Then rent out the asset or sell the asset at the new increased price and cash in profit.
You know how this works or you were a fool for not knowing what you were buying and all that comes along with it in the first place.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
-
Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.
Congress Should Start Planning for a Potential AI Crash Now, New Report Says
- Thread starter philb2
- Start date
Then rent out the asset or sell the asset at the new increased price and cash in profit.
You know how this works or you were a fool for not knowing what you were buying and all that comes along with it in the first place.
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2007
- Messages
- 14,226
Well, assuming it did actually increase the value, that might be a good idea. But if sentiment about data centers is bad, do you think someone would want to pay the increased amount to buy my house, or move into a rental there? Do you think I have time to do that while I am working full time at my job? Do you think I have the business sense to do that?
If I did, I would probably already be doing it. And lets be honest, it would be worth more as a commercial property than a residential one, moreso after the datacenter is built.
A VA loan requires you to live in the home anyway, I'm sure there are other loans with similar stipulations. It may not be allowed in the community. I may not own the property in the first place, maybe I'M in a lease.
Yes, as I said, the tech companies can do a better job of getting the public on their side, and in some cases (Google, Microsoft) they are.
On the foreign actor thing, respectfully, anyone who claims US rivals aren't funding opposition organizations to slow down AI development in the US are very naive. It's directly in the interest of rival powers like China to slow down AI development any way they can. China doesn't have the issues the US has building this sort of infrastructure. They just build it. I'm not saying that's the better way, but I am saying they know the US can't just do that and will work to exploit that weakness to slow them down. Funding agitators to drum up opposition and flood America with misinformation campaigns to turn public opinion is something that's been done on much less consequential geopolitical issues in the past. You can bet they're doing this on AI.
So then sell! Take (increased now) profit! If it increased your land value - it benefited you. There are always people/companies willing to buy - don't have to sell to a family.
So then move to a lower cost place! You're now saving money monthly!
Such is life everyone has to deal with decisions like this when being an adult (and owning assets and signing contracts).
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TnlPtaPxXfc&themeRefresh=1
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2007
- Messages
- 14,226
I can say the same to those datacenter companies. No, we don't want you here, so go find somewhere else! See, works both ways.
And if they increase your land value it has benefitted you (if you don't own it's not your land value).
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2010
- Messages
- 8,545
I don't even want walmart to appear in my town, let alone a datacenter.
So in other words, upend your life because someone wanted to build a data centre next door? No thanks. They can't do that near me, but if I lived in a place that had that happen then I'd be furious. I wouldn't be trying to move further away from my job thus making my commute worse and having to pay all the moving expenses. People live in homes and raise their kids in homes. It isn't an asset to be bought/sold like shares. People are highly unlikely to yank their kids out of their school and move a significant distance just to save a bit of money on taxes but at the same time they shouldn't have to put up with that shit because some massive corporation wanted to save a bit of money on power delivery to their data centre. The politicians elected are supposed to protect people against that sort of stuff.
You yourself said the increased land value existed! That's what started this entire thing!
I don't care if you personally want it or not - but to claim a net positive to an owned asset while then claiming no net positives you contradict yourself.
Shit happens:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TnlPtaPxXfc
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2010
- Messages
- 8,545
He isn't saying that as a positive.
And increase to an asset is a positive.
Saying
'Mo' money mo' problems' is complaining about positives too.
Totally agree, but what drives me crazy is that it doesn't have to be this way. There is plenty of empty rural space that can be used that won't bother anyone. Everyone can win, we don't need to choose.
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2004
- Messages
- 24,218
DC's tend to lower land value, because no one wants to live close to them,. so for housing, if one is coming, sell now....if you can..
I do joke, if one ever went up close to me, just make sure I get some fat pipe fiber direct into their connections
. Like that one person in online FPS games that have a 5 ping, and you ask them how the heck "Ya, data center / interconnect is just down the road from me"DC's tend to lower land value, because no one wants to live close to them,. so for housing, if one is coming, sell now....if you can..
I do joke, if one ever went up close to me, just make sure I get some fat pipe fiber direct into their connections
Right but then it hasn't increased his land value - as he initially claimed.
No I'm telling you you're literally wrong if you claim it has increased your land value but there's also been no benefit at all.
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2007
- Messages
- 14,226
It was a fucking hypothetical. The increased value isn't something that exists right now for me, and likely isn't for many others. It was one possible benefit, and not one that would satisfy everyone.
