It's a bit concerning how we hear so many self-destructive voices from the USA on so many different topics. Especially since they tend to export their culture all over the world.
I think it is not smart to export data centers if you are the US. Data sovereignty, compute sovereignty, exporting your dollars, and probably a lot more is something not to take so lightly.
>The operation sought to exploit and amplify existing public concerns about energy prices and local impacts of data center development, but we found no evidence of meaningful breakout beyond its own activity.
>What X didn't disclose, according to Darren Linvill, a researcher at Clemson University, is that at least 59 of those bots had zero engagement and were likely quickly deactivated by X before they could garner a following.
How can you possibly determine the efficacy of this operation?
Is it not more likely that there is a grassroots rejection of building the infrastructure to replace labor, with no upside to the American worker? And a few hundred Chinese sock puppets join in the online fray, but this conversation is not just happening online, and Chinese propaganda is not raising electricity rates or burning illegal natural gas generators.
The dislike of giant data centers is also authentic though. They are generally bad neighbors, for a wide variety of reasons (water/electricity usage, loud, over lit, generally cheap construction with no aesthetics). There are ways to be more neighborhood friendly - you often drive by traditional data centers without even knowing.
Like Russia's efforts to aid Donald Trump in 2016, it's hard to tell how much actual impact the propaganda is actually having on the outcome. There are many, many legitimate reasons to oppose data centers, from the local nuisance they create to the energy they consume to their contribution to an already critical level of global warming.
But I think the most damning argument against them is that they aren't needed. The cost of serving models is dropping faster than data centers can be built, and that trend seems likely to continue---AI is such a new technology that we have barely scraped the surface in finding efficiencies. And most of the innovations in efficiency that have emerged have come from the smaller players, because the big AI labs believe they can simply scale their way out of capacity constraints. An increasingly troubling trend is that they are not scaling their way out with cash flow, but with massive amounts of borrowed money. Seen in that light, data centers are not only a physical liability, they could become a catastrophic economic liability.
There were not many many legitimate reasons to support Trump tho. That vote says something very bad about those who cast it and that is all there is to it.
If you truly believe that, then all I can say is you have not put nearly enough effort into understanding Trump voters' views. I know a few people who voted for Trump, and while I disagree with their respective choices, it doesn't just come down to "it says something bad about them".
It's a bit concerning how we hear so many self-destructive voices from the USA on so many different topics. Especially since they tend to export their culture all over the world.
Care to expand? What are you getting at?
I think it is not smart to export data centers if you are the US. Data sovereignty, compute sovereignty, exporting your dollars, and probably a lot more is something not to take so lightly.
Yes; and in no small part because of Chinese propaganda efforts.
C.f. https://www.axios.com/2026/08/28/china-ai-data-center-backla... for example.
Hmm I wonder why?
>in no small part because of Chinese propaganda efforts.
By all accounts such efforts had little, if any impact.
https://openai.com/index/prc-linked-influence-operations-ai-...
>The operation sought to exploit and amplify existing public concerns about energy prices and local impacts of data center development, but we found no evidence of meaningful breakout beyond its own activity.
https://www.businessinsider.com/x-chinese-bots-data-center-d...
>What X didn't disclose, according to Darren Linvill, a researcher at Clemson University, is that at least 59 of those bots had zero engagement and were likely quickly deactivated by X before they could garner a following.
> no small part
How can you possibly determine the efficacy of this operation?
Is it not more likely that there is a grassroots rejection of building the infrastructure to replace labor, with no upside to the American worker? And a few hundred Chinese sock puppets join in the online fray, but this conversation is not just happening online, and Chinese propaganda is not raising electricity rates or burning illegal natural gas generators.
The dislike of giant data centers is also authentic though. They are generally bad neighbors, for a wide variety of reasons (water/electricity usage, loud, over lit, generally cheap construction with no aesthetics). There are ways to be more neighborhood friendly - you often drive by traditional data centers without even knowing.
Like Russia's efforts to aid Donald Trump in 2016, it's hard to tell how much actual impact the propaganda is actually having on the outcome. There are many, many legitimate reasons to oppose data centers, from the local nuisance they create to the energy they consume to their contribution to an already critical level of global warming.
But I think the most damning argument against them is that they aren't needed. The cost of serving models is dropping faster than data centers can be built, and that trend seems likely to continue---AI is such a new technology that we have barely scraped the surface in finding efficiencies. And most of the innovations in efficiency that have emerged have come from the smaller players, because the big AI labs believe they can simply scale their way out of capacity constraints. An increasingly troubling trend is that they are not scaling their way out with cash flow, but with massive amounts of borrowed money. Seen in that light, data centers are not only a physical liability, they could become a catastrophic economic liability.
There were not many many legitimate reasons to support Trump tho. That vote says something very bad about those who cast it and that is all there is to it.
If you truly believe that, then all I can say is you have not put nearly enough effort into understanding Trump voters' views. I know a few people who voted for Trump, and while I disagree with their respective choices, it doesn't just come down to "it says something bad about them".
And your comment is American propaganda, so it's equally safe to disregard