Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | kortilla's commentslogin

I think you’re missing the point. It’s not you gaining more freedom with the land that’s the problem. It’s that all your neighbors now have the same freedom.

I bought my house with a close neighbor because I know the neighbor can’t build a steel mill in their backyard. If the government comes in and says we’re all free now to build steel mills, that gain in freedom is a loss in value for me.


Yes but unfortunately you never paid for what rights your neighbour had, so nothing is being taken from you

> the AXD301 ATM switch achieved nine nines over a nine-month period using Erlang and BEAM in 2002. That calculates out to 24 milliseconds of downtime.

This is misleading. I had an old Dell computer in my garage hosting a php app that hit that level of uptime as well over a 9 month period. It was 100% so actually better.

Those uptime numbers only hold water when spread over many thousands to millions of users where you’re at large enough scale that you’re actually dealing with a meaningful volume of hardware failures.


Did you come from reddit? The switch in question is a backbone switch and those at the time served tens of millions of users.

How many do you serve?

Edit: either you are a troll or you have an affinity for hateposting on HN. Nothing positive have come from your comments.


Many churches believe they have a “healthy and positive” community along with their constituents while espousing those same views.

A community can simultaneously be healthy and positive while being politically disagreeable to others.


Being incapable of compromise for votes does not make good legislation. “You’re gonna need congressional approval and you don’t have the votes.”

What compromise? The GOP are ideologically opposed to these sorts of things and immovable.

What do you suggest, trading away people's healthcare or something for net neutrality?


> No one travels with babies for fun

I have encountered this many times flying so it’s not “no one”. It’s usually younger couples who either don’t know what they are getting into or just have the energy to deal with it.

On international flights from the US it’s common to hear the reason is to bring the baby to see extended family.


That’s not what the idiom “don’t do x for fun” is about.

The expression means that X is the best of unpalatable options to accomplish something else, where X is taken in a literal and narrow sense.

People don’t fly with babies for fun. They do it because visiting grandparents is fun, and driving isn’t a good option. Or, if it involves a trip across the ocean, the alternative would be sailing.


Well that’s idiotic. Approximately nobody “flies for fun” under that tortured definition.

It’s a common idiom. And idioms are often weird. But that is exactly the point.

> Approximately nobody “flies for fun” under that tortured definition.

Yes. That is exactly how it’s supposed to be used. The vast majority of people do not enjoy the airport/airline experience and were there any other reasonable way to get where they are going they would probably take it. They are not doing it because it is fun, they are doing it because they have to.


Yes but seeing extended family is not "for fun". Family is important.

agree, and extend... ask any parent if taking small kids anywhere is a "vacation"

there is literally no such thing.

its like people who say that parental leave is a vacation. wildly miss informed and completely tone def.


That’s not correct. I took my small children on vacations to grandparents all the time. Taking the kids to any extended family that can help watch them is a vacation. The best vacations you can have involve just taking kids to see family.

i mean "vacation" in the sense that people use the term to mean "a break from work"

small kids are always lots of work and this its pretty hard to have a vacation.

i agree that visiting fam is the best, partly bc they will help with the kids :)


>In this scenario, there isn't going to be evacuation. At best, it's search and rescue. At worst, search and recovery.

Scenarios without evacuations are ones where nearly everyone or everyone is already dead. That’s not a case to optimize for.


Your 3 examples were all different regulatory regimes.

> There are tons of examples now of data centers harming communities.

But there aren’t. At least not in any of the anti datacenter discussions. There are just vague fears of using up the river water and spewing chemicals back in. Then the majority of actual issues people come up with aren’t even data center specific, they are just construction mishaps.



These are clearly written as fear porn rather than serious academic analyses.

The reason they need to be written like that, it because honest takes have a pretty hard time making data centers look close to being as bad as everyday things like golf courses, average car emissions, AC's set at 70, eating meat, normal industrial power demand, or the overnight shipping economy.


This is a strawman. I’ve watched my own city reject datacenter propositions much to my dismay. Tax revenue thrown away purely on FUD-fueled backlash.

I lived by a datacenter in Cali and would happily do it again. It’s about the most benign form of “industrial” activity you could imagine.


If you don't like it there, trade with someone who is in a town with a datacenter and is unhappy that the datacenter is there! Or maybe convince more YIMBY types to move into your city and get the datacenter back.

I understand you're disappointed that people had the ability to choose things in their lives and didn't choose the thing you wanted. You can still do plenty to get the datacenters right across the street from you - sometimes in this world you have to work for the outcomes you want. IDK if it's fair or not, but it is how it seems to work out.


Nobody is building datacenters directly across a house. This kind of ridiculous exaggeration doesn't help. And I'd happily live in a town or place near one.

They literally are. Look up the markley datacenter in lowell Massachusetts. Here's a video out of dowagiac michigan where you can see and hear the datacenter across the street: https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/michigan/2026/0...

Those are two I know off the top of my head. There are others.

Why would you lie about something so easily dispoven?


You linked to a data center that was a bitcoin mining operation and is explicitly having noise abatement being applied before being brought back online as an AI one?

That doesn’t support any argument against new builds nor does it support the notion that they are inherently noisy.

Also, in reply to your further up NIMBY nonsense suggesting I move.

I don’t think you understand how people operate. I like my small city and am upset idiots spread fear and harmed its prospects that we will pay for with continued anemic local employment, poorly budgeted infrastructure, etc.

I want to see good things here. I’m not just going to give up on it and go to some city that has its shit together on the business side.

Datacenters have been around for decades and the Dulles Tech Corridor, the ones around Portland, the SIX in Seattle, etc all have shown they can operate just fine.

> I understand you're disappointed that people had the ability to choose things in their lives and didn't choose the thing you wanted

No, I’m disappointed they did it based on ignorance and propaganda. There was no informed decision making going on. This is no different than people who voted against gay marriage because they thought their god would seek retribution through calamities.


> You linked to a data center that was a bitcoin mining operation

This is a good point. Was it a data center across the street from somebody’s house when it was mining Bitcoin? Yes. Will it still be a data center across the street from somebody’s house when it reopens as an ai data center? Also yes


> You linked to a data center that was a bitcoin mining operation and ...

> I don’t think you understand how people operate.

Hahaha you think people care what the datacenters do.... and you accuse me of not understanding how people operate.


But why do you think they know what they’re talking about? That’s the problem with that show. It platforms people with no guardrails to stop quacks.

As much as I hate appeal-to-authority based arguments, it's basically the only way I can see how to answer this without just totally rehashing the things he says in the video. He was an AI forecaster at OpenAI for several years. (I think 2019? to 2024). He quit on the grounds that OpenAI (as well as the rest of the industry) were / are throttling towards RSI irresponsibly, and even refused to sign an anti disparagement clause on exit at the risk of losing 2 million dollars (80% of his family's net worth) so he could talk freely about OpenAI. Now he runs a non-profit that does AI forecasting and advocacy.

https://www.aifutures.org/

https://ai-2027.com/


Sometimes the most interesting people are people with ideas outside of the same groupthink circle. Everyone who has changed society has been called a quack by a square.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: