Hacker News Reader

Comment by colechristensen | Hacker News Reader

Eh, not really.

Few years ago everybody was talking about the inadequacies of our aging electricity distribution infrastructure and how it was a shame it wasn't being fixed and the risks it entails.

Now folks are wailing about the terrible AI come for our electricity and how awful the burden of the upgrades are.

When the upgrades were for solar they were good, when upgrades are for AI they're bad. It's almost like people just want to complain about anything associated with something they don't like regardless of relevance.

View on HN

Why should locals be happy that someone is building AI data centers?

I can understand it for the country as a whole. AI is a last desperate gamble for the US to stay relevant and fight of China. But then maybe the federal government should start paying for it.

> When the upgrades were for solar they were good, when upgrades are for AI they're bad.

Do you look at every issue in this 50,000 foot view with no nuance or even basic details, or is just certain ones?

Is it not clear that I'm criticizing the people who have that attitude?

It's almost like people just want to complain about anything associated with something they don't like regardless of relevance.

I've noticed that we don't hear a lot about the EV boogyman taking down our electric grid now that AI has come to town.

I mean EVs are a change in power source, with an increase in energy efficiency even. AI is a brand new massive energy draw that isn't really reducing much elsewhere, and with a huge question mark over how much value it brings to the vast majority of the population.

I'd say the people complaining about AI likely see EVs as having some utility. While AI may have some utility, the amount of resources invested seems to make it more of a ponzi scheme waiting to pop.

EVs can also (at least in some cases) be charged from on-prem solar panels and not burden the public grid at all.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com