There’s a lot in here, Alberto. You’re channeling passionate and valid concerns about our planet. I too am heartbroken about humanity’s greed and myopia that’s burning up your country and ravaging the West Coast of the US where I live.
At the same time, I think it’s a slippery slope to bundle up all these issues and pin them on the collective AI boogeyman. There are a few important distinctions to tease out here:
1) NIBY-ism is not specific to AI. In fact, its roots in American society are deep and cultural. As someone born and raised in Europe, it took me decades of living in different states and cities in the US to understand the phenomenon. The AI bosses don’t want data centers in their Los Altos back yards. But that’s just the last in a string of NIMBY issues that span any and all development - from industrial to public housing. The patchwork of laws and regulations span city, county and state and are really hard to navigate for anyone on a crusade to build anything other than mansions in wealthy areas. You also have to understand that unlike in Europe, most retirees in the US don’t have government pensions or welfare benefits. Most of their wealth is tied to the value of their homes, so letting that value go down by allowing any adverse development in the zip code is an issue of survival for most middle and upper class households. It’s unfortunate but it is what it is.
2) Politics in the US has lost all connection to reality in recent years. You can’t tell anything meaningful from what Abbot or any politician says. If tomorrow the popular sentiment starts blowing in a different direction or Trump tells them to perpetuate a lie, they’ll stand up and say the exact opposite from what they said yesterday. It’s opportunistic to the core. The same with tech companies that seamlessly switch from building AI tech to offering anti-AI features (powered by AI of course) without batting an eye. They will be pro AI or anti AI depending on what makes them the most money. Don’t take their stance as evidence of anything else.
3) The data center issue is mostly a state issue in the US. The economics and attractiveness of data centers are very different for a wealthy state like California versus an impoverished state like Mississippi and others in the Bible Belt. I know it sound crazy to European ears, but that’s how a lot of things like healthcare and education policies are decided - on the state level. It’s almost like you have different countries and vastly different economies. The cost benefit math on data centers will be different too. In her podcast interview with Ezra Klein of the NYT, Jasmine Sun shared that she had spoken to a few of the local people hired to build and operate those data centers and found that the income from the 5-10 year project will be life changing for most of them, allowing them to buy homes and raise families in states and communities where the next best alternative for them would have been either crime, drugs or a hand-to-mouth existence on a minimal hourly wage. I think that’s an actual measurable benefit.
4) The true reason behind the data center opposition in the US is not the environmental cost. In fact, Jasmine Sun in the same Ezra Klein podcast interview shared that the environmental costs of data centers are not meaningfully different than the costs of other factories or beef farms. In fact a lot of times they’re actually lower. There is a quote by her that I mention in my essay from last Friday that says the real issue is the lack of trust. Most people have not used AI and have let the increasingly polarizing media coverage of AI (contributed to in large part by the tech CEOs as well) to shape their opinion of AI as harmful and useless. In fact, AI has become this warped boogeyman phenomenon that is highly emotionally charged and fear-driven but few people have taken the trouble to understand the technology first hand.
And the last point is where I would caution you to moderate the fanning of the flames of fear. I know it emotionally-charged content gets engagement online. But I believe that those of us lucky to have a platform and an audience also have the responsibility to be thoughtful and measured when it comes to educating people about things we’ve taken the time to research and understand.
I think a big part of the water/noise/power problem is the lack of standard data center designs. There are very noisy data centers next to suburban lots. There are data centers with on site gas with maybe diesel for peak load or spikes and none of the pollution mitigation that goes into proper power plants. There are places where the developers made out like bandits with incentives. Everything just melts together because there are so many instances of something reprehensible happening and the common tie is 'data center'.
Maybe this is the US's Brexit moment. Widespread opposition to AI in America cedes leadership in the field to China and they become the 21st century superpower.
I really appreciated this, some of the data is really shocking, although not surprising. I find it complements very much what I have been writing about the political backlash (posting it also as maybe useful for your longer piece) https://artificialfutures.substack.com/p/the-backlash-against-ai-is-here
People may be anti-AI or anti-Data Centers but only in the sense that these Data Centers can be a boogeyman/scapegoat that they can project all of their fears about AI and tech onto. They don't actually seem to want to stop using the technology or put their smart phones down. Similar to how the big Oil Corporations have become a scapegoat in a society that benefits massively from, and is in fact completely dependent upon, fossil fuels.
Yes. But admittedly, only this many data centers are needed because generative AI is extremely inefficient. The rest of the internet ran quite well without them for a long time
All they gave us is the modern world, with its long life expectancies, low levels of violence (historically speaking), abundant food, water, electricity, transportation, and information, civil and voting rights, rights for women, children, gays and lesbians, and animals; antibiotics, anesthesia, cures for cancer and heart disease and obesity, low rates of infant and maternal mortality, low rates of famine and starvation; increasingly clean water and air, global reforestation and greening. Is that all they gave us? No wonder the people are so angry.
Guilty as charged. But the same underlying long-term dynamic that gave us all this progress is what’s giving us data centers and I expect the same kinds of long-term effects.
Building data centers in one's back yard doesn't seem to satisfy the opponents. Look for example at New Albany, Ohio, where Les Wexner has encouraged the building of numerous data centers locally, yet still gets no respect.
There’s a lot in here, Alberto. You’re channeling passionate and valid concerns about our planet. I too am heartbroken about humanity’s greed and myopia that’s burning up your country and ravaging the West Coast of the US where I live.
