This degrowth anti-technology mindset just does not make sense to me, and I think it's mostly astroturfed from TikTok.

AnneTrotter 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

How is this degrowth? Individuals who had a nice neighborhood now living next to the noise and pollution equivalent of an airport running 24/7 have a point that it sucks. Households complaining that their power flow is getting cut off but the data center isn't have a point. People whose water sources are carefully measured due to drought and loss of replenishment being worried have a point.

Growth can be done carefully and well, or it can be cancer. The current data center boom is not being done carefully and well. How you do things matters a lot.

▲

ozlikethewizard 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I'm sure the luddites got all their ideas from TikTok aye?

At least were not at this point yet:

"Mill and factory owners took to shooting protesters and eventually the Luddites were suppressed by legal and military force, which included execution and penal transportation of accused and convicted Luddites."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luddites

▲

flanked-evergl 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

"The luddites were right" seems like an odd position to have on HN.

	▲	Starman_Jones 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Why? The hacker ethos is all about understanding systems as they actually are; not as the people at the top want them to be. With the benefit of hindsight, it’s pretty clear that the Luddites were right; the industrialization of weaving did destroy their profession, and, contrary to the opinions of the political leaders, this had a direct, negative impact on society for many decades. The curious-minded hacker should not ignore that reality, even if they think the circumstances are different this time.
	▲	forestrywat an hour ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		Only if you don't know what the Luddites were concerned about. HN users tend to be better educated, and understand that the Luddites probably were right -- they weren't anti technology at all. They just wanted the benefits of the technology to be split between the factory owners and the workers. Instead, the factory owners wanted to keep all the benefits and fire all the workers. Luddites wanted a rising tide to raise all ships.
	▲	unrented7977 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		The vast majority of people who think the Luddites were wrong have no idea what they actually stood for
	▲	digitaltrees 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		HN isn’t a monoculture. And the Luddites weren’t against tech. They were against the avoidable harm by thoughtless adoption of automated looms. Their argument was distorted and smeared much like is happening here. Hackers used to be counter culture and want to push power down to individuals. If anything this techno fascist push to merge big tech with government while steamrolling humans is not hacker culture. We should home brew data centers for open weight models and open labelled datasets.
	▲	blitzar 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		"The tech bros were right" doesnt exactly have a great track record.

▲

alex43578 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

People have often resisted progress of all sorts, particularly if they feel it threatens their position or erodes their sense of superiority.

	▲	cindyllm 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		[dead]

▲

goda90 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

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?

▲

ButlerianJihad 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> 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.

▲

flanked-evergl 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> 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.

▲

goda90 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> 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 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Dyson Sphere is the end game. Once you capture and use all of the sunlight hitting the earth, what do you do?

	▲	goda90 an hour ago \| parent [-]
		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.

▲

vrganj 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> 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 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> 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 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> 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.

▲

trollbridge 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It’s not “de growth”. I want sustainable growth, which to me means:

- no NDAs signed with elected officials who then stonewall the public and hide behind them - paying the same prices for water and electricity that I pay - paying the same property taxes and income taxes that I pay - building in a fashion that doesn’t leave area residents stuck with bigger electric bills and water bills

All of these things can be done.

I have a tiny data centre. I get no sweetheart deals on the above tho bf s.

▲

meltyness 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

are you confident the demand for massive ai datacenters peppered everywhere isn't just some financial gambit? wouldn't you ask for consequences and side-effects that are socially desirable, even if the facility brings no wealth to the immediate area (either as a consequence of being owned by a remote corp, or by the investment failing completely).

	▲	flanked-evergl 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> are you confident the demand for massive ai datacenters peppered everywhere isn't just some financial gambit? yes.

▲

digitaltrees 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It’s not degrowth. It’s anti monopoly, anti wealth concentration. Anti tax avoidance. Anti price on water and electricity. Anti raising the ambient temperature of a community.

Let’s put the data center in Palo alto or Atherton.

	▲	budman1 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Not being from silicon valley, I am not sure of the communities mentioned. But may I suggest we put it right next to Zuck's house? How about in SamA's back yard? They are noisy buildings, designed to turn electricity into heat. And provide a small number of jobs.

▲

vrganj 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Why would people possibly not want something that uses up water in times of constant draught, uses up energy in an energy crisis and pollutes the air and contributes to climate change in times of climate catastrophe, all so a few already way-too-rich dudes can become even richer?

It just doesn't make sense! Surely they were manipulated to hate progress!

▲

chasd00 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

You’re going to get modded down but you’re right. Go look at these sites in Google Maps compared to datacenter sites that already exist and have existed for a decade.