Why are you stuck on that when there are so many good reasons to have datacenters in the area?
Because that's all I initially pointed out you contradicted yourself on that you then tried to argue your way out of.
https://hardforum.com/threads/congr...h-now-new-report-says.2047503/post-1046338662
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2007
- Messages
- 14,226
This is my position. The land value isn't a sure thing. Tell me why it is a sure thing, or otherwise convince me why I am wrong. I'm waiting.
You initially argued it was as an absolute thing while arguing there were no positives.
There's no *potentially* or *maybe* there. That's contradictory is all I pointed out. Deal with it - whether that's retroactively applying *maybes* as you're trying to now, or whatever you need to do.
![Zarathustra[H]](/data/avatars/m/9/9298.jpg?1723407683){kind=avatar}
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 42,336
Sadly since we have allowed AI to grow out of control, sucking up all of the investment in the marketplace, and leaving much less available for real businesses that drive foundational market strength when this crashes, it will be bad, because the rest of the market - once you remove AI - has been seriously under-performing due to lack of investment.
And I say "when" and not "if" for the simple reason that per analysis by both Deutschebank and Goldman Sachs, the AI industry has long since crossed the threshold of receiving more investment than can possibly ever result in a positive return. None of these companies are making profits on their AI investments yet, and none of them can. There simply is not enough of a market opportunity to offset the massive investments in the industry. So the only way any one of them see a return long term is if most of their competition fails, and if most of their competition fails, we already have a burst bubble.
There is also the fact that no major AI company that has a clear market dominating advantage in this race, and they have all invested so much money that they are likely to be seriously plagued by sunk cost fallacy, so every last one of them is likely going to fight until the very last dollar they have and go down swinging.
The money that would previously have been invested in real economy growing businesses is currently being shoveled into the AI fire, most of which will never be seen again.
It's inevitable, and it is going to be really ugly for all of us when it shows that after subtracting out AI, our economy has little to show for itself since at least ~2023.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2007
- Messages
- 14,226
Okay, but you aren't convincing me that way. I'm not changing my position again. If you say anything else I wont argue, especially if it's reasonable. "You should be smarter" and acting as if I represent everyone effected by this is not honest or reasonable.
It's a simple question. If the only positive I provided was enough, I wouldn't be asking it. Give me some other reasons, please.
It's a simple question. If the only positive I provided was enough, I wouldn't be asking it. Give me some other reasons, please.
Last edited:
That's another mistake of yours then - thinking I personally want to convince you personally to accept datacenters or something. I don't.
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2007
- Messages
- 14,226
So I try to have an honest conversation and you waste my time and tell me I'm stupid...ok, bye.
They do have big one relative to what they cost the city usually, that why it is common for people tax in those city tend to go down a lot while schools budget climb,
https://www.city-journal.org/article/loudoun-county-virginia-data-centers-construction
getting close to pay half of the taxes while using only 3% of the land, “bring $1 billion a year into Loudoun County,” and the total continues to rise. In the fiscal year 2027 budget, data centers are expected to generate $417 million in real property taxes (on the buildings themselves) and another $879 million in personal property taxes (on the servers and equipment inside them), for nearly $1.3 billion in total.
Municipal tax are not just on physical building property but asset value in them, for a datacenter it is often outrageously high per square feet and town service use.
I don't think you want to have an honest conversation.
Otherwise I'd point out how we're better off today having had electricity and railroads built out over the objections people raised when protesting those at the time. Or how when the people's protests got listened to, like with nuclear power that then wasn't built out - we're not better off for that to this day.
The world of today and tomorrow runs on compute. Every company, every military, every (modern) civilization today runs on compute. Therefore more compute is more beneficial to the one/country who has it. Has to go somewhere then. If not in your backyard, then *theirs*.
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2007
- Messages
- 14,226
I'm glad somebody knows how this works. If I saw that, I would feel much better. I might still have complaints if they had to issue large grants to proceed, but at least the tax situation looks good.
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2007
- Messages
- 4,585
Slopping Malls
And is it Alberta that wants to secede?
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2004
- Messages
- 24,218
Ya, the "separatists" who do not understand treaties....that were in place before Alberta as a political entity even existed..
StoleMyOwnCar
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2013
- Messages
- 3,526
https://www.usnews.com/news/nationa...er-neighbors-grapple-with-noise-air-pollution
There are a lot of noise pollution articles about these things.
