urbanSTL

southcitykid wrote: ↑

12:56 PM - Jul 19

I hope those apposed are getting paid by China for spreading their propaganda for then. 

Ironically, you maybe should have run this through an AI-generated spell check to clean it up for you.

Trololzilla wrote: ↑

5:37 AM - Jul 20

^ Don't need to be paid by China to oppose mass-surveillance centers.

Too late for all of us.   Simply by participating in this blog you have already committed to the mass surveillance in one fashion or another.   AI could probably pick everyone's favorite brick color and be 90% accurate..   

Government can seize private land to make way for new AI data center transmission lines, report says — takeovers could be implemented using eminent domain law when private citizens refuse to sell land
https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intelligence/power-companies-can-seize-private-land-to-make-way-for-new-ai-data-center-transmission-lines-report-says-takeovers-could-be-implemented-using-eminent-domain-law-when-private-citizens-refuse-to-sell-land

dredger wrote: ↑

5:53 PM - Jul 20

Trololzilla wrote: ↑

5:37 AM - Jul 20

^ Don't need to be paid by China to oppose mass-surveillance centers.

Too late for all of us.   Simply by participating in this blog you have already committed to the mass surveillance in one fashion or another.   AI could probably pick everyone's favorite brick color and be 90% accurate..   

Make a nice, solid, red brick data house and maybe we'll talk. Just . . . put it out in Chesterfield town center and keep it quiet, efficient, and clean.

Coming from the same people who are totally against the same transmission lines being used to connect green energy projects to the grid

symphonicpoet wrote: ↑

7:01 AM - Jul 21

dredger wrote: ↑

5:53 PM - Jul 20

Trololzilla wrote: ↑

5:37 AM - Jul 20

^ Don't need to be paid by China to oppose mass-surveillance centers.

Too late for all of us.   Simply by participating in this blog you have already committed to the mass surveillance in one fashion or another.   AI could probably pick everyone's favorite brick color and be 90% accurate..   

Make a nice, solid, red brick data house and maybe we'll talk. Just . . . put it out in Chesterfield town center and keep it quiet, efficient, and clean.

Why not, the nice brick building along the north industrial riverfront? Puts some industrial property back to use, city gets some more private tax base added and residents also see a water user come online for a system that is underutilized & will only be more expensive for current water users.    

dredger wrote: ↑

11:23 PM - Jul 22

symphonicpoet wrote: ↑

7:01 AM - Jul 21

dredger wrote: ↑

5:53 PM - Jul 20

Too late for all of us.   Simply by participating in this blog you have already committed to the mass surveillance in one fashion or another.   AI could probably pick everyone's favorite brick color and be 90% accurate..   

Make a nice, solid, red brick data house and maybe we'll talk. Just . . . put it out in Chesterfield town center and keep it quiet, efficient, and clean.

Why not, the nice brick building along the north industrial riverfront? Puts some industrial property back to use, city gets some more private tax base added and residents also see a water user come online for a system that is underutilized & will only be more expensive for current water users.    

I've seen this idea circulated here and elsewhere many many time since the Armory proposal became public. Of course it makes perfect sense, which should prompt us to ask, why haven't any data center developers found this idea as appealing as we do? 

I'm genuinely asking...anyone have any insight on what these folks are looking for when they select project sites? What made the Armory site appealing in the first place? The only pattern I can see is that they're looking for land where the current owners are already primed to sell.

Nvidia is in talks to provide a $250 billion backstop for OpenAI’s lease of a data-center project, as AI hyperscaling intensifies despite market unease. The 10-gigawatt development — the largest data center announced so far — will be on US federal land and will have its power needs guaranteed by Washington, which the tech giants hope will circumvent permitting headaches and local opposition. Jittery investors, who have already driven a major selloff over concerns about Big Tech’s huge AI spending, will be eyeing earnings reports from several giants this week, The Information’s co-executive editor wrote. Of particular interest will be Meta and Microsoft, whose shares are down 9.8% and 21% respectively this year.

Just so we all understand this positive feedback loop:

-Data center construction is Nvidia's largest customer, data center developers need AI companies to lease their data centers, AI companies need money to lease the data centers.

-Nvidia financing $250B in data center leases, means more data centers can get built, means more customers for Nvidia to make that $250B back.

And God only knows where the $250B is actually coming from and how it will be structured.

All of this to delay their stock plummet when the inevitable reality that AI companies cannot make enough money to pay off the debt they went in to build all these data centers. "Look at our revenue!" (Ignore that this revenue was expensed a few years ago and is literally fake).

Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk

A.I. Companies Are Recruiting Electricians and Carpenters by the Thousands
The future of artificial intelligence depends on finding more skilled humans for some very physical jobs.
A.I. Companies Are Recruiting Electricians and Carpenters by the Thousands - The New York Times

SB in BH wrote: ↑

2:56 PM - Jul 24

dredger wrote: ↑

11:23 PM - Jul 22

symphonicpoet wrote: ↑

7:01 AM - Jul 21

Make a nice, solid, red brick data house and maybe we'll talk. Just . . . put it out in Chesterfield town center and keep it quiet, efficient, and clean.

Why not, the nice brick building along the north industrial riverfront? Puts some industrial property back to use, city gets some more private tax base added and residents also see a water user come online for a system that is underutilized & will only be more expensive for current water users.    

I've seen this idea circulated here and elsewhere many many time since the Armory proposal became public. Of course it makes perfect sense, which should prompt us to ask, why haven't any data center developers found this idea as appealing as we do? 

I'm genuinely asking...anyone have any insight on what these folks are looking for when they select project sites? What made the Armory site appealing in the first place? The only pattern I can see is that they're looking for land where the current owners are already primed to sell.

Good question in my mind.   I can only think of how maunfacturing/commercial warehousing and onto Amazons of the world progressed from vertical in the urban core upon a time, think Wash Ave and Cupples, to the massive horizontal greenfield development we see now.   Of course, definitely some cost savings building on and operating a facility on horizontal vs vertical built structure but mostly incentives, cheap land values with often one or two instead of multiple land owners, no historical baggage of past land use.   
.
That being said, I would agree that as a society we have given way to much away in benefits to capital markets and i myself have advocated for some of that.  I just have no clue with such a fragmented and decentralized form of our government from cities, counties and states all completing against each other on how to come up with a better equitable mousetrap.   I can be idealistic but that doesn't matter

So in that regards, city in the immediate future would really need to focus, consolidate and take a very active role on how to repurpose a previous industrial use to new a new industrial use.  Yes, that means considering data centers if you want capital to flow the north riverfront.  Because, in my mind a lot of cities have given up on manufacturing and warehousing which is why a lot people living in the burbs are actually working in the burbs.  Also, as factories become more automated and robotic they are in essence will have a job footprint trending towards data centers.     

my letter to the Planning Commission as it debates the Data Center bill that board of alders kicked back to them, theyll meet about it on the 12th 

I believe data centers should be permitted in Downtown, but the rules should include safeguards that protect an active, walkable street environment.
Data centers can bring substantial investment, reuse underutilized buildings, expand the tax base, and create long-term economic activity. Downtown should not unnecessarily exclude that investment. However, as we establish rules for future data center development, we should ensure that these projects do not inadvertently create blocks of inactive street frontage with little ground-level activity.

The rules should therefore require data centers in Downtown to maintain active ground-floor uses along primary streets. The first floor, or at minimum the street-facing portion of it, should be reserved for uses such as retail, restaurants, bars, cafés, entertainment, or other publicly accessible businesses.
In addition, as part of the approval process, data center projects should enter into a Community Benefits Agreement that provides substantial funding or subsidies to attract and support those ground-floor businesses. That could include tenant improvement grants, reduced rents, build-out assistance, or direct contributions to a fund dedicated to activating Downtown storefronts.

The goal should not be to choose between data center investment and a vibrant Downtown. With the right rules, we can welcome significant new investment while proactively ensuring that the street level remains active, welcoming, and economically productive.

dbInSouthCity wrote: ↑

5:36 PM - 4 days ago

my letter to the Planning Commission as it debates the Data Center bill that board of alders kicked back to them, theyll meet about it on the 12th 

I believe data centers should be permitted in Downtown, but the rules should include safeguards that protect an active, walkable street environment.

On that note, we should not have gone from this (at 2300 Locust)...

To this:

Yes, that was a big Tishaura mistake


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

stldotage wrote: ↑

6:39 PM - 4 days ago

dbInSouthCity wrote: ↑

5:36 PM - 4 days ago

my letter to the Planning Commission as it debates the Data Center bill that board of alders kicked back to them, theyll meet about it on the 12th 

I believe data centers should be permitted in Downtown, but the rules should include safeguards that protect an active, walkable street environment.

On that note, we should not have gone from this (at 2300 Locust)...

2300LocustBEFORE.png
To this:



PXL_20260731_184758390.jpg

exactly why these rules are needed. 

Just How Bad Are AI Data Centers for Your Local Water?
https://gizmodo.com/just-how-bad-are-ai-data-centers-for-your-local-water-2000795372