Such structures would have better latency due to locality, they wouldn't be subject to transmission interference from weather, they'd be far more accessible for replacements/upgrades, and being underground naturally aids in cooling and noise suppression.
While it would be resource intensive to dig out the underground structure, I'd be surprised if it even came close to the resource expenditure required to launch all your computer hardware into stable orbit, not even accounting for the fact that the former is a one-time, up-front cost, while the latter would have to be re-done every time you replace hardware.
While that "solution" is, er, not strictly against the laws of physics, it still falls into the subcategory of "utterly insane", once one looks at the real tonnages and watts and dollars and engineering problems.
It was never a serious proposal, it's just some zillionaire's daydream about having their own Neuromancer-style space-station, a place where their word is law and their dynasty assured by a pet superintelligence.
The only "data-center in space" we're likely to see will be tiny low-power satellites, offering themselves as extraterritorial hosting (i.e. actual data, versus processing) for stuff like an oligarch's ill-gotten crypto-currency.
The article seems to be confusing Republicans with people in GOP counties. Republicans are politicians, and just like Democrats, they're only in it for the special interest groups that bribe them, while being completely out of touch with their constituents.
Depends on the datacenter. If SpaceX etc weren't intent on cutting corners with illegal natural gas generators and trying to trick locals there wouldn't be any push back. Its not like we started building these things in the last couple of years. I've been to plenty of data centers that no one even knew were data centers because they weren't the size of Manhattan and spewing out tons of noise pollution.
Data centers are only going up near populations because the DCs want the community to pay for all the infrastructure upgrades and higher rates.
If the DCs had to go it alone, wait who are we kidding? They never even thought of that path, it's all about how to push the costs on to locals. They want all the freebies they can get.
People aren't "Republicans" or "Democrats" or whatever. They're people. Of course "Republican support" collapses in communities once you start asking people what they want.
Find this quite funny overall. In the end Loudoun and Santa Clara get cheap power and lower property taxes than otherwise because they host so many datacenters. It’s pretty good that local policy leads to such good outcomes for people. Huge fan of this structure.
The policy-outcome feedback loop should be tight. People rapidly adapt when that happens.
Fortunately site selection is still possible and construction teams are still well occupied. America’s fortunate to enter a period with such clean industry. Dropping the ball here would have been so foolish.
One solution is to put them in space, leaving more room and resources for humans and wildlife.
Why not build underground structures?
Such structures would have better latency due to locality, they wouldn't be subject to transmission interference from weather, they'd be far more accessible for replacements/upgrades, and being underground naturally aids in cooling and noise suppression.
While it would be resource intensive to dig out the underground structure, I'd be surprised if it even came close to the resource expenditure required to launch all your computer hardware into stable orbit, not even accounting for the fact that the former is a one-time, up-front cost, while the latter would have to be re-done every time you replace hardware.
Space is pretty big. Where would you propose putting them and what will you do when a switch port fails?
This is an idea that is getting a lot of airtime but not sure if anyone practical minded thinks it is viable in the next 15 years.
While that "solution" is, er, not strictly against the laws of physics, it still falls into the subcategory of "utterly insane", once one looks at the real tonnages and watts and dollars and engineering problems.
It was never a serious proposal, it's just some zillionaire's daydream about having their own Neuromancer-style space-station, a place where their word is law and their dynasty assured by a pet superintelligence.
The only "data-center in space" we're likely to see will be tiny low-power satellites, offering themselves as extraterritorial hosting (i.e. actual data, versus processing) for stuff like an oligarch's ill-gotten crypto-currency.
As soon as we figure out how to build a practical and cost effective way to radiate megawatts of heat in a vacuum I'm sure we will!
Why don't we just put them where the people who want them live?
Heat radiation by convection doesn't work great in a vacuum.
The article seems to be confusing Republicans with people in GOP counties. Republicans are politicians, and just like Democrats, they're only in it for the special interest groups that bribe them, while being completely out of touch with their constituents.
BTW this data is drawn from a US map of the entire US data center built-out, county by county:
https://pressaudit.org/blog/datacenters
The title is extremely misleading. Local support collapses almost identically regardless of party affiliation.
This is more indicative of the general NIMBY effect.
what are the pros and cons of having a data center in your county? and does it actually change residents day to day lives in any noticeable way?
Depends on the datacenter. If SpaceX etc weren't intent on cutting corners with illegal natural gas generators and trying to trick locals there wouldn't be any push back. Its not like we started building these things in the last couple of years. I've been to plenty of data centers that no one even knew were data centers because they weren't the size of Manhattan and spewing out tons of noise pollution.
Data centers are only going up near populations because the DCs want the community to pay for all the infrastructure upgrades and higher rates.
If the DCs had to go it alone, wait who are we kidding? They never even thought of that path, it's all about how to push the costs on to locals. They want all the freebies they can get.
They bring nothing to the table
People aren't "Republicans" or "Democrats" or whatever. They're people. Of course "Republican support" collapses in communities once you start asking people what they want.
[EDIT: damn. y'all in the comments. whoosh]
only politicians are delusional enough to think people will support datacenters in their county
[dead]
[flagged]
Find this quite funny overall. In the end Loudoun and Santa Clara get cheap power and lower property taxes than otherwise because they host so many datacenters. It’s pretty good that local policy leads to such good outcomes for people. Huge fan of this structure.
The policy-outcome feedback loop should be tight. People rapidly adapt when that happens.
Fortunately site selection is still possible and construction teams are still well occupied. America’s fortunate to enter a period with such clean industry. Dropping the ball here would have been so foolish.