Like, would a skyscraper-style datacenter be practical? Or is just a matter of big, flat buildings being cheaper?

  • foggy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    8 minutes ago

    I’m just going to repeat myself. Ildeploying a day center isn’t building one. If you’d architected a data center I’d give a fuck about what you’re saying

    Again:

    Cost is the limiting factor. Not weight. You are provably incorrect. You can ignore proof all you want. It doesn’t make you right.

    • Shadow@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 hour ago

      You started off with an ad hominem attack calling it armchair nonsense, that the weight argument has no merit. I’m pointing out i have actual experience in this area. If you hadn’t been an asshole with your initial reply I wouldn’t have bothered replying, instead here we are.

      Everything is a money problem when you get down to it far enough. Why don’t we have mars colonies? Money. Why don’t cars fly? Money. Why doesn’t everyone live in super tall towers that touch the atmosphere? Money. Sure let’s just ignore all the engineering considerations and reduce it down to the absolute basic explanation of “money” so that nobody in this thread will learn anything.

      Why don’t we have super tall datacenters? It’s not worth the money to sustain that level of weight in a new tower, and definitely not worth it to overhaul an existing tower.

      It’s pointless to call out money as the limit, that’s completely obvious.

      Anyways I’m over this thread, byeeeee.