You must log in or # to comment.
AI is starting to show that it isn’t worth the investment and they are STILL building more?!? WTF is going on?
Because I do not think AI is the actual end goal. I think the actual end goal is cloud computing. They want everyone to use thin clients and connect to their data center instead of using a pc at home.
Don’t forget the surveillance state! The global buildout for the NWO one government surveillance state will be paid with your pension and retirement savings.
Nothing to do with a so called new world orde just the same people as before. It is just the government and industrialist that want more power. We are just living though the beginings of a cyberpunk setting.
Yeah but without the cool tech or space exploration. We just get the shitty parts.
Well there is cool tech for the ultra rich (some examples, robotic prostetics, private space companies, Gabe’s private lab yachts, brain interface, private exploration of the Marianna trench).
We definetly get the sloppy seconds, if that.
I think the real goal is the billionaires uploading their minds to achieve immortality. Definitely impossible, but that’s what I think.
That was my theory to why Zuck was so interested in his Metaverse. Every billionaire is planning some sort of post-life or extending their lives one way or another. The same way kings and emperors of history have.
Chinese emperors often consumed mercury in pursuit of eternity. Zuck and friends want to print themselves onto silicon. Coincidence?
You also have Brian Johnson’s blood transfusions and it wouldn’t be a stretch that Musk’s children are all potential organ donors.
AI LLMs are definitely a smokescreen for justifying more compute.
What the real goal for all those CPUs is I have no idea.
Good thing my rural internet isn’t strong enough for that
Than just a thin client for you.
full circle, back when I started, main frames with thin clients.
Jensen Huang has been pretty open about that being the plan lately. Although he still insists that even the cloud computers will be run by AI agents.
There are multiple goals in mind such as surveillance, pumping the stock market, taking control out of people’s hands, excuses to do things like lay people off, etc. In this case or in general for local governments, it’s a matter of a select number of people getting a lot of money in their pockets and thus pushing for these data centers to happen.
That might have worked over a few generations but they want people that are used to owning their stuff to just give it up over night and it’s not going very well for them.
The bailout money will be double what they lost I am guessing.
Red line go up.
Profit Cults gotta commit to the behaviour
That is crazy and would make no sense for them to do. Why do you think they’re doing that?
deleted by creator
Hmmm Providence RI by any chance? LOL
OP claims to be from southwestern europe here: On a post about his cat
Lol, that’s clearly Portugal. They have burrokracia over there, and they are honorary Balkan.
Not judging but curious, why did you dig into post histories? I see plenty of people doing it even if I never do, so I’m just curious why.
Can’t answer for them but the few times I’ve done it is to make sure I’m talking with someone that can actually hold a conversation and I’m not arguing with a shill or looney. Sometimes just to see what a person is like on average. Especially if they act like a cunt for little reason. Some do it just for curiosity sake.
Makes sense. Thanks for the answer!
Sure thing. 🙂
Lol I wasn’t expecting op to actually reply don’t need them doxxing themselves was just poking fun at how that crap happens more often than you’d think with the corruption , shits a plague everywhere
It should be legal and acceptable to take back things given for one purpose that end up being used for something else.
It actually is if the gift is conditional on a specified use - in writing of course.
In my country it is legal to do so
It’s legal to burn down data centres if you don’t get caught.
was there a clause that if it isnt used as intended, it return to the owner?
Yeah, it’s a park… An industrial park
a while back when i was a animal physio class a university, the profess told how he knew someone about to retire/Will but he wanted to donate it to STANFORD on the sole purpose of it being used as a research station in some island/country. the guy somehow heard the stanford lawyers said they were going to sell it or rent it out instead right behind his back. he gave it to Berkley university instead to be used for science.
the moral of the story make sure you have something in place so that the land/property being donated is used properly by a lawyer or a trust org.
Universities are a business and have the morals of your generic street thug. Why anyone would consider donating anything to them is a mystery.
Mostly to get their kids guaranteed entry into the university.
Whistleblowers with morals are also more important that people realise.
I can’t imagine a better way to ensure people don’t donate land ever again.
deleted by creator
People should know that donating land like this is not at all guaranteed to keep the land from being developed. Promises to keep parks in existence is nothing when the city “needs” a new development, hospital, data center, whatever.
I know the saying is “don’t mess with Texas” but Texas seems to fuck itself over all the time. I would be raising hell about this if it was my backyard.
That’s kind of but not exactly a mistranslation. The original Chinese is closer to ‘do not interrupt your enemy while he is making a mistake’, but in the american vernacular, you can just say ‘don’t mess with Texas’ and it means the same thing locally. Its one of those very regional sayings.
Pretty sure “Don’t mess with Texas” began its life as an anti-littering campaign in the late 80s or early 90s. It has been appropriated to mean all sorts of things, though. The original meaning might be even more relevant to data centers…
No, the EPA just appropriated sun tzu.
I mean… I guess it could mean that now, but that is certainly not what it meant originally or how it was ever used.
Oh, you speak Chinese?
In the most Peggy Hill way possible.
