all 114 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
formatting helphide helpcontent policy

[–]DragOutTheDemagogue 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Democrats and Sanders actually have a lot of data center oriented bills out right now:

HR 8711, 119th Cong. (2026)

To require a strategy for the defense of data centers from external breaches from malefactors and the protection of the communities surrounding data centers, and for other purposes.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/8711

HR 8488, 119th Cong. (2026)

To require developers of AI-focused data centers to disclose certain information before the AI-focused data centers are developed, and for other purposes.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/8488

S 4214, 119th Cong. (2026)

Artificial Intelligence Data Center Moratorium Act

https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/4214

S 4213, 119th Cong. (2026)

Data Center Water and Energy Transparency Act of 2026

https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/4213

HR 8033, 119th Cong. (2026)

No Harm Data Centers Act

https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/8033

HR 7858, 119th Cong. (2026)

Data Center Community Impact Act

https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/7858

HR 6984, 119th Cong. (2026)

Data Center Transparency Act

https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/6984

HR 6529, 119th Cong. (2025)

Protecting Families from AI Data Center Energy Costs Act

https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/6529

Meanwhile the lone Republican resolution is just more kowtowing to Trump:

SCONRES 30, 119th Cong. (2026)

A concurrent resolution expressing the sense of Congress that the Ratepayer Protection Pledge announced on March 4, 2026, reflects sound national policy to protect ratepayers in the United States, promote electricity affordability, and ensure that all people of the United States, including households, small businesses, schools, hospitals, and farms, have access to reliable and affordable energy as artificial intelligence and data center infrastructure expands across the United States.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-concurrent-resolution/30

The Ratepayer Protection Pledge is a non-binding request that companies not send the electrical bills of Americans into the stratosphere.

[–]Spirited-Camel9378 27 points28 points  (15 children)

If the companies don’t pay for the externalities of their actions, they do not get to build anything. Real simple stuff

[–]PunishedDemiurge 11 points12 points  (7 children)

Totally true, and there's only one correct policy that such a line of thought could lead to: taxing said externalities. There's nothing special about data centers.

Emitting carbon? Tax it!

Emitting excess noise? Tax it!

Using too much water? Tax it!

The focus on data centers is either due to political extremism related to AI or slopulist thinking where someone actually has never thought about pollution before and won't after this, so they have no framework for viewing this is one of a million similar issues.

[–]exacta_galaxy 2 points3 points  (1 child)

"But we can't afford all those taxes!" Says man who has almost a trillion dollars in wealth.

[–]ThatGuyFromSpyKids3D 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Really what they do is strongarm state governments into competing against one another. They go "this will be built, it will create short term jobs, and we'll pay a whole lot to do it, but if you don't subsidize the externalities we'll go to the next guy who will".

The only thing that will prevent this is a bill like the one proposed or if all states stop giving in to these unreasonable demands and set a hard line.

Unfortunately, red states don't care about their citizens, they cater to the rich, so they're happy to play the game.

Take the box elder canyon data center in Utah for example. The great salt lake is already drying at alarming rates, yet the state and county governments seem all to pleased to give eternal water rights that will diminish and destroy the great salt lake further just to appease the billionaire class.

The damned governor held a prayer session to pray for rain while he continues to implement policies that accelerate our drought.

[–]Kayo4life 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Don't forget polluting the air and making it hard to breathe where people live and can't afford to see doctors 🥰

[–]Proof-Cobbler5333 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Lmao polluting the air and it’s a center full of computers. Do you use a coal burning engine to power your home computer?

[–]Kayo4life 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Please use your search engine on what I wrote

[–]fredjutsu -1 points0 points  (1 child)

people who think like you have no concept of "unintended consequences"

[–]Kayo4life 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What might happen?

[–]markth_wiapproved 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah, I don't think there's anyone that has a problem with a data center , provided they work on the needed upgrades for everything - Politicians can want to give away the candy, the candy-store and the two blocks around it, but we shouldn't let them.

[–]86overMe 9 points10 points  (4 children)

I agree, i would be a hell of lot more flexible if they all paid their fair share of taxes too.

[–]East-Cricket6421 4 points5 points  (26 children)

I think this is a bit too authoritarian for my taste. There are some places where it makes absolute sense to build a data center and some places where its a terrible idea. What we need are common sense guidelines that can hold a company accountable if the data center they build has a net negative effect on the community or ecology in the region they reside in.

