Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin
The EPA is planning to scrap public review rules for data center pollution (capitalbnews.org)
466 points by doener 16 hours ago | hide | past | favorite | 338 comments
 help



This is bad news for everyone (well, except the high priests of the LLMs / nascent Cthulhoid godlings), but it certainly makes the communities who've successfully opposed data centers seem ever more justified in retrospect.

It also sustains the bubble for a bit longer. I'm genuinely curious/anxious to see when and how the bubble bursts. It could end up being something seemingly trivial or random and completely illogical that finally topples the jenga tower.

> the bubble

> the jenga tower

I am not so sure about these narratives anymore.


Both bubble and Jenga tower are examples of unstable systems that can persist for an unexpectedly long time.

They're good analogies. It's possible to keep a Jenga tower going forever, just extremely difficult once it reaches the point of being all middle pieces.

It's certainly not possible to keep a Jenga Tower growing forever. For each floor you add you need to leave at least one piece in a lower floor. Eventually you run out of pieces. It's possible to "complete" a Jenga Tower, but at that point it has to stop growing.

Also easier if you can hold up bits of it with strings from the ceiling, which is what the EPA is doing for data centers here.

I don't think it's a bubble

The dot com boom was a bubble. Doesn't mean that the underlying web technology that powered it was bad or worthless. But the valuations definitely were. AI, in its current form, will be around for a long time, maybe even as ubiquitous as the internet is today, a few decades from now. But the situation right now can definitely be classified as a bubble.

Consolidation. This happened with cars during the great depression. Lots of small factories were bought out by Ford and Chrysler.

It’s a bubble. “AI” could be quite successful at this point, and the economics still don’t work out.

Parts of it can be a bubble while other parts are not. The need for datacenters can be real while the valuation of model providers can be a fantasy.

If the need is driven by a bubble economy, when the bubble pops the demand disappears too. This can even lead to a separate bubble popping (see: the dotcom and telecom bubbles).

Yes, datacentres can be reused for other purposes but dark fibre didn't save the telecom bubble and the utility of train tracks didn't save the railway bubble.


The economics work out just fine. Their actual target business model is replace every knowledge worker. Their thought process is "look at all these people making 150k+, we can do their jobs for 10% of that, think how much money that would be if we had all of it"

Sure, the next step is complete regression to feudalism, but they aren't thinking that far ahead, they just want to take every job in existence that isn't physically turning a proverbial wrench.


You can't be a feudal lord if you're forced to accept razor-thin margins (assuming they're positive at all) due to relentless competition

the moment AI is capable enough to replace every knowledge worker and all knowledge workers are fired and/or dead the AI companies will just hike up the price for access to their bots until every company is paying at least as much if not more than what they were on human workers.

What even is the economy after they have killed all the workers and it's just bots clicking on each others ads?

Once the economics work out, the economy as a whole doesn't, therefore the economics DOESN'T WORK OUT.

I think you're making an assumption that the owners of this capital aren't: "That the economy has to work out for everyone."

It doesn't work out for the owners of the capital. Their wealth is entirely based on their claims on future production that is consumed by people with money.

Rich people trading houses and shares to each other

Then it's on to centralization of the "human" components of the workforce into company towns, robot armies and competition for natural resources that will be processed from raw.

You can't hike up the price on open-weight frontier models. It's a commodity.

This already happened btw

It’s wild to me that anyone can have that thought and yet not think about what happens to everyone whose job you took. Especially in a country with citizens known for owning guns.

Especially after seeing what the “learn to code” movement has brought people into, I can’t imagine those people will just roll over and peacefully enter homeless encampments..


> Especially in a country with citizens known for owning guns.

This has always been a story Americans tell themselves to sleep better at night that has zero relation to reality.

The US is a country that has seen many injustices perpetrated by the government. From concentration camps for people of a certain descent to legal racial discrimination (and slavery before that) to wanton violence by security forces against innocent people (pick your favourite police/ICE/etc murder here).

When have armed Americans ever risen up against a government injustice? Best I can think of is the Oklahoma city bombing and I'm pretty sure that's not what you're all refering to.


This doesn't make any sense. Americans wield guns against the government literally every day. Usually it's not very widespread or organized, but sometimes it is. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rebellions_in_the_Unit...

Your list is embarrassing. Since 1973 (I'm not going further back because the recent examples are too bad to bother), there have been:

* 2 land disputes between federal land management and individuals that thought they deserve more rights over federal land. Hardly fighting against an injustice here, were they

* The BLM protests/unrest started by the murder of George Floyd. I don't recall Americans taking up arms against murderous cops, or anyone, really. The closest to arms taking I can remember is an underage guy going to a protest to "protect" against rioters, getting attacked and killing people in response. Hardly anyone fighting against government instilled injustice with their right to bear arms, is it?

* January 6, where a bunch of mentally challenged individuals tried to overturn the election results at the request of the loser of that election. There was no injustice done against the people in question, and they didn't use their arms against it, they just stormed a barely defended building. One of the shittiest coup attempts of all time, and if anything, for furthering injustice and government overreach than anything else.

So no.


Hunger and desperation are really powerful motivators. And violence and rioting are basically socially transmitted diseases.

You don't need everyone to wake up someday and think "Hey, I think those Jacobins in France had a good point" to have a revolution. You only need a few detonators.

If the societal conditions are ready, nobody can really stop the masses once they are ignited.


>citizens known for owning guns.

They're largely the ones voting for this.


I’m old enough to remember when people said computers would do all jobs 30 years ago