you unfortunately have to dig quite deep for sneers in this weird post about datacenter votes in the recent US elections, but they're there

https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/8vakRzGKXLknQNJ9M/stephen-martin-s-shortform?commentId=ec8LnnTjBMcow3C82

especially "Noosphere89" smugly stating that datacenters will just move somewhere else, like Iceland (retracted after someone points out that Iceland is probably even more woke than, say, Vermont) and Paraguay (which recently had a digibank seized and closed, leading to the president stepping down).

Then there's this gem

Data center inputs, unlike almost anything else are much more subsitutable than any other input, and can be built in places where humans don't care to raise NIMBY concerns.

So cutting through the jargon, "inputs" in this case means

• power
• cooling
• construction / planning
• the actual fucking contents in the racks
• data

All of these are constrained in various ways. The places with abundant accessible power tend to be relatively developed parts of the world. Same with water which is the most efficient mode of cooling.

Building your datacenter in Texas means you're on familiar ground with local laws and regulations, and can draw on skilled manpower to actually construct the thing and keep it running. I'd wager that the actual hardware is cheaper than almost anywhere else. Once it's built it's in the security zone of the USA, which means property is efficiently defended by LEO and emergency services.

Paraguay? You need to find a skilled workforce there, or import it. Same for all the bits and bobs needed. Then you probably have to pay more for the same, as well as having to deal with an unfamiliar planning process. Not to mention political instability. And you might have to build a shit-ton of supporting stuff yourself, like power generation and fiber comms.

These people are delusional.