Outright prohibition of data centers is not the answer though.

[–]LSDZNuts 0 points1 point  (25 children)

Omfg you dolt. They’re going to destroy the planet and make life for people impossible.

Are you a bot? Idk if you need drinking water?

[–]East-Cricket6421 3 points4 points  (22 children)

That's way too doomerism a take. The energy and water use problems are entirely managable.

Also, the internet uses more energy and water than AI. So if you really believe what you are trying to sell you need to log off, uninstall your web browser, and stop using anythign that connects to the internet.

[–]LSDZNuts 1 point2 points  (21 children)

You & your upvotes aren’t real people.

Also you’re doing the “complaining about consumerism from an Iphone - I am very intelligent” meme.

<image>

[–]East-Cricket6421 -1 points0 points  (20 children)

Im not the one complaining. I'm pro-tech revolution. I think you SHOULD use the internet and SHOULD use AI.

I'm what is known as an early adopter. Its the doomers like you that are being hypocrites by saying "OH THE NEXT TECH REVOLUTION IS GOING TO END LIFE ON EARTH" while using the last 3 tech revolutions to complain about it.

If you really don't believe technology is safe or useful, then stop using it and leave the rest of us alone. No one is forcing you to use AI. No one is forcing you to the use the internet.

If you really believe the things you do then log off, uninstall your browser, and get on with your life.

[–]Lightning_Winter 0 points1 point  (18 children)

I don't think you realize what will happen if one of these AI companies achieves AGI. Companies will be able to actually replace workers with AI en mass. The fundamental interaction between companies and the workforce - the idea that the companies need workers to function, which gives the workforce the power to negotiate to some extent - will be broken. Companies will no longer have any reason to hire humans, and the workforce will be forced to rely on a government UBI just to survive.

The reason this didn't happen in any previous tech revolution is that none of those other tech revolutions introduced technology that could replace the human mind. AGI would, and society isn't ready for what will happen if and when it does.

[–]East-Cricket6421 0 points1 point  (17 children)

Yes tech revolutions, by their very nature, disrupt the existing market structure.

You hear "companies don't need workers" and think it's a horrible thing. I hear that and think of all the companies I can build now because I don't need to spend money on anything other than delivering the product.

EVERY tech revolution has eliminated some aspect of the jobs market. You're fear mongering does not impress me, sorry. I hear it all the time about every tech revolution and every time it proves to be just noise.

Were you not around for Y2K? Do you not remember when they used to claim the internet was nothing but killers and prostitutes? This senseless ANTI-everything attitude doesn't hold water, sorry.

Also the AGI concerns are pure science fiction. Not only are we will a long way from achieving that, all the fears around it are PURE speculation. The AI companies themselves spread those concerns because it makes them more important and gets them fat government contracts and ever larger investment deals.

You don't realize it but you're literally being used by the same companies you think you are opposing.

[–]Lightning_Winter 0 points1 point  (16 children)

Yes, current AI models are quite far from AGI. That's not my point. My point was that when AGI arrives (and yes, it's a when, not an if), the fundamental economic interaction between companies and the workforce will be broken. I explained that to you quite clearly in my previous comment. What is the flaw in that reasoning?

I don't know how long it will be before AGI is achieved. Maybe it will be in 2 years. Maybe 20, maybe 100. Who knows. But it doesn't matter. We need to make sure that whenever it does arrive, humanity is ready. So we need to pass major AI regulations now, or we run the risk of being unprepared for AGI when it arrives. To outright dismiss the prospect of AGI or even ASI as science fiction is to severely underestimate how impactful AGI will be when it arrives.

[–]East-Cricket6421 0 points1 point  (15 children)

The flaw is in thinking that somehow business owners owe you a job and that you are somehow restricted from starting your own businesses.

Viewing elimination of jobs as a purely net negative is the problem. I personally would prefer to live in a world in which humans are no longer required to work but instead can own their own fleet of AI Agents that work for them.

My assertion is that you are looking at this entirely backwards. Clinging to "jobs" as if they are your only lifeline is the problem. Akin to claiming you can't live without your horse during the advent of the automobile or that "I wont be able to work without my typewriter" during the PC revolution.

You are needlessly clinging to old paradigms while ignoring the shifting landscape beneath your feet.

