Maybe if they had, they would have opposed them earlier. On the whole, I'd say the surveillance industry has benefited much more from widespread ignorance than it has suffered.
Perhaps not but there's a vast difference between the infrastructure that had been used prior to the current boom in hyperscalers. If I had to choose between DoorDash and breathing the exhaust generated by 30+ gas generators I know what I'd pick.
The utility monopolies are partly/mostly to blame for this. Their rates have become so disconnected from reality that it's cheaper to install your own power generation. They've all been posting record profits, up 50% where I am, in the last 5 years, as rates continue to increase.
I'm sure the utility companies are ecstatic how the blame as been put squarely on data centers.
Maybe they shouldn't be profiting so heavily if that's the case?
But yes, they say it's green energy requirements/expansion. But, they're also very good at making excuses, including when they're old equipment erases whole towns due to fires they started, from leaving it all unmaintained to help with those record profits.
Yup. The headline is also about opposing more datacenters. The AI datacenter boom is now approaching 6% of US GDP and it's not surprising so many are feeling unnerved about the massive footprint of this tech on not only the economy but their physical spaces.
I disagree. There is a huge difference between web host data centers and hyperscale compute data centers. It's disingenuous to use the same term to refer to both of these things. People are mad about the hyperscalers who want to pollute low income neighborhoods with noise and smog. Traditionally, data centers have used grid power, used far less power, and created far less noise than a "compute center".
