You must log in or # to comment.
Motherfuckers have been buying people out of their homes, emptying entire neighborhoods just to get access to land near power plants and near water sources to build their AI data centers, they’ve been polluting drinking water sources and siphoning the electricity of entire towns, and polluting like crazy, and they’re affraid society might not accept their useless AI porn generating bullshit? Because let’s face it, that’s what it’s mostly used for.
Where did they buy neighborhoods to bulldoze them?
Here’s one example:
There’s also Itasca in Illinois
I bet you can find more
Wow wow wow crazy.
Wow is right, those people made a massive profit on their homes.
They reportedly paid an average of around $950,000 per house — which was significantly above what that land would have been worth as residential
Why are you trying to make it seem like the homeowners have been screwed over? It makes no fucking sense.
There is a reason they all sold. But that it is happening is still crazy. As if there is no empty space anywhere?
It doesn’t matter. They didn’t hold a gun to anyone’s head. It’s hard to imagine anyone being dumb enough to not realizer what a gift that is.
What’s crazy is people acting like this is some kind conspiracy that screwed over the homeowners, who made out like bandits.
The rush to build data centers has become the new Oklahoma land grab, with providers competing for prime real estate. In one instance, a data center provider bought 55 homes only to demolish them to make room for its campus. Stream Data Centers, a Dallas-based provider of colocation and custom data-center construction services, last November purchased 55 homes in a 34-acresubdivision of Elk Grove Village, Illinois. According to published reports (here and here), Stream paid an average of $950,000 for each house.
“land grab”? That makes it sound like they did something illegal.
They offered people money and those chose to take it. Wisely. Because they made a huge profit on their houses.
You think I wouldn’t sell mine for 950k when I bought at $310k?
I’m surprised we don’t have a story yet about a town of people weilding pitchforks and torches and breaking into a data center.
They’re being paid above market value for their homes. And who knows what other kinds of pressure they’re facing.
“Pressure” being an amazing deal they wouldn’t have gotten otherwise.
You’re COMPLETELY removing any responsibility from the sellers and that is just ridiculous.
Would you pissed if someone offered you double the value of your home? Wish would that happen to me.
How are they polluting?
They are wrecking the energy grid and messing with the water supply, but how are they polluting the water supply?
Here:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy8gy7lv448o
Also there are talks of re-opening old coal electric power plants to feed these data centers.
And I agree that coal power plants are very polluting. However, the pollution comes from the source of power.
However, the pollution comes from the source of power.
Unless the AI is running on fairy dust, its energy use is very much a part of how sustainable it is.
It is important to anticipate the argument that they are getting the power from renewable sources.
But they aren’t. What they could be doing is irrelevant, none of the big ones are running 100% (or probably even 50%) green energy.
This is anticipating the arguments in front of the planning boards.
I get that a lot of data centers use coal and other polluting sources of power. The problem is how that gets represented when trying to create local opposition.
The profitability of a power plant is to some degree determined by its location. It costs more to move power farther. As renewables get cheaper, fossil fuel plant margins get lower, and in many cases, it’s enough to shut them down.
Now you can’t move a coal plant closer to the people who use electricity, but if you build a data center close to a coal plant, suddenly, it’s a viable business model.
Similar reason aluminum refineries are often built near power plants. Except aluminum actually helps people.
I’m more focusing on what the source of pollution is to make sure arguments are better made online to fight data centers.
The power required for data centers can be polluting, but building a data center in an area isn’t guaranteed to cause a drop in air quality since the builder could choose a different energy source to power the data center.
Except you’re missing the reality of the situation for the sake of theory. They pointed out quite rightly that these new data centres are not using clean energy and are, in fact, propping up old fossil-fuel plants which should be closing to make way for clean energy.
They could choose a lot of stuff, but since it’s a choice and not forced upon them they are jumping on the quicker options. Why wait for a bunch of renewable sources to be built when you could simply use the existing, shitty stuff and get your shit built quicker? Corporations don’t give a fuck about anything but money and they will let people fucking die if it would save them even 0.01% of their annual revenue. It wouldn’t the first or even the thousandth time it’s happened.
Corporations also misinterpret facts for their benefit.
