I’m sure they do. Probably using an AI model to calculate it tbh

The article alludes to it: “The United States does not lack flat, open land away from population centers on which to build data centers. However, AI hyperscalers prefer to locate their campuses near existing infrastructure so they don’t have to spend massive amounts of time and resources building everything from scratch.”

It costs a lotta money to run electricity and water to the middle of nowhere.

Also, companies are doing research to specifically build in areas where they believe the local community is not politically empowered to prevent it from being built. This guy goes into some more depth at this timestamp: https://youtu.be/1CpVmPh3BDE?t=831

Seems more foolproof to just ban killing people directly tbh

I dislike hypocrisy as much as the next person. So I feel where you’re coming from. At the same time, the wind turbines are generating power that everyone benefits from, whereas these things are consuming power for a product that very few people actually like or even want to exist. So I think its fair to say that maybe the noise is tolerable when you’re getting something you actually want out of it. Also, wind farms are usually built further away from large population centers, whereas data centers are because it’s cheaper to build them in areas with lots of people around. So the concern does seem a little more irrelevant to wind farming as a whole than data centers.

Hmmm that’s a good point. I keep trying to teach myself the lesson to lower that bar. I mean, I still think that there have been enough people upset about Epstein even just this last year that we should have seen something happen.

But it’s true that it might take more people than the amount that we would like…and you’re right that there’s probably a lot of people who know next to nothing about it.

Well like I said, I think he is doing a good thing. And I like the exhibit.

“What power do you think this non-profit has to do anything about it?”

Exactly, no power. That’s why him saying “if they stand up they can take action and demand accountability for the crimes that were committed” is a ridiculous thing to say.

1. People already have been standing up, taking action, and demanding accountability. Absolutely nothing happens
2. As you yourself admit, him and his exhibit cannot demand accountability either

So in what sense is he saying something true here?

Blaming pharmacists for things they have no control over, nice. Biggest brain

““The evidence in this room is evidence of one of the most horrific crimes in American history,” Garrett says. “When people come through this room, I hope they realize that in America, we have the rule of law, and if they stand up they can take action and demand accountability for the crimes that were committed.””

Is this “rule of law” in the room with us?

Why are you printing shit out instead of going and getting that there accountability taken care of, bro? Hmmm almost like you know demanding accountability won’t do shit so the best you can do is just make sure people don’t forget about how we’re all getting fucked. But recognizing that I’m getting fucked isn’t the same as not getting fucked. It’s a good thing he’s done, but it’s ridiculous and annoying that he said this. Totally normalizing, system-preserving bullshit. We wouldn’t need to make cutesy libraries about this if there was ever going to be accountability.

NooOoOO fashion is only for shallow dummies that aren’t like meeeeeeeee

It was a philosophical question posed about a technical matter.

Okay, succinctness aside, I get that you’re trying to imply that the kind of person who still uses Chrome is basically asking to be mistreated (I think?) - but the author’s point about climate impact depends on user count, not user personality.

68% of all browser traffic, with Safari at a close second with 17%

Spelling pedantry, really

Yeah, unfortunately as hard as I try I can’t see many good ways to protect kids from religious parents as fully as I’d like without too broad of a law. I think that protections specifically with respect to gender and sex could be implemented under the same sort of umbrella as other forms of child abuse though, at least.

Yeah, some countries have better disease control methods than others ;)

It’s tempting to shrug this off as not my business, but if this kind of entity becomes widespread enough, then you can get into situations where a future government, more radical than what we have today, could feasibly mandate people to use these types of networks

Nah cuckloading is perfect. The best way to make an insult like that not effectively belong to the sexists is just to use it in non-sexist contexts. The intrinsic meaning of cuck is perfect for this. Fuck the extrinsic meaning. We can change that.

So the actual text in these posts is probably fake but I’m sad to say I’ve known two guys who act like this. Its not a ton, its not a majority of the guys I know, but like. Two is a lot for being THIS moronic. And they both seem like nice enough people at first. One of them is married to a pretty nice girl who just didn’t see it until it was too late. RIP.

That said, posting this kind of stuff kinda irks me since it can end up making that reality seem more imaginary than it really is. Plus, people like me who have had that experience in real life don’t need internet posts to teach them that this is the way it is, and people who haven’t had that experience in real life probably aren’t going to update their perception of reality based on posts like this. So these posts still kinda end up useless despite being fairly representative of reality.

They will buy their products and services from each other. That can still form a working economy. It would function just like any slavery based economy of the past, just with more slaves than usual

No no, see:

Disagreeing = being defensive

Being defensive = knowing you’re wrong

Ergo. All people who disagree with me secretly know they’re wrong Q.E.D

So defensive!