Maybe the answer is not to build them in Finland if there is really no more useless land there (unless Finland is explicitly asking for the DC to be built in the country for other reasons) but there is elsewhere. Even if it was, that's still less than 0.5 ms from a city of 200k+, surely there is some option better for the climate in 20x the radius!

I do like that it is at least a naturally cooler place, which is more consideration than most DCs get. And, being Finland, I'd imagine a decently cleaner power mix than usual for a new DC? Both of these are fair things to give credit and support for IMO - not everything has to be outrage.

▲

wongarsu 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Off the top of my head Finland seems to tick a lot of boxes: low population density, good local availability of water without competing uses, low electricity prices, very green electricity (lots of nuclear, hydro, wind), good infrastructure, cold climate

Apart from this being in a forest, this seems like an ideal place. And places that are not used for agriculture or human habitation but do have water available have a habit of being forests (or mountains)

	▲	TeMPOraL 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> low population density, good local availability of water without competing uses, low electricity prices, very green electricity (lots of nuclear, hydro, wind), good infrastructure, cold climate This then makes the headline basically read as, "Popularly disliked company listened, with new project avoiding literally every valid or ignorant criticism people brought up; news found some even more nonsensical criticism to amplify".

▲

helsinkiandrew 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The trees being cleared look like commercial forest - trees planted a few decades ago after a previous clearing