this post was submitted on 28 Jun 2026
295 points (99.3% liked)

Technology

86628 readers
3928 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 36 points 4 weeks ago (3 children)

Lasher—who no AI company spent big money to elect—had just beaten Alex Bores, a state assemblyman who became the unlikely center of an extraordinary bidding war between rival AI factions. Pro-safety AI super PACs, including Public First Action backed by Anthropic, poured $19 million into supporting Bores. Leading the Future, tied to OpenAI president Greg Brockman and Andreessen Horowitz, spent $8 million trying to destroy him. Lasher won with 39% of the vote (while Kennedy scion Jack Schlossberg came in a distant third place). And then Lasher pledged to pursue the same AI regulation agenda as the man he beat.

Regardless of letter by the name, absolutely no amount of money can buy as many votes as anyone would get by not taking AI money...

No one actually wants this shit except the politicians who have been bribed to make it happen no matter what.

Pushing this hard on one of the only issues that actually has widescale support is going to really backfire. Even people who see AI is inevitable, none of them want datacenters anywhere near them.

What's fucking crazy, is no one is trying to build out in Alaska.

Cold as fuck, sparsely populated, huge tax breaks for everyone, and I gotta assume there's major internet connections they could tap into when it crosses continents at the shortest point.

Or like Japan building underseas by thermal vents, but in America they build them in fucking neighborhoods, likely knowing it will crash all surrounding property values giving them easy expansion down the road.

[–] roofuskit@lemmy.world 9 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

There are exactly zero undersea cables from Alaska to Asia. I think the reasons should be obvious. There is one to Alaska from the lower 48.

[–] Nastybutler@lemmy.world 2 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

Not yet

And while this article has an estimated completion date of this year, current projections have it pushed out to 2029

[–] hamsterkill@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

They are putting them in Alaska (the governor is even working to attract more), but sparsely populated Alaska doesn't currently have the energy infrastructure to support a major build-out of data centers there.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago

but sparsely populated Alaska doesn’t currently have the energy infrastructure to support a major build-out of data centers there.

That's the neat part...

No area does.

When they go in residential areas, peoples faucets go dry and their energy rates skyrocket.

Because there's not enough infrastructure for the data centers and the population. So they just take it from the population.

[–] impairedimperator@lemmy.zip 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Cold as fuck and sparsely populated is another way of saying expensive as shit to do anything.

They build in neighborhoods because it is cheap.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Buddy...

For a lot of this large scale shit, it's easier to get it to somewhere in Alaska close to a port than the middle of small town America and definitely in residential areas of major metro areas.

They prefer small towns adjacent to major metros because thats where the bribes are cheapest for tax breaks and property deals.

Again, this is all corrupt capitalism making the decisions. Those decisions won't be good for anyone except the people paying for them or getting paid to make them.

That's why it's "cheap" if we enforced regulations and zoning, it wouldn't even be an option.

Like, arguing that gas is cheaper than an EV, but you only care about price at pump and not all the gas subsidizes we have to pay because of fossil fuel lobbyists.

Gas is "cheaper" but only because oligarchs are making it the cheapest option.

We can just make environmentally prudent decisions the cheapest via regulations.

That's literally the point of environmental regulations and why Cleveland hasnt had any rivers catch fire in almost 60 years. It would be "cheaper" to handle industrial waste like that again if it wasn't for regulations.

[–] impairedimperator@lemmy.zip 0 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Yeah. Exactly. Like I said: they build it in neighborhoods because it is cheap.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Welp, any further attempts to explain the finer points on anything else will probably end up the same as this did...

Best of luck

[–] impairedimperator@lemmy.zip 1 points 3 weeks ago

Like I said. I agree with your explanation.

My point is simple: when you say "it's only cheap because..." Every CFO in the world stopped listening after the word "cheap"