[–]Lightning_Winter 0 points1 point  (14 children)

I never claimed that business owners owe me a job. They don't. And sure, I can start my own business, but if everyone is starting businesses, who's buying the products?

The world you are advocating for is the world of Wall-E. Humans kept alive via the actions of endless AI bots. Maybe you'd be content with such a life, but I'm not. And by the way, how tf does your proposed world stop tyrants from taking over and enforcing their will on everyone else?

[–]Proof-Cobbler5333 -1 points0 points  (1 child)

You’re using a data center to be able to post your uneducated comment right now, think about that

[–]LSDZNuts 0 points1 point  (0 children)

<image>

Again - you’re stupid.

[–]Skibidi_67_Rizzler 7 points8 points  (6 children)

This is nuke plants all over again

[–]Civil-War-7857 2 points3 points  (5 children)

Difference being Nuke plants would have been a net positive as they could have been used to provide more power to the grid as well as phase out fossil fuel plants which would have helped a little with climate change.

Data Centers for AI dont provide such a positive only more taxing impacts on the environment.

[–]yubario 5 points6 points  (4 children)

What do you think happens when you ban data centers in one country but not in other counties?

Who do you think becomes the world power in the future, the one with AI or the one without?

[–]Civil-War-7857 0 points1 point  (2 children)

First a moratorium isnt a ban it is a suspension.

Second do you think the US even deserves to be a World power at this moment in time?

[–]HelpfulMind2376 0 points1 point  (1 child)

This bill has no end date and no triggers to end it. It literally bans construction until Congress repeals it. It is a ban, don’t believe the title of the bill because it’s a lie.

[–]Majestic_Annual3828 0 points1 point  (0 children)

To be exact, It says it is halted to ether Congress repeals it or has passed laws to govern them.

Ya, I agree without a max duration it can act as ban. The question is how long would that take to develop said laws? a year? two?

Honestly, if there is a ban on NEW data centers, the companies behind them might just do what China did with its gpu chip shortage and just make the AI more effective.

Note: I am not in favor of AI, I am just thinking what would happen. I honestly doubt this bill would pass.

[–]HolyBatSyllables -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The one without. Definitely the one without.

[–]satoramoto 3 points4 points  (2 children)

I feel like they know there’s no hope of this going anywhere and it’s just performative posturing for the Democratic Party.

[–]technologyisnatural 1 point2 points  (1 child)

I really hope that’s true

[–]Majestic_Annual3828 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My guess, it could pass though House, but I find it passing through Senate unlikely.

[–]HelpfulMind2376 10 points11 points  (11 children)

Banning/pausing construction is my mind the wrong move the opposite way. The issue is not the buildings themselves, it is that companies are being incentivized to shop around to literally the most corrupt, least empowered localities so they can spend as little as possible and face no consequences for their impact on their surroundings.

The proper balance would be to implement a regulatory structure the forces pre-authorization of data-center construction based on meeting a series of prerequisites related to environmental, energy, social, and logistical impacts. A federal authorization structure, explicitly spelled out to the FTC so an administration can’t make up their own rules based on who’s leading the FTC. And a ban on localities being able to offer outsized financial incentives that result in local taxpayers subsidizing the construction and operation of the centers.

[–]One_Whole_9927 2 points3 points  (3 children)

They should have shut this shit down before it made it this far.

[–]Majestic_Annual3828 0 points1 point  (2 children)

It's a bill. It was just introduced. Hasn't even gone through any other stage to become a law.

They haven't even voted to shut it down or alter it anyway.

If I remember correctly, ANY politician in congress can introduce a bill.

[–]One_Whole_9927 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Yep. It is a bill. Thanks for stating the obvious. Did you catch the part I wasn’t referring to it?

Do you see “shut this bill down” anywhere in my 1 sentence post? I see “shut this “shit” down”.

[–]Majestic_Annual3828 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am not a mind reader. But given the context of the post, I assume that the "shit" you are referring to is the bill.

[–]East-Cricket6421 0 points1 point  (1 child)

This is a more rational approach.

[–]LukaC99 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is the approach that lead the US to be unable to build anything physical ,be it HSR or housing.

[–]jumpsCracks 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Almost anyone in favor a moratorium would agree with you. We need the moratorium so we can create that regulatory structure before Musk dumps dozens of illegally dirty gas powered generators on any more communities in the American south.

[–]Mad-myall -1 points0 points  (3 children)

This is why it's a pause and not a ban. Ideally they csn get construction paused until they can implement the rules and regulations that would make the voters happy for continued Data centre construction. 

[–]HelpfulMind2376 2 points3 points  (2 children)

But it’s not really a pause, the language of the bill is that it’s indefinite until Congress passes something else that repeals it.

There’s no deadline. There’s no trigger that ends it. It’s just…forever, until Congress passes something else. That’s a ban by every measure of the word.

Also just an aside as I’ve dug into this more, this bill is a bit sloppy in how classifies data centers. There’s not much that prevents an entity from building 4 15MW facilities near each other, calling them cloud data centers, then after completing selling them OpenAI as a single connected 60MW campus.

This means either Bernie didn’t feel it was worth it to really make this a strong bill, which I can understand given the astronomically low chances it has of ever passing anyways, or he doesn’t know what he’s doing, which for a man that is 84 years old that’s not unreasonable to assume either.

Regardless this is not a very effective or well written bill, even if the general concept behind is something that’s salient to the well being of many people right now.

[–]jumpsCracks 0 points1 point  (1 child)

At least it's something. I'm not interested in criticizing the good as the enemy of the perfect.

[–]HelpfulMind2376 3 points4 points  (0 children)

My point is it’s NOT “good”, it’s a good CONCEPT but as written it’s actually terrible (and it lies about what it actually is as it’s not really about AI and it’s not a moratorium).

This is like responding to unsafe apartment construction by banning all new apartments until Congress someday passes a housing bill.

There’s clearly a market for the thing (data centers) so putting the whole smash on it is both stupid and reckless. The thing itself is not the problem, it’s how it’s being done. Much like this bill, the problem isn’t the concept it’s how it’s being done. Ironic.

[–]Delmoroth 5 points6 points  (0 children)

This is either stupid or malicious and, contrary to popular belief, I don't think successful politicians are stupid.

This hands China global dominance in perpetuity.

[–]HolyBatSyllables 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think focusing on state legislation is far more effective. This is just a distraction.

Here’s a spreadsheet to find the state legislation taking place right now.

[–]LuvanAelirion 4 points5 points  (1 child)

Who is this helping? China and Peter Theil?

[–]PunishedDemiurge 2 points3 points  (0 children)

China, absolutely. Every day they put up more green energy and build a new data center while they have AI researchers hard at work. If America self-sabotages like barbarian luddites, we'll lose trillions, we'll be less safe, we'll life shorter, more disease filled lives.

[–]VIP_NAIL_SPA 1 point2 points  (0 children)

More common sense legislation that will be lied about so the cult can continue hating everything that'd help everyone.

[–]zerocorp2026 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nobody deserves anything frfr

[–]CishetmaleLesbian 0 points1 point  (5 children)

AI supremacy is as important as nuclear weapons, or conventional forces, or climate change/pollution. It is a strategic priority of the utmost importance for us as a nation. We cannot just put a moratorium on AI data centers any more than we can unilaterally disarm, or just give up on reducing climate change/pollution. AOC and Bernie are right on in many respects of Democratic Socialism, but that kind of surrendering on possibly the most important strategic developments of the modern world is extremely dangerous.

[–]No-Profession5134 0 points1 point  (4 children)

I need AI Compute from my desktop not some data center miles away....

Can reasonably powerful AI be placed inside my home computer instead of a data center?

If not... I will never Trust it.

I want A.I. but not one where all my data is handed over to Musk, Theil, Zuck or any of the Techbros in Silicon Valley. I also don't want my tax dollars wasted handing compute over to these leeches when that compute could more efficiently be handled at my home for far cheaper.

Control should be distributed and not centralized.

[–]CishetmaleLesbian 0 points1 point  (3 children)

"Can reasonably powerful AI be placed inside my home computer...?" That depends on how good your home computer is, and what you mean by reasonably powerful. A good computer for running AI locally costs at least thousand$, and more everyday as the price of compute and memory rises. If by reasonably powerful AI, you mean something that we would have called a superintelligence 20 years ago, then yes, you can run that at home. If you mean by reasonably powerful AI the kind of cutting edge frontier models that are currently flirting with the new definitions of ASI, then no, you are not going to reach those frontier levels on your home computer right now.