Hence, they can go fuck themselves. If you want to go set one up in the Sahara Desert, be my guest, but keep that shit far away from me. I have a hard enough time sleeping with any noise concerns as is, I don't need a motherfucking data center anywhere near me, unless you give 100k (minimum) for every home in the area to get state of the art sound proofing, go shove that fucking datacenter GPU up your ass.
Actually, no, even if all of the homes are soundproofed, kids now have to play outside with this in the backdrop, and walks are ruined.
Plus they don't really provide any jobs after construction, they're just tax generators if anything, and I'm sure these businesses will eventually try to loophole their way out of that part, too, considering how ethically dubious they are about pushing them through to begin with.
Fact is, AI itself is a powerful tool to help. But you can already get started locally with a 5090 or less. There are even some recipes for 16gb consumer cards out in the wild. Most people don't need the frontier models these datacenters run.
There are a lot of noise pollution articles about these things.
Hence, they can go fuck themselves. If you want to go set one up in the Sahara Desert, be my guest, but keep that shit far away from me. I have a hard enough time sleeping with any noise concerns as is, I don't need a motherfucking data center anywhere near me, unless you give 100k (minimum) for every home in the area to get state of the art sound proofing, go shove that fucking datacenter GPU up your ass.
Actually, no, even if all of the homes are soundproofed, kids now have to play outside with this in the backdrop, and walks are ruined.
Plus they don't really provide any jobs after construction, they're just tax generators if anything, and I'm sure these businesses will eventually try to loophole their way out of that part, too, considering how ethically dubious they are about pushing them through to begin with.
Fact is, AI itself is a powerful tool to help. But you can already get started locally with a 5090 or less. There are even some recipes for 16gb consumer cards out in the wild. Most people don't need the frontier models these datacenters run.
Last edited:
The thing is, they wouldn't have to be so noisy. Chances are you've been near a datacenter before and not known it. They are fairly average commercial/industrial buildings. The issue is that they want to be exceedingly cheap and fast about these. Facebook is putting some in literal tents, and many are using gas turbines for power which are noisy as fuck. If they were willing to spend time and money to build them well, use things like ground source cooling (more expensive but more eco friendly) and so on then it wouldn't be nearly as big a deal. But they are all in a building orgy to get as much as possible, as fast as possible, fuck any considerations of anything else.
StoleMyOwnCar
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2013
- Messages
- 3,526
That depends on the datacenter type. I've been in many datacenters, too, my workplace has some. But they're not hosting thousands of extremely power hungry GPUs that they have to cool. The AI datacenters being built now are a different animal from the datacenters of days past, I think. Or more like the issue is that "datacenter" is an extremely vague term that could imply any number of a billion things and configurations.
Anyway...
The other problem is that "cheap orgy" is the modus operandi for most companies these days, and our government is too lax on them due to extensive lobbying. If we didn't have states and local city governing bodies clamping down on them instead, we'd be completely fucked. I understand that the money is appealing because they can then use the tax revenue to do improvements to the city and improve peoples' lives (or just line their pockets like corrupt fucks, who knows), but imo this has to be rolled out a lot more responsibly than it has been.
It's true they use more power than your typical one, but supercomputers are similar and I've been around well designed buildings for them (and for GPUs) and it isn't an issue. It really isn't that hard to insulate the noise they make. The cooling is another issue but again, it can be done and usually was in the past.
That's what makes it even more enraging to me. It isn't a situation of "This technology just CAN'T be done quietly!" I mean there are some (air travel) that just flat out can't there's lots of noise. No, this CAN be, you just have to spend more on it. But of course they don't wanna do that. Likewise there is land that is extremely remote that they could be built on, but that cost more time and money for construction and utilities, so they don't want that either. Instead they'd rather stick them in residential areas and say "deal with it."
And the last few announcements I heard were that greedy counties and towns were offering decade or longer breaks on those asset value taxes to attract data centres which would result in bugger all taxes generated by the data centre itself compared to its damage on the local town.
DukenukemX
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2005
- Messages
- 11,464
Crash now? Without any cures for cancer?
They get tax breaks for all of it. So it just zeros out any revenue the state would have collected. In Virginia right now as we speak Spanburger is trying to pass a $2 BILLION tax break for data centers. That's NOT going to be made up anywhere.
case by case, the example above no they did not get tax break for all of it. Loundoun is in virginia and receive giant local property and tech taxes from it (as you see in the message you quoted).
The state level reail sales and use tax break is for a different tax they get a break from (until 2035), but they do a state level pay other taxes and massive electricity fees