> I'm so tired of every news outlet trying to turn everything datacenter related into a panic-worthy event.

I guess you being tired means you also just skip reading the actual article and start arguing about some point no one made? The problem isn't "Google reduced the forested land by 0.00000013%" but that Google "began bulldozing large swaths of forest before the required environmental review of the full plan was complete", and then on top of that, Google seems to have gone beyond just rushing through it, and also cleared forest "that should have been protected have already been leveled. Beyond the loss of so much forest, the outcome could be dire for wildlife preservation"

Maybe don't turn every comment section into some tirade against news outlets when the news they carry in this case isn't even relevant to what your tirade is about.

▲

fullmoon 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It’s not a ‘tirade’ to point out lies by manipulation. Media must be held accountable.

	▲	malfist 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		What lies? Are you claiming google did not deforest 300 hectares of forest?
	▲	breezybottom 4 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Finland isn't an authoritarian shithole like the US yet. They still have a free press, and there's nothing you can do about it.

▲

Aurornis 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> I guess you being tired means you also just skip reading the actual article and start arguing about some point no one made?

I covered this in my comment.

You missed the fact that it's not even clear if they broke the law. It's someone's suspicion, and they're requesting that construction be halted while they investigate to see if any wrongdoing happened or not.

> Maybe don't turn every comment section into some tirade against news outlets when the news they carry in this case isn't even relevant to what your tirade is about.

The deforestation is the headline. It's fair game.

The submission headline is "Google cleared 300 hectares of Finnish forest". It's fair to address that.

	▲	embedding-shape 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> I covered this in my comment. Yeah, I finished and posted my comment before you had edited yours to add everything below what I quoted, my bad. > You missed the fact that it's not even clear if they broke the law. It's news reporting, not the conclusion of a court case, the entire thing is "undecided" right now with no conclusion. But the story itself is about how they (allegedly) illegally cleared forest, not about what percentage of Finland's forest Google has (allegedly) illegally cleared. The problematic part is the "illegal" stuff, obviously. Don't focus so much on the HN title, lets discuss the actual contents itself instead of navelgaze about if the title is 100% accurate or what not.