In theory, let's say that a data center was proposed that:

1. got no tax breaks

2. self-generated electricity with greenest of green generation

3. did not pollute water supplies

4. made electricity prices go down somehow

5. (can't figure out a theoretical version where there are lots of jobs, sorry)

6. was extremely quiet

Would people still be mad about them?

I'm trying to figure out if the bad reasons are the _actual_ reason people are generally against data centers. Or if it's really more about "AI bad."

I think at least it would be hard to get a nimby protest movement going with those conditions. Maybe add in building it somewhere people can't see it?

Yes, people were mad about them due to the tax breaks here in Sweden long before LLMs were a thing.

Personally if your 6 points were true, I would not be mad about them.

A lot less people would be mad, yeah. In my own area, the mere rumor of a data center was enough to galvanize activity and get write-ups in the local news. The focus, generally, was on how it would raise electricity costs for the county and use up variable water resources right as we are facing water shortages here.

A lot of people here are in precarious financial situations, they do not want to see any costs go up. Inflation at the grocery store, high gas prices, high mortgages/rent, and a lousy job market have people on edge. I don't know if the average Joe is worried about AI leading to a dystopian hellscape, but he at least doesn't see AI providing any benefit to making ends meet.

Turned out not be a data center, but just the possibility caused a stir.

> I'm trying to figure out if the bad reasons are the _actual_ reason people are generally against data centers.

The list is long and includes things like people not being able to afford AC anymore; why are you trying to figure this out?