666
Wolves roam into Finnish villages after Google destroys 1,300 acres of forest for AI data centers — forest where wolf packs used to live is now an expanse of mud (www.tomshardware.com)
submitted 2 days ago by to c/fuck_ai@lemmy.world
71 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 35 points 2 days ago (7 children)

Cucked by the American tech stack again.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 32 points 2 days ago (6 children)

    And their own government that sold Google the land

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] -5 points 2 days ago (5 children)

    when one sells property, as one does, nobody expects the buyers to do really dumb shit.

    sell a house. buyer cooks meth in it. house is decommissioned and demolished.

    see? same thing.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 2 days ago (4 children)

    There are certain basic questions that should be asked when a company known for building massive data centers and employee campuses suddenly offers to buy over 1000 acres of forest land. The first that comes to mind is "what are you going to do with it?". But that's just me I guess.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] -3 points 2 days ago (3 children)

    I do not plan to cook and sell meth from this house. even if I were to cook and sell meth from this house, I would let you know first because that's the law.

    I promise 🤞

    see. not that hard to lie about it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (2 children)

    But it’s definitely predictable if you’re selling it to Walter white. The solution is not to sell houses you don’t want blown up to known meth manufacturers and not to sell land with forests you want to keep to companies that only buy land to build on it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (1 child)

    you're not wrong. local governments often attempt to use unused property as a way to funnel much needed financial support into the city/state by ways of their own deception.

    we'll sell you this property and you can do what you want with it. *some exemptions may apply

    in this case, the buyer had enough "fuck you" money to see to it that this turned into a huge mess, ecological and otherwise.

    that said. who's to blame? is it the government attempting to finance social programs for their city/state by selling unused property to companies? or is it the company that purchased the property and decided they don't have to follow the laws because they have enough money to do so and in turn destroyed hundreds of thousands of local ecologies out of spite?

    personally, I'm blaming the company. they had no reason to do what they did other than to menace the locals.

    sure the politicians aren't blameless, but they are operating within the laws.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago*

    Both are to blame, as is the person who was supposed to pay attention to whether anyone is amassing enough machinery to clear cut a forest. If nobody had that job, then that falls back to the government making the contract.

    The company totally had reasons to build there, just not any that excuse clear cutting the forest, just like the government had reasons to sell it to them, just none good enough to excuse not doing their due diligence.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent