If you’re an AI researcher working on beneficial applications (ethics, alignment, human-AI collaboration, accessibility, cognitive frameworks, etc.) — would you support a moratorium on new terrestrial datacenter construction until space-based compute infrastructure becomes viable? Context: A proposed datacenter in Utah would double the state’s total energy consumption, drain water in an already-stressed desert region, and according to climate scientists, generate enough heat to alter regional weather patterns. Local residents’ concerns were dismissed, public comment was blocked, and it was approved anyway. Meanwhile, companies like Anthropic have openly stated that compute requirements for next-gen AI are “outpacing what terrestrial power, land, and cooling can deliver” and are exploring orbital datacenter partnerships specifically because space-based compute offers “near-limitless sustainable power with less impact on Earth.” The question: If the tradeoff for faster compute expansion is environmental destruction and harm to communities who don’t benefit from the technology — would you, as a researcher whose work aims to help humanity, choose to wait for sustainable infrastructure instead? Genuinely curious whether there’s researcher consensus on this or if I’m wrong about the disconnect between research needs and commercial buildout pressure. submitted by /u/AdMean9105
Originally posted by u/AdMean9105 on r/ArtificialInteligence