This is true. It is also true that waiting until things bottom out will make things even worse. It will be more expensive and options will be more limited.
There will need to be a federal bailout to relocate everyone who needs help. The government should also probably announce a policy that there will be no future disaster relief that involves rebuilding, only relocating.
New Orleans will be the first, but not the last American city to collapse. Miami is probably next. Salt Lake City could very well run out of water, nevermind the increasingly toxic lakebed. Phoenix too. In the next hundred years people are going to learn why environmentalists use the word "sustainability" so much.
Global warming increases evaporation and consequently increase global rainfall. Although it is true that it can shift the location of rainy spots and dry spots, unless you have some magic way to predict the locations they will shift to, I'm going to assume Phoenix's access to water is going to increase because it seems extremely unlikely to me that the entire watershed of the Colorado River (encompassing most of the American part of the Rockies probably) will become dryer on average.
The difference is that schools, crime, etc., are all what they are right now. It's there, it's verifiable. Anybody buying in has access to the full information. They can walk around the neighborhood and see for themselves.
The flooding and inevitable destruction of the city is decades away. It's still abstract. Some people might even think it is preventable.
I don't think it's unethical to sell. People have their own motivations. Maybe a buyer just wants it for 5 years, who knows. Probably the risk will get baked into market price. What does need to happen though is the federal government needs to step up, because they're the only ones who can, and guarantee they will buy it for a certain percentage of appraised market value. I would imagine that percentage will decline over time until they declare the city a total loss, after which your property is declared worthless. If they do this now, they can make it possible for people to leave with some semblance of dignity and mitigate hardships.
For those interested, Relisten is another repository of live concert recordings. It skews heavily towards improvisational music, ie jambands, but there's some indie rock on there as well.
Cool site, thanks! it seems to also be backed by archive.org, i wonder if there's a way to move more stuff into that interface. the nirvana performance in the article isn't there for instance.
We landed an update on mobile last week that brought all 4,000 artists with a "collection" onto Relisten. That'll be coming to the web and sonos shortly as well.
We've been discussing the Aadam Jacob's collection with the archivists for some time. It comes with its own unique UX[0] and data constraints so we've been iterating on that and waiting for a critical mass of uploads before tackling it. We're getting closer though.
I agree with most of the sentiment in these comments. Archive and share non-comercially all the things!
[0] it's not "one" artist so it requires some custom UI, it should be unified through a single Aadam Jacob's collection, and it has a unique data path/structure on Archive.org relative to other collections
Because the "it'll create X jobs" implies it's ongoing. It's a disingenuous attempt to oversell the benefits because they know if they're transparent about it, suddenly it doesn't seem like such a great deal.
Actually if they were honest they'd say "It'll create x careers", which is a much better deal than just a job. Friend went from 17 an hour at his first DC to 100/hr last year with 70 people on his team.
"If they require the datacenter to be a closed water system and pay for their own electricity..."
This assertion is doing a LOT of heavy lifting, and when it isn't true, it can cause huge externalities not just for the local community but possibly an entire region. It also does not address the noise problem.
Additionally, your jobs estimates are likely high and include short-term construction jobs which may not even go to locals anyway.
"Pay for their own electricity" is just not an actual thing that seems to be doable at this scale without those externalities. You're talking about sites that are, say, 800MW or 1GW or more... these use more power than tens of thousands of homes, and require entirely new power plants, interconnects, lines run, transformer costs, staff, etc. Typically, power companies amortize those costs and spread them over ratepayers, and when it's just part of the normal induced load of population growth, that's just how things go, and the system works.
In these cases, the rates that these DCs are paying for power are nowhere close to being able to fully absorb or offset the additional CapEx that the power companies are suddenly tasked with, even if they put up, say, the capital for IC, which is usually what's required. So the remaining new shortfalls get spread over the remaining ratepayers, ie, everyone else. If the demand wasn't induced by the build of these massive sites that, strictly speaking, aren't "necessary," then the rates wouldn't have to climb to accommodate them.
Frankly, there should be laws against power companies raising ratepayer rates to accommodate infrastructure investments driven solely by DC/fab load inducement.
Heating homes keeps humans alive who then go onto work, creating economic value.
A DC supplies, like, 12 jobs maybe. The 10,000 homes worth of power it uses supplies 20,000 jobs, maybe more if some older kids are working at the local Dairy Queen.
Yes, if we stopped making underwear the economy would suffer a lot. That's just plainly true, I don't know why you perceive reality as "deranged". I believe they make medication for that, you might look into it.
Human needs are a prerequisite for human productivity. Heating is actually more important than data centers. I think 99% of people would agree with me on that.
Are you just trying to be annoying and pedantic or do you secretly have a point you're trying to make? Because I'm not gonna try to guess your argument for you and then argue against it.
Heating has value because PEOPLE FUCKING PAY FOR IT.
Do you know what we call assigning monetary value to a service? Value. That's value.
No, you don't understand. Sending bytes back and forth creates real economic value. We shouldn't heat homes and have supermarkets in this day and age, the margins are miniscule.
I think the differentiating feature is that capitalism used to be tethered to producing things that were useful. The current model of wealth acquisition, so called "late-stage" seems to have shifted more towards rent seeking and extraction.
Is there a viable career path for researchers who choose to focus on replication instead of novel discoveries? I assume replications are perceived as less prestigious, but it's also important work.
The closest thing we have is, in security / privacy / cryptography, you can write "attack" papers.
It's not perfect. You don't get any credit unless you can demonstrate a substantial break of the prior work. But it's better than in a lot of other fields.
There will need to be a federal bailout to relocate everyone who needs help. The government should also probably announce a policy that there will be no future disaster relief that involves rebuilding, only relocating.
New Orleans will be the first, but not the last American city to collapse. Miami is probably next. Salt Lake City could very well run out of water, nevermind the increasingly toxic lakebed. Phoenix too. In the next hundred years people are going to learn why environmentalists use the word "sustainability" so much.
reply