• Silic0n_Alph4@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        2 days ago

        Well, yeah. If you put it somewhere cold like the Arctic it’ll melt the ice caps and make global warming worse. Better to let the cold places stay cold and put the hot data centres somewhere that’s already hot! Sorted - no more global warming (just some localised warming I guess)

        “I’ll just put this over here with the rest of the fire” image from The IT Crowd

      • bthest@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        I often wondered about how much chaos one or two individuals were to just pump 3 or 6 high powered rounds into that place from 1k-3k yards out. Then do it again another day from a different spot, and then another day at different facility, and so one.

        Yeah damage and casualties would be insignificant at those ranges but the fear and panic as random bullets crack over head in the parking lot, punching holes in the roof. The place would have to shut down for days while they search for damage.

        It would take two or three of these in a row before the police realized they weren’t just loose bullets from drunks shooting into the air. Then it would get WAY worse because of the panic and bad press but also because the FBI and AFT will shut them down even longer while agents scour the entire plant to recover every single bullet fragment as evidence.

        It would lead to a total loss of productivity. Like they would have to treat every facility with same security levels as fucking Groom Lake after something like started happening lol. More likely they’d just have fuck off with these data center monstrosities if they started to become bullet magnets.

        And there’s a good chance that the culprits will never be caught. Lots of unsolved crimes out in those deserts.

    • azertyfun@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Well, it could work. If the local government gave a shit. Which they don’t, because Texas. But the water going into a datacenter does come out… The main downside being that it’s hotter (which is a limiting factor, you can’t run it in a loop without some big cooling system, and rivers/lakes are by far the most effective way way to do that).

      The article I saw doesn’t say what the problem is exactly. Is the datacenter pumping from an aquifer rather than a lake/river? Are they raising the temperature in ways that affect the environment negatively? Are they abusing the municipal water supply instead of pumping their own water, forcing the taxpayer to essentially subsidize their infrastructure? Lots that could go wrong, but it’s all shit that should be fully figured out during the permitting process.

    • FaceDeer@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      There’s lots of factors to consider beyond just water. Cost of power, cost of construction and staff, access to internet, proximity to demand for low-latency access, and so forth.

      • Zacryon@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Yeah. It’s just water. Who cares, if at least the internet is good and such. /s