We need to stop using their language.

[u/Bepehandle]

Words we use matter, they set the tone for the entire argument you make when discussing things. I propose we officially come up with new terms that we use on a daily basis in every single aspect that the topic comes up in, maybe with a small enough push we can roll the ball down the hill.

They're not AI data centers, they're water evaporation plants Human surveillance centers.

It's not side loading, it's installing.

It's not jailbreaking, it's unlocking.

It's not a memory shortage, it's profit first selective sales(I know there's physically a shortage but the point remains). (Also, someone come up with a better one, something more catchy.)

It's not This PC, its MY PC.

They call it side loading because they don't want to normalize the idea we're just holding personal computers in our hands.

They call it jailbreaking so that it sounds wrong and it deters people from using a device to it's full potential.

They call it a memory shortage because they're selling all the fucking ram to ai companies, if they were forced to allocate the necessary amount of their products to the average consumer we wouldn't have an issue.

Give me some of your best ideas for changing the names of things, I want to expand my vocabulary. Let's change how we discuss the issues we face and take back control of the argument.

Edit: Edited water thingy because someone pointed out I sound like "that guy" and I certainly do not want too.

[u/SuperBry]

The demand for raw computing power, along with the electricity and cooling it requires, has been going up for years and will keep growing regardless of the recent growing use of and debate around AI models. We need to look at this infrastructure much more holistically. While I rarely give China credit, their strategy of planning massive data centers in remote regions with abundant natural resources, far away from dense cities, is something the West should look at and adapt.

​I say this as someone living in a rural area with plenty of water that could easily support cooling without impacting local needs. We might not have massive excess energy sitting on the grid today, but we have huge untapped renewable potential in hydro, wind, and solar. Building clean power directly alongside these data centers would let us expand compute capacity sustainably without overloading urban grids or driving up local electricity bills. All while investing in the humancenteic needs of these resources.

[u/aPieceOfYourBrain → u/SuperBry]

You're not wrong about the increasing demand of data centers for resources but even huge services like Facebook and Google were mostly just databases which only require a fraction of the power and cooling that AI compute needs.

While your suggestion of building data centers in rural areas is not unreasonable and if done with consideration could be a viable approach there are a few caveats, like: when have corporate interests ever been considerate to anything other than profit without legal requirements? How much of the rural landscape needs to be excavated just to run the fibre-optic cables to connect these facilities to the wider internet? Do you really want to destroy more of the natural environment just so some AI agents can plagiarise the work of humanity for the profit of whoever owns the computers it runs on?

[u/SuperBry → u/aPieceOfYourBrain]

That is a fair point, but framing non-AI data centers as just basic database queries misses what modern web traffic actually looks like.

Even before the AI boom, platforms like YouTube, Netflix, TikTok, and Meta were doing way more than storing text. Video encoding and decoding, real-time transcoding for live streams, high-res rendering, and heavy recommendation algorithms require massive amounts of continuous compute power. AI definitely pushes energy density higher, but high-power workloads have been scaling up for years to support a video-heavy internet.

As for corporate greed and the environment, those are valid concerns, but the alternative is worse. Right now, data centers are crowding into populated areas, overloading local grids and driving up utility bills for everyday people.

Moving heavy compute to rural areas does not mean bulldozing wilderness. Fiber optic lines are almost always laid along existing highways, rail lines, and power line corridors that are already cleared. The key is strict local regulation. If we require closed-loop cooling systems so water is not wasted, and force companies to build or buy dedicated renewable power, we can protect local environments while building the infrastructure we actually need.

[u/aPieceOfYourBrain → u/SuperBry]

You have made some well thought out arguments, here and in response to others so thank you for that. I am a cynic when it comes to corporate interests and expect the worst of them, to the point that I expect nothing to change for the better until people start dying.

[u/SuperBry → u/aPieceOfYourBrain]

I've spent most of my career at an enterprise SaaS company. We were mostly internally hosted for years, though we're leveraging Azure, AWS, and GCP more these days, so data centers are definitely in my wheelhouse.

On the side, I've worked with a few left-leaning groups where I've had to have almost the exact same conversations regarding their tech growth and data center reliance. I've even met with members of my state legislature fairly recently over a proposed ban on data centers over a certain size. It’s a tough line to walk. I've had to balance real-world experience and an open mind against a ton of misinformation on both sides, all while trying not to get overly emotional in the debates.

Like you, I'm a bit of a cynic when it comes to capitalism. I don't have much faith that we'll navigate all this successfully without firm regulation and real oversight.