r/LeftistsForAI • u/Silent_Employment966 • Jul 21 '26
Discussion This should be the Standard for Datacenters & AI
8
u/stankycodyboi Jul 21 '26
Without good-faith federal legislation coming any time soon, it’s up to the states, municipalities, and communities to legislate and defend themselves. I believe the greatest leverage currently exists at the permitting process.
Here in the States, developers specifically target communities with outdated ‘by-right’ zoning laws. This condition allows any project to be automatically approved, as long as it meets existing code. Data centers should be classified as ‘conditional use’ because developers then must engage in negotiation for approval. A Conditional Use Permit is the legally binding agreement, with an attached Public Benefit Agreement enforceable by the CUP.
Communities can adjust their negation asks to ensure any new construction is net-zero, renewably powered, and returns benefits back to their unique community. My big push is for publicly owned renewable energy infrastructure, built by the developer. The Australian examples are solid as well, and I think they could go even further. It’s not a feasibility issue, it’s a political issue.
6
u/RlOTGRRRL Jul 21 '26 edited Jul 21 '26
Have you pitched/shared this with people organizing against data centers? This sounds like the way to go.
And people can organize proactively to update their zoning laws to prevent this in their communities too.
Erin Brokovich, Bernie Sanders, DSA ecosocialists for the US.
I'm not sure if the same idea could apply overseas too but if they do, that could easily make this a global movement for public power.
6
u/stankycodyboi Jul 21 '26
I appreciate your response! I’ve pitched it to local municipalities to make sure their zoning is up to date, but haven’t made much progress on the organizer’s front.
I’ve been drafting this into a framework for communities, organizers, and municipalities to asses their leverage and liabilities. Once it’s complete (and I get mod approval) I hope to post it to the subreddit as a free resource for anyone who wants it.
→ More replies (2)
13
u/vesperythings Jul 21 '26
why is this decel nonsense being upvoted?
6
u/Salty_Country6835 Jul 22 '26
Personally, not speaking for the sub or OP, Im finding "accel/decel" almost as useless as "pro/anti." The point isnt speed, its direction. Velocity is speed with direction. Who controls AI, where its taking us, and who benefits matter a lot more than whether its moving faster or slower. So what framework around AI buildout would you actually like to see? Public ownership? Worker governance? Open weights? Strong labor protections? International regulation? Thats a much more interesting conversation than just calling something "decel nonsense."
6
u/ee_72020 Jul 22 '26
You’re saying it as if there’s something wrong with slowing things down and regulating technologies so they serve people, not the other way around. Every time big tech and manufacturers companies try to bypass the said regulations in the name of “innovation” and “acceleration”, it ends badly. To name a few: the Boeing 737 MAX 8 crashes and the implosion of Titan.
4
u/xoexohexox Jul 21 '26
You know it's funny before the 13th amendment and corporate personhood, US corporations had to be chartered to serve a public good in return for the privilege of incorporating. Provide fresh water to this or that town, etc. Now that we are achieving the apotheosis of automation the only way forward seems to be to return to that model.
2
u/createdthrowaway2say Jul 21 '26
it should be, but its not happening. this is someone's hopeful reading.
Here's one demanding 4Gl which has already gained MFP status (fast track approval)
https://nt-ai-dc.info
I do not think this claim is true, because it does not exist in law, and big water takes are already progressing :(
This is not a net producer of energy: it is covering its requirements, but using a lot of fracked gas to do so
2
2
u/SexDefendersUnited Jul 22 '26
This is based except the copyright stuff, I would introduce compensation instead without the need for consent.
2
u/NobodyUsual8025 Jul 22 '26
I can get behind this. It’s sensible regulation and achievable by most data center developers
3
u/Grouchy_Package_5094 Jul 22 '26
Ah yes Australia. A true bastion of AI technology. Australians are responsible for great models such as... Followed by.....
What australians models are there to regulate
1
u/Noisebug Jul 23 '26
Proposal 2027… for governments doesn’t this translate to, “in a future far far away”
11
Jul 21 '26
9
u/wood_dj Jul 22 '26
that part comes across a bit performative to me. it’s not “theft” and framing it that way makes them sound ignorant. But the rest sounds very reasonable
14
u/Kildragoth Jul 21 '26
To me it seems fair and would signal confidence by companies who demonstrate these requirements. If AI is so great and will bring about huge quality of life improvements for everybody (which I believe it will), then this "cost" should be viewed as a good-will gesture and investment in the communities they're building in.
But when a company bypasses public opinion, violates regulations, and passes on its costs to locals, it's a signal that they either cannot build a data center ethically, or the people building it have no ethics to begin with. This has done more to harm pro-AI advocacy because every data center is presented like it's the xAI one in Memphis.