At the same time, I think it’s a slippery slope to bundle up all these issues and pin them on the collective AI boogeyman. There are a few important distinctions to tease out here:
1) NIBY-ism is not specific to AI. In fact, its roots in American society are deep and cultural. As someone born and raised in Europe, it took me decades of living in different states and cities in the US to understand the phenomenon. The AI bosses don’t want data centers in their Los Altos back yards. But that’s just the last in a string of NIMBY issues that span any and all development - from industrial to public housing. The patchwork of laws and regulations span city, county and state and are really hard to navigate for anyone on a crusade to build anything other than mansions in wealthy areas. You also have to understand that unlike in Europe, most retirees in the US don’t have government pensions or welfare benefits. Most of their wealth is tied to the value of their homes, so letting that value go down by allowing any adverse development in the zip code is an issue of survival for most middle and upper class households. It’s unfortunate but it is what it is.
2) Politics in the US has lost all connection to reality in recent years. You can’t tell anything meaningful from what Abbot or any politician says. If tomorrow the popular sentiment starts blowing in a different direction or Trump tells them to perpetuate a lie, they’ll stand up and say the exact opposite from what they said yesterday. It’s opportunistic to the core. The same with tech companies that seamlessly switch from building AI tech to offering anti-AI features (powered by AI of course) without batting an eye. They will be pro AI or anti AI depending on what makes them the most money. Don’t take their stance as evidence of anything else.
3) The data center issue is mostly a state issue in the US. The economics and attractiveness of data centers are very different for a wealthy state like California versus an impoverished state like Mississippi and others in the Bible Belt. I know it sound crazy to European ears, but that’s how a lot of things like healthcare and education policies are decided - on the state level. It’s almost like you have different countries and vastly different economies. The cost benefit math on data centers will be different too. In her podcast interview with Ezra Klein of the NYT, Jasmine Sun shared that she had spoken to a few of the local people hired to build and operate those data centers and found that the income from the 5-10 year project will be life changing for most of them, allowing them to buy homes and raise families in states and communities where the next best alternative for them would have been either crime, drugs or a hand-to-mouth existence on a minimal hourly wage. I think that’s an actual measurable benefit.
4) The true reason behind the data center opposition in the US is not the environmental cost. In fact, Jasmine Sun in the same Ezra Klein podcast interview shared that the environmental costs of data centers are not meaningfully different than the costs of other factories or beef farms. In fact a lot of times they’re actually lower. There is a quote by her that I mention in my essay from last Friday that says the real issue is the lack of trust. Most people have not used AI and have let the increasingly polarizing media coverage of AI (contributed to in large part by the tech CEOs as well) to shape their opinion of AI as harmful and useless. In fact, AI has become this warped boogeyman phenomenon that is highly emotionally charged and fear-driven but few people have taken the trouble to understand the technology first hand.
And the last point is where I would caution you to moderate the fanning of the flames of fear. I know it emotionally-charged content gets engagement online. But I believe that those of us lucky to have a platform and an audience also have the responsibility to be thoughtful and measured when it comes to educating people about things we’ve taken the time to research and understand.
Reframing datacentres against almond or cannabis farming is more effective.
IIRC Training llama3 used the same energy as 90 minutes of legal cannabis cultivation in USA. (and I guess a minute or two of water use if that)
I think a big part of the water/noise/power problem is the lack of standard data center designs. There are very noisy data centers next to suburban lots. There are data centers with on site gas with maybe diesel for peak load or spikes and none of the pollution mitigation that goes into proper power plants. There are places where the developers made out like bandits with incentives. Everything just melts together because there are so many instances of something reprehensible happening and the common tie is 'data center'.
Maybe this is the US's Brexit moment. Widespread opposition to AI in America cedes leadership in the field to China and they become the 21st century superpower.
I really appreciated this, some of the data is really shocking, although not surprising. I find it complements very much what I have been writing about the political backlash (posting it also as maybe useful for your longer piece) https://artificialfutures.substack.com/p/the-backlash-against-ai-is-here
People may be anti-AI or anti-Data Centers but only in the sense that these Data Centers can be a boogeyman/scapegoat that they can project all of their fears about AI and tech onto. They don't actually seem to want to stop using the technology or put their smart phones down. Similar to how the big Oil Corporations have become a scapegoat in a society that benefits massively from, and is in fact completely dependent upon, fossil fuels.
Yes. But admittedly, only this many data centers are needed because generative AI is extremely inefficient. The rest of the internet ran quite well without them for a long time
‘First, nerds are not martyr material’ ended me 😄
All they gave us is the modern world, with its long life expectancies, low levels of violence (historically speaking), abundant food, water, electricity, transportation, and information, civil and voting rights, rights for women, children, gays and lesbians, and animals; antibiotics, anesthesia, cures for cancer and heart disease and obesity, low rates of infant and maternal mortality, low rates of famine and starvation; increasingly clean water and air, global reforestation and greening. Is that all they gave us? No wonder the people are so angry.
Datacenters? Nah you're exaggerating slightly
Guilty as charged. But the same underlying long-term dynamic that gave us all this progress is what’s giving us data centers and I expect the same kinds of long-term effects.
Building data centers in one's back yard doesn't seem to satisfy the opponents. Look for example at New Albany, Ohio, where Les Wexner has encouraged the building of numerous data centers locally, yet still gets no respect.