Is “don’t mess with Texas” Chinese?
I just said its a translation. Yes. From sun tzu I think. In england they translate it the other way I said here.
Except the actual phrase didn’t originate from whatever Chinese saying you’re talking about. It was an anti-littering campaign, from Texas, in the 1980s.
No, its from translating ‘the art of war’ into an american dialect. EPA just appropriated it.
Any time I think of the art of war, I think of this song:
Any time I think of the art of war
That is how Americans do things. A third of angels fell, but that’s ok because we have the Illuminati to kerfuffle their feathers.
This has nothing to do with any translation of any language, it’s a US English expression.
It is a joke.
They are intimating that texas makes so many mistakes that “Don’t mess with texas” may be a blowhard boast to texans, but to everyone else it means “just let the idiots wreck themselves”
Also that ‘Texas’ is synonymous with ‘enemy’ for all Americans.
Still has nothing to do with translating anything from any other language.
And since they doubled down on it being the actual origin when pressed on it, I don’t think they were joking.
…it was pretty obviously a shitpost, dude.
Absolutely not. You don’t double down on a joke.
Thank you for the correct interpretation, I really need to remember that one
Stories like this always remind me of the Peter’s parking deck at GA Tech. The couple that donated the land wanted it to be a park, so that the students would have a green place to play and relax. Once Tech had the land, they put a parking deck there instead. But they put a basketball court on the top level so that they technically met the letter of the law.
In fairness, as a student I needed that parking deck way more than I needed the park.
omg, never knew about this donation. Sad, but also in the spirit of an engineer doing absolute minimum to pass compliance while achieving what you need. Whats the good word!
The said part there is truly that the you needed a parking lot more than greenspace.
Pave paradise and put up a
parking lotdata center🎶 shoo-bop-bop-bop-bop 🎶
She trusted the government I don’t understand what Went wrong
I’ve seen this story a few times now. Is there (gonna be) a court case, or is that it?
Nobody got any fight in them anymore. Which is how they like it.
And this is why you need a lawyer when you’re doing this kind of thing.
If this farmer was smart, there would be a clause in the contract that the land may only be used for a park or other public space. And that if the city decides to resell the land, the farmer or their descendants will have the right to reclaim it.
Thus, farmer could either stop the data center or at least get a solid payday.
If you read the article, there was exactly this sort of clause in the deed, and now the courts are saying “fuck you”
and now the courts are saying “fuck you”
It’s one Court and unsurprisingly it’s the Court located right there in town. I strongly suspect that the Third Court of Appeals is going to have a different take on this mess.
At least where I live you can’t wash away a deed restriction like this by transferring the property a couple times.
It is wild to me that this wasen’t handled elsewhere to begin with. There is no way to at least somewhat guarantee a fair process with this massive potential for conflict of interest.
Actually just did read the article, had to dig it up off an archive site. Honestly this seems like it’s a garden variety case of deed washing. Pass the property back and forth a few times between various entities, somewhere in the line the deed restrictions get ‘accidentally lost’, and what comes out in the end is a parcel with no restrictions and the only one with any interest in enforcing restrictions is five or six owners ago (all with impeccable arm’s length separation of course) so if a court does try and fix it you end up with a giant mess of transactions to unwind, some of which may not be possible to unwind.
Sadly if I’m correct that means the most likely outcome is the deed restriction is enforced and the data come center company files a claim with their title insurance. The best shot at actually unwinding any of this is that the property was transferred for significantly below market value or for nothing between some of those entities in the middle, which makes it a lot easier to argue they were acting as one.
IANAL. The general approach to this isn’t to sell it, from what I’ve seen. It’s to lease it for purpose.
We have a number of scouting camps near me that have permissive leases. Technically, the family that “donated” the land has a conditional lease with BSA, with terms like “BSA may use the land so long as one Boy Scout sleeps on the property at least one night per year.” With stipulations that if this requirement is not met, the land returns full and unconditional ownership to the nearest living descendant.
In the mean time, BSA is responsible for all taxes, costs, upkeep and improvements.
Basically, until BSA dissolves, they will be free to use the land. Failure to meet the condition would immediately revert ownership and void the lease.
Not a lawyer either, but the article explicitly says “sold”, so I assume it’s not just leasing
In 2003, the Texas Parks and Recreation Foundation granted the land to another non-profit called the Williamson County Park Foundation. A month later, that non-profit gave the land to the City of Taylor. Five years later, in 2008, the city of Taylor sold the land to the Taylor Economic Development Corporation (TEDC) for $15,000. In 2025, TEDC sold the land to Blueprint, the data center developers, for $10 million.
I can just see it- ‘Okay kids it’s that time of the year again, whoever wants to get their computer merit badge and their camping merit badge, bring your tent at meet at 6:00 p.m. in the parking lot of the data center on our old campground…’ 🤣
(I’m sure that’s not the only restriction heh)
But yeah I agree that’s the way to go, basically guarantees the donation recipient stays in line and the instant they don’t the donation evaporates.
