> isn't against them being built but thinks that there need to be rules in place so the communities that they're being built in actually benefit from them
Welcome to NIMBY
Welcome to NIMBY
Your point is that the arguments are topologically similar but you are ignoring the impacts.
I think there's a better case that building additional housing causes an impact on people nearby than there is that data centers do - because the people who would live in that housing are a type of impact on the people who already live nearby - and I'm still extremely unsympathetic to NIMBYs because NIMBYism is the main reason my own housing costs are so high. Data center opposition is even less justified than housing opposition.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2025/07/27/electrici...
Datacentres are generally built where poor people live. If you are on minimum wage and suddenly someone increases your electricity bill by $300 because of data centres, on top of all the other increases tied to things like energy insecurity... I can understand why people would consider that an impact.
I can legally operate a slaughterhouse. How about I buy the plots on both sides of your house and start killing, gutting and cleaning cows, pigs, sheep and other animals?
Any waste can be removed a couple times a week.
I'd expect that you'd object to that perfectly reasonable business plan, yes?
What's that? There are laws (usually zoning) about who (If anyone) can run a slaughterhouse on your street?
Whatever do you mean?
Who are you to tell me what I can do on my private property?
Are you some kind of communist?
I think in a residential area that would be more profitable than a slaughterhouse. Slaughterhouses don't really pencil out in busy neighborhoods.
We hate NIMBYs when others get what they want.
That’s life I guess.
In other words, welcome to NIABUDSAGTTYGAOP, BATPESLETSGWFLSTL
But I get how that's not as fun to engage with for pithy internet rhetoric.
“Nono, I’m not NIMBY, I just want to set up some goalposts that I can arbitrarily move whenever I want. I just want veto power. Trust me, I’ll use it responsibly”
Decades of no housing follows
But the chips land on our soil and are programmed by our companies (often by immigrants).
I think if we forfeit our spot it could be pretty bad economically.
That’s my point.
... you sure about that one chief?
After that, when more Litography machines have been built and facilities constructed, that may change. But even then I don't see how this will reduce component prices below the pre-AI-boom numbers? Chip production was already very efficient and already had very good economies of scale. Any attempt to ramp up production quickly will just lead to higher costs in facility construction, that need to be recouped. (Unless AI is a bubble that bursts, at which point components will be cheap, but only for a moment)
Other than war, price pressure is the only lever we have for abundance and a pivot against a future of rationing and constant whinging and committee hearings about which technology is allowed to use how much RAM.
Pressure on.