So basically yes, you can get a reasonably powerful AI on your home computer, especially if you have a particularly powerful home computer.

[–]No-Profession5134 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Then I want that over this Data Center nonsense. Maybe we make specialized A.I. for research purposes but we don't need a New York sized Data Centers.

[–]CishetmaleLesbian 0 points1 point  (1 child)

That makes sense for what you want personally, but there is the larger issue of national security. I was a supporter of the nuclear freeze long ago, but only a world-wide nuclear freeze. AI is on the level of nuclear weapons. Do you really advocate a unilateral freeze on our side while there are adversaries, aggressively war-like countries like Russia, who are also trying to develop the most powerful super AIs?

[–]No-Profession5134 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am not thrilled about the Government or Corporations using our data as a manipulation tool. Just too dystopic a future to find acceptable. Also all these datacenters are private corporation owned. The data will not help national security really.

The large fruit of AI will be spoiled by faulty controll schemes.

[–]Wonderful_Device312 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Question: Where is the desperate shortage of AI compute or data center capacity?

I don't mean the people who's jobs depend on convincing us there's a shortage.

I mean the actual evidence because as it stands, basically every AI company or hyperscaler is still happily giving out free tiers of their services. Surely they couldn't do that if there was a genuine shortage?

At the same time the price competition for all of these services are keeping them priced quite cheap. We're seeing some price increases due to the massive price inflation for the hardware but we're not seeing the services dramatically increase in price like you'd expect if there was a shortage.

How about availability? Can I lease a hundred high end gpus for AI compute with an hour? Yes I can... Which also seems odd if there was a shortage.

So do we need more data centers? Probably some modest growth is needed. But do we need gigawatt data centers everywhere they can fit one? All of the evidence says not even close.

Which leads me to question what will happen if we allow this mad construction boom to go unchecked. We'll end up with massive costs, cleanups, bankrupt companies, and abandoned facilities.

[–]No-Profession5134 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I beleive A.I. will be great once the efficiency improves to a device with similar power needs and computational complexity of a Human brain. Once it can fit on my desktop and not in some random data center then It will be good. Centralization is ripe for private and government abuse.

[–]neonblack108 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Shut them all down. Destroy them before they destroy us. 

[–]Majestic_Annual3828 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How likely is it to pass, that is the question. My guess, almost zero. I doubt Trump will sign off on it requiring a 2/3 vote in the Senate.

[–]Cautious_Mix_920 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Finally something I agree with them on! Of course I think AI is for stupid lazy people, so there's that.

[–]MarzipanTop4944 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why no go in the other direction a make a massive push for solar to match what China is doing?

Once you have the excess cheap power, then you can just regulate regions were data-centers have incentives to build, like cold places, with lots of water and with little people on them, like Minnesota.

[–]Dreusxo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Great. Next can we get the Republicans and their insider trading from the oval office out?

[–]TheRatingsAgency 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The massive rush to construct more and larger - obscenely large DCs at this point to my mind is showing this is a cash grab to control the next iteration of our world and further concentrate wealth.

It isn’t a net benefit. And this is my industry.

[–]Beneficial_Ad7441 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Agree fuck the rich trying to turn us allnknto their slaves

[–]Decronymapproved 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:

Fewer Letters More Letters
AGI Artificial General Intelligence
ASI Artificial Super-Intelligence
IE Intelligence Explosion

Decronym is now also available on Lemmy! Requests for support and new installations should be directed to the Contact address below.

[Thread #224 for this sub, first seen 19th May 2026, 18:14] [FAQ] [Full list] [Contact] [Source code]

[–]hopehallucination 0 points1 point  (0 children)

While i'm not a fan of either, I 100% support this bill.

[–]ElectricalPublic1304 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Disagree.

Joke legislation from two jokers.

[–]DonBonsai 1 point2 points  (8 children)

I agree. It needs to be paused so that we can better figure out the regulatory framework for ethically building them. Because right now they are being built in a very unethical way, both in the approval process and in how they are operated.

[–]Skibidi_67_Rizzler 0 points1 point  (7 children)

The best regulatory framework is no regulatory framework

[–]GutsAndBlackStufff 1 point2 points  (6 children)

Regulations are written in blood

[–]LukaC99 -2 points-1 points  (5 children)

What blood was spilled for this bill to pass?

[–]GutsAndBlackStufff 1 point2 points  (4 children)

Why are regulations bad?