I can easily see people make the argument that data centers affect air quality because they are powered by coal power plants and the data center rep is going to reply “we aren’t building a coal power plant at this data center site; that’s just opposition fear mongering” and now it becomes harder to get people to believe you on other issues.
https://www.sehn.org/sehn/2025/8/14/data-centers-and-the-water-crisis
You know that using water turns it into wastewater right? Whether it’s cooling computers or turning a turbine, the water is contaminated by metals as a direct result of the process.
Need a third button, ruin society to be pressing.
He’s like every other CEO. Currently pressing it with his erection at the profits and suffering of poor people.
It’s wild to think that ‘actually being useful’ is considered a backup plan and not the starting point. Usually, you prove the value before you use all the resources, not the other way around.
The epitome of a solution looking for a problem. Microsoft and others have dropped almost trillions into AI. With nothing to show for it.
It is useful, if you have the freedom to use it when and how you want. Not when Microsoft says so.
lose ‘social permission’
So when was that permission given?
Bananapants.
Puts that in my pocket for later
I hereby revoke the social permission.
Social permission revoked. Please set the money piles on fire.
Wow, it turns out “Really convincing-sounding chatbot” isn’t as all-purpose as was hoped.
I mean, legit, it’s impressive how detailed and precise (and often wrong) it can get, but impressive isn’t the same as useful.
I guess AI image generation probably has made concept art mockups quicker for some.
People who can’t find any use for it are those who are determined to hate it at all costs.
Cooking and weight loss alone is worth $20 a month for me and that’s just scratching the surface.
I’m not sure an AI nutritionist in every kitchen is worth burning the environment/economy down.
I am sure you’re a hypocrite when it comes to energy expenditure. My footprint is probably smaller than yours.
Fuck me for improving in a way YOU don’t approve, right?
It absolutely makes no sense that a bunch of corpos can do whatever the hell they like all while the common folk are forced to pay for their stupidity.
The electricity is one example. Bullshit like this which is completely useless shouldn’t be a thing - All it does is severely impact the general populace all while the borguoise is blinded by false narratives whilst living beside their fat stacks of cash.
They could all lay themselves off
They’ve already lost social permission by making us hate their OS. This wording feels the same as calling lies “alternative facts.” You just rename"hatred of our OS" with “lack of social permission.” God PR speak is so annoying
My GPU just started to die and I planned to build/upgrade my PC. Rip I guess all I can do now is hope for the bubble to burst.
You can still get one that’s 7 years old and was thrashed by the crypto Bros for 800 bucks though !
My RAM is starting to go on my 10 year old machine. I haven’t cried, but I wouldn’t describe the situation as dry, either.
I had the same thing yesterday - I had bought a 16GB DDR4 stick in the before times for my ThinkPad and now it’s been behaving erratically and unpredictable. I’ll run a memtest at some point, but it might be going back to its original 8GB for a long time…
DDR4 laptop RAM hasn’t been hit quite as hard, a 16GB will set you back about $100-120
I had a squiz, so I had gotten a Samsung 2666MHz DDR4 16GB stick back in early October 2025 and it was AUD52.23
Looks like if I look around hard enough they’re about AUD80-90 now, so while that’s still a relatively large jump, it’s not anything like the desktop memory has been.
I think even so, if my ThinkPad continues to have issues I’ll live with the 8GB for now and wait out the price hike.
Microsoft committed too much too soon and now they’re desperate.
They wrote a “Happy Birthday” sign with a big ass B, big ass I, big ass R… Oh, no!
Banana pants for scale.
I think there are valuable, narrow use cases for AI as it currently is. It should not be released into the wild willy-nilly in some scheme by greedy, irresponsible billionaires to profit from. It should be strictly regulated and controlled, perhaps allowed only to researchers who are trained to use it responsibly. I imagine it would be useful for suggesting novel solutions to problems that people would eventually come up with on their own, but LLMs would present many more now for consideration. It could act as a hallucinating muse for people who understand its limitations and know the application well enough to know what to reject out of hand as wrong and irresponsible.
Today in “billionaire says the most blatantly evil and deranged shit ever publicly and no one cares”…
They could produce something useful instead?!
But think of the shareholders!
