Yeah, the implication here is that data centres are not worth getting into because something even better and more profitable will be built instead, which can do a similar task. OK? Does op care to elaborate on what that might be?
I think it's more about the leftover impact to cities than trying to preach about future profits.
Computer equipment has a very limited shelf life. It's easily less than 5-8 years on average, especially in commercial applications with very high uptime.
What is a city going to do when a massive data warehouse gets built, taking up a massive square footage of the taxable land, often with massive tax grants, which only employs 20-40 people permanently (after construction), and then the whole building gets shut down because the business is unable to replace failing or obsolete chips in just 5 years?
You'll end up with half built structures that are more of a hindrance than a help. Just like the abandoned canals or train lines.
^ This. The real world is more than profit and data. The physical places, actual people, and a town’s culture can be forever impacted. Tons of examples where big factories close down and small towns feel eerily haunted, stuck in the past
104
u/CosmicDave 19d ago
We still have the railroads 200 years later. If you see the AI as the trains instead of canals in this analogy, it hits completely different.