Join the discussion
Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.
- Hacker News
- Basically I think most people are on some level in opposition of something that is very expensive and produces little of what they think has any value. Frankly I find AI as it is of little value. And on other side the speculated investment insane in scale.
I don't find it unreasonable to think that the money to be spend on these data centres could be spend on something else. Thus opposing them really does make sense.
by Ekaros - Such an elitist thing that people do trying to separate "ideology" from reality. That Joe the plumber hates how the data center built by big tech cut his home value in half, but he couldn't possibly develop an "ideological" hatred of big tech. It also colluded to censor and enshittify his favorite app (tiktok) and drive Grandma insane for going on a decade. But he couldn't possibly draw connections between those things. He's no public intellectual posting on X everyday, he's just a neighborhood guy.by jackb4040
- I'm a little bit surprised to see someone taking such grand & absolute claims so seriously. I guess I don't, generally. Actually thinking about it, it's not that I treat them as unserious, it's more like I read it as something akin to hyperbole. Anyway this isn't to say exploring this ("taking it serously") isn't worthwhile, just that I hadn't been prior.
As for the backlash itself, it seems safe to say it's motivated by a wide range of things. Ultimately though, I do agree with the point in the title (i.e. it's about datacentres) but I think a lot of the other factors mentioned are significant, but I still wouldn't expect even a perfect (impossible) poll/study to find a neat, unifying reason for most of the backlash.
Of course it's about the datacentres: why would anybody want even a modest, ye olde time datacentre, let alone a neo cloud / AI one, in their neighbourhood? You can call this nimbyism, which it is, but it's important to note the gulf of difference between a tech company's private profit facility and the sorts of projects where "nimby" typically is invoked.
Because this particular DC rollout is so massive and high profile, people have realised en masse that rejecting these things is something they can do. The anti-AI movement is absolutely a big part of this -- in terms of publicity, awareness, outreach -- but the various local peoples can (should, must) have their own reason for rejecting/protesting the projects.
Finally, given the dismal rate of promised capacity actually coming online -- which was apparent prior to and separately from "the backlash" -- I can't help but wonder if the widespread local resistance will end up as a scapegoat when questions start getting raised.
by qwery - I'm not a fan of any large projects from Amazon, including data centers, warehouses, and the HQ2 office.by gulugawa
- - stop whitewashing climate impacts
- https://read.misalignedmag.com/triangulating-ais-climate-imp...
by vivzkestrel - The title is accurate: it's "I think". There's no convincing argument or study about whether the backlash is about big tech, data centers or AI or not. Maybe I'm a bit tired but I didn't find any objective information in this post on the matter.
If we are sharing just opinions, I'll say that it's definitely a mix of things. And the anti AI sentiment (in part because of the environmental impacts) is very real.
The rapid growth of AI possibly also raised anti tech growth sentiment more generally: in a way, we are realizing that tech doesn't live in clouds but is very much tangible, and its externalities too. Tech has never been this concrete in a way. And in parallel people are more and more aware that big tech doesn't straigtforwardly design its software to serve the end user, so yes, there's also a negative sentiment because of this too.
by jraph - My hypothesis: people are against data centers because they are a visible externality.
Computers are in the cloud -- so, nowhere and cost nothing. The AI-assisted search result is on a web page and only costs a little bit of screen space. Amazon may have eaten retail, but at least it ships stuff to my door, has a great selection, and employs people.
Data centers are big, noisy water guzzlers that don't do anything and don't employ enough people to matter. They don't answer questions. They don't write code for me. They don't recover my data if I lose it. If I want to take some computer-mediated action, I go to https://... not data-center://... so why do I need the damn thing uglying up my community?
To be clear, I am not saying that these are stupid or naive opinions or arguments. I'm just trying to point out the visibility aspect. There are cogent arguments why allowing a data center would be a net negative to a community even after you factor in the actual benefits it provides (which are often enjoyed by Other People Who Don't Live Here).
It is natural for us to want eg utility-style AI on tap and also not want the planet destruction that data centers bring. (Nor the brain destruction that AI brings.)
by sfink - Hyperscalers were banned in the Netherlands because compared to their impact they make no money for the country. No jobs, a pitiful amount of taxes yet an enormous need for power, land and water.
That's it. The government will bend backwards to accommodate the port of Rotterdam, Schiphol or ASML because those are national assets. But for AI the math simply ain't mathing.
by TitaRusell