this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2026
221 points (99.6% liked)

politics

31234 readers
2518 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Our gov is a dumb fuck bit he did one thing right requiring them to disclose their usage information. They did but redacted the important parts. How the fuck do they get to get away with this?

all 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TigerAce@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 hour ago

They also do that in the Netherlands. Shady fuckers. Burn them all.

[–] ptsdstillinmymind@lemmy.today 18 points 7 hours ago

Fuck Data Centers and anyone that supports this shit

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 16 points 8 hours ago (4 children)

There's a subgroup on Lemmy that will absolutely melt down if you mention data center water usage. And I can't help but think "The Water Hoax" rhetoric churning through the LessWrong community has played a major role.

However you square it, though, you can't help but consider something like this peculiar.

[–] KC_Royalz@lemmy.world 21 points 8 hours ago

I don't buy it for a second that these things dont use massive amounts of water. And Google hiding it just proves that

[–] KC_Royalz@lemmy.world 5 points 8 hours ago

I think I need to go visit this community and post this there

[–] Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 8 hours ago

And I can't help but think "The Water Hoax" rhetoric churning through the LessWrong community has played a major role.

Incredible, I didn’t think I could hate anyone involved here any more, and yet.

[–] cogitase@lemmy.dbzer0.com -5 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

If you attack the electricity and carbon sides of data centers, you might at least be able to divert some of the money tied up in AI towards the construction of renewable energy. Those are also stronger arguments than the water usage argument. Arguing from your most defensible position(s) is generally ideal.

[–] khannie@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

The energy usage is off the charts. I've spent time in data centres (a long time ago) and none of them at the time had massive water usage so I believe it's only a very wasteful subset that are being dicks.

On the flip side, data centres are taking up a fifth of all electricity usage in the whole country where I live and fucking our carbon targets so people are pissed about it.