Hacker News Reader

Comment by j2kun | Hacker News Reader

What I think is nice is that the political parties opposed to data center development are actually taking concrete steps, exercising specific powers, to advance their goals.

So much opposition to tech boils down to whining, and then the tech companies get to do whatever they want anyway. Same complaint applies generally to the democratic establishment. It's nice to see people finally waking up to the reality that opposition has to use its teeth, not just bare them.

View on HN

If the city thinks data centers are incompatible with certain areas, it should encode that through zoning, permitting, utility pricing, noise limits, etc.

We have those but data centers keep skirting them. Data center developers often classify their properties as "light industrial" or "warehouse" to bypass regulation. These lobbyists are also big enough to push state legislation that strips local towns and counties of land-use authority.

Noise regulation is also sorely lacking because it's usually based on absolute decibel and ignores the impact of low-frequency continuous hums or even infrasound

Sounds like a good opportunity to update the rules on noise pollution then.

Probably zoning and anti-corruption laws too. That's why I think moratoriums like what Maine did are incredibly important. We should take our time and make sure things are done right. Pro-data center people who oppose those things are digging their own graves

FTA:

> In late July, the Metro Council approved new zoning and related restrictions on data center development and implemented a moratorium on new permit approvals to run through Dec. 1.

I feel like that is besides the point. I think the fact that ended up this way is an illustration how hardened the public has become. There's no niceties, procedure. The public has been pushed well past that point. This is not a negotiation.

Eminent domain is like the the Thanos snap version of state power in a democratic / capitalist country. The ultimate representation of the peoples will over the individuals desire.

Eminent domain is almost always used to make corporations richer. In other parts of the country, eminent domain is being used to seize people's homes to build AI DCs.

Corporations are the money engines of the government.

I don't know of any other way the government makes money other than riding on the back of corporations.

So yes, from the governments POV, using eminent domain to make corporations richer also has the direct effect of making the government richer.

Just think about it a little bit.

Over 80% of the federal government's revenue comes from individuals (income tax, payroll tax).

On the other hand, I guess the vast majority of politician incomes come from corporations.

And where does that income tax/payroll tax money come from?

~45% of people work for companies of less than 500 people, ~12% for the govrnment (federal, state, local), ~6% are self employed. That leaves less than a half for all the companies >500, and only a tiny minority of them have an outsized influence on politics.

EDIT: Also, if there were no big corporations, people would still work and pay taxes. No sane statesman would purposefully build their countries economy on non-state-controlled megacorps.

No, this is more like checks and balances: the state, the public, and corporations are kept in check when two of them join together to oppose the third.

It's kind of strange how the state ("of, by, and for the people") and corporations (comprised of people) are such distinct entities with their own interests. The fact that the state and corporations can and do collude in opposition to the public good is at the heart of so many enormous problems.

It feels like this is the first time I've seen the political system move in tune with the public mood in regards to AI and this is public anger finding expression in public policy.

> will over the individuals desire.

If you believe corporations are people.

Even billionaires really don't operate as individuals, they are a monster that we've let grow to have unchecked power across the entire federal government.

(note, I may be agreeing with what you're saying I just don't agree with the framing of the "individual") Most of the pushback belongs against the entities that are more powerful than even the federal government at times.)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com