens. People aren't going to vote a Republican because of regulations on a DC that makes the neighborhood quieter and cleaner, stops excessive water consumption for cooling, and forces them to build their own power infrastructure. They will vote Republican for a million other dumb AF reasons, including a conservative taking head telling them regulations are bad for DCs, but they won't do it because of those reasons. They won't even know what those reasons are
“Leftist lunatics tie up small business development!!!” It’s dumb but it works. I live in an area like this.
I’m not talking about government data, I’m talking about businesses. Securing corp data and service availability it’s just as important. Just think how many companies would go under if a datacenter was droned. The 2nd level impact of a mass email outage or payment processing going offline would put employees out of work.
Business data doesn't require the mega datacenters that are all compute for AI. Those types of datacenters won't have the same issues with infrastructure for power and closed loop systems. If they do, they'll figure it out because they have the money to do so. Someone will build them. DCs that have storage and racks for cloud compute are in a different category.
I agree and mentioned that talking heads will spin regulations in a way that convinces their idiotic base that there's an issue. It's not the regulations that are the problem, it's the media. But the thing is, If it's not regulations, it will be something else. It will be just as nonsensical, but something will fill that gap. Might as well do something good if the propaganda is gonna flow anyway.
Agreed
Closed loop is absolutely the right answer, and easily regulated.
As to your other two points, the answer is obvious. Nuclear.
It doesn’t need to be nukes. Hydro, solar, wind, and any other mix of power sources is fine, including fossil fuels as an alternative should it be a cloudy, windless week.
Wtf are you talking about? No, any usage of planet-warming compounds for the benefit of creating Twitter incel AI-gen CSAM and TikTok slop videos is unacceptable. Even use of renewables is largely unacceptable, considering the materials (lithium, cobalt, etc) usually entail environmental degradation at best and outright child slavery at worst.
Yes, but consider how realistic it is to sway 51% of the voting population.
...What?
Hydro is limited by geography, and wind and solar requires a metric fuck ton of oil to produce and replace at EOL. You want clean, you want nukes.
You say that like building a nuclear plant won't require the metric fuckton of oil to build and replace at eol.
EOL for a nuke plant in measured in centuries. Refueling measured in decades. Wind turbines have end of life somewhere between 5 and 10 years.