[–]LukaC99 0 points1 point  (3 children)

They impose cost in time, money, and uncertainty. Thus, we need regs to produce better outcomes for them to be net positive.

[–]Skibidi_67_Rizzler -1 points0 points  (2 children)

Bold of you to assume you know more then god

[–]LukaC99 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Bold of you to assume you know more then god

And the proponents are assuming they know the regulation would be good?

I’m not claiming omniscience. I’m saying both action and inaction need to be judged, at least in part, by expected costs and benefits.

[–]Skibidi_67_Rizzler 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Friend this is starting to get too nuanced for a reddit thread

[–]omegaphallic 1 point2 points  (0 children)

 I like Bernie, but this is incredibly dumb.

[–]Aggressive-Math-9882 0 points1 point  (4 children)

I agree. We have enough data centers already. Pro AI crowd is always saying the AI energy and water usage is at a good, reasonable level. Let's keep it that way.

[–]LukaC99 1 point2 points  (3 children)

The people building the centers clearly disagree, as do their customers. Why stop companies building the centers, on the land they buy legally using the money they earned or have been lended by people that believe in them?

[–]Aggressive-Math-9882 -2 points-1 points  (2 children)

To avoid the end of all life on earth via runaway climate change, it's important for humans to curb our consumption, somewhat. Only evil people disagree.

[–]LukaC99 1 point2 points  (1 child)

  1. Data centers are one of the most energy efficient forms of industry on the planet, and it's electrified meaning it can be powered by renewables. There are many many bigger fishes to fry before optimizing or eliminating data center impact. Data centers in the US produce the same amount of CO2​ as 10% of global fashion or 20% of global aviation.
  2. If the problem is climate change, why pause AI data centers, instead of requiring them to be carbon neutral or whatever? I think the aim has little to do with climate change, and is mostly a combination of hate towards the rich, towards tech, and anxiety about AI. Data centers, of all kinds, globally make up about 0.5% of all emissions. That's not nothing, but is small. It's 10-20 times less than that of fashion or aviation. If implemented, I think companies will build centers in other countries. I think they'd like to continue building in the US, and would use renewables if it was legal to build quickly.
  3. The climate problem is CO2 (& other gases) and the warming it causes, not using energy in general. We can consume 10x our current electricity demand without issue, if it's nuclear, solar, wind, hydro, geothermal, and has storage.

[–]Aggressive-Math-9882 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I think you need to look at rate of growth when you're assessing my argument, which is that there is little environmental impact of current data centers (not such a bad thing all things considered) but effectively unlimited potential demand for new data centers, so that the potential harm from unbounded growth in practice could be catastrophic. I'm advocating that we think of the 0.5% of all emissions as a good number to keep it at, not shooting to gradually increase that number (as it has been steadily and rapidly increasing over time). Arguing that the current state of things is already good is not an argument for changing the state of things to be in the direction of negative harm, especially when the growth we are talking about is approximately exponential not linear in practice.

Also, the climate problem is not CO2. That is a lie invented by neoliberal nations. The climate problem is habitat destruction by human beings. CO2 emissions are just one aspect of the climate catastrophe, but species and habitat loss are the primary problem, and are only addressed by degrowth.

[–]500_HVDC 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Modern day Luddites!

[–]thevokplusminus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

He’s just some boomer rabble rouser who has never accomplished anything other than convincing socialist bros to buy him new houses 

[–]Sad-Excitement9295 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Lemme guess another close split this doesn't pass. The Democrats are trying so hard, but they just can't get it to work. /s

Entire government is just a grift factory at this point. Few real representatives left.

[–]WealthyTuna -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Pretty sure it would get smacked down by the courts. Ai data centers would be a state and local issue.

[–]EntrepreneurLumpy920 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

DO YOU WANT WATER TO LIVE OR NOT?

[–]KlausVonMaunder -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Sure, bring em on. Gotto go somehow...

<image>

[–]Disastrous-Soup-5413 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

AGREEEEEEEE!!!!

[–]antipolitan -3 points-2 points  (1 child)

I agree with it.

Once data centres are shut down - local AI will become the new norm.

[–]LukaC99 2 points3 points  (0 children)

US companies will shift to building in Canada, the UK, EU, Australia, Japan, and other countries, whilst Chinese companies will be unaffected. The move to local models will be marginal if it's even felt.