Can the AI industry persuade data center opponents by getting rid of NDAs?

本文为原文前 6,000 字符的节选翻译，完整内容请查看原文。

Listen on Apple Podcasts Listen on Spotify Amazon recently followed Microsoft’s lead and said it will no longer use nondisclosure agreements (NDAs) while negotiating with local governments over data centers. On the latest episode of TechCrunch’s Equity podcast, Sean O’Kane, Rebeccan Bellan and I discussed Amazon’s announcement, which came in the middle of a longer blog post making the case that data centers are actually good for communities. Rebecca was a bit skeptical that the recent spate of data center moratoriums will have a lasting effect, especially since the moratoriums only last for a year or two and “these data centers aren’t coming online for the next two, three, four, five years,” though I countered that data center backers definitely seem worried. Sean, meanwhile, suggested that a big reason for the backlash is the industry’s poor communication. “We’ve seen, through a lot of the controversy and backlash to AI and data centers, that the industry just does a really poor job explaining itself, and that they are obviously and constantly frustrated with the fact that most people can’t envision a world in which this stuff is useful for them,” he said. Keep reading for a preview of our conversation, edited for length and clarity.

在 Apple Podcasts 和 Spotify 上收听。亚马逊最近效仿微软，表示在与地方政府就数据中心进行谈判时，将不再使用保密协议（NDA）。在 TechCrunch 的《Equity》播客最新一期节目中，Sean O’Kane、Rebeccan Bellan 和我讨论了亚马逊的这一声明，该声明出现在一篇旨在论证数据中心对社区有益的长篇博文中。Rebecca 对近期出现的数据中心暂停令是否会产生持久影响持怀疑态度，尤其是因为这些暂停令通常只持续一两年，而“这些数据中心在未来两、三、四、五年内都不会投入使用”，但我反驳说，数据中心的支持者们显然感到担忧。与此同时，Sean 指出，抵制情绪的一个重要原因是该行业沟通不力。他说：“通过围绕人工智能和数据中心的许多争议和抵制，我们看到该行业在解释自身方面做得非常糟糕，而且他们显然对大多数人无法想象这些东西对他们有何用处这一事实感到持续的沮丧。”请继续阅读我们对话的节选，内容经过编辑以求简洁明了。

Sean O’Kane: It’s an interesting thing that it was sort of buried in the blog post and part of a larger story that Amazon’s clearly trying to tell. I guess I understand why they weren’t putting it in the foreground, but to me, this is at the root of so many of the problems that the tech industry currently faces when it comes to AI broadly, but data centers in particular. There are so many things that could be said about whether or not people should be worried about the effect that data centers have on their property values, on their electricity bills, on their water usage in the area, and whether or not those things are real problems, inflated problems, etc. etc. I think so much of that just really goes back to the fact that a lot of these projects are being negotiated essentially in secret. Sometimes they’re being negotiated [with the public knowing] that it’s a data center, but just not knowing who’s actually going to use it or occupy it at any point. This is a long-standing issue with the tech industry. I always go back to the mid-2010s when Uber was expanding really fast. Uber was one of the companies that really used this tactic a ton when it came to working with local governments. In particular, I remember I was working at The Verge at the time and we had a freelancer write a story about a city outside of Orlando where Uber was trying to negotiate tax subsidies to subsidize rides for people to use public transit after the Uber trip. The whole thing was negotiated in secret. And not only that, which was frustrating on its face, but also, because of the secrecy, you could just see Uber getting really comfortable with asking for a lot of other stuff, too. So there needs to be more of this. I’m glad Amazon’s doing this. We’ll see if it actually does have any positive effect, but people are pretty entrenched right now.

Sean O’Kane：有趣的是，这件事被埋在博文中，作为亚马逊显然试图讲述的更大故事的一部分。我想我明白他们为什么不把它放在显眼位置，但在我看来，这是科技行业目前在人工智能领域，尤其是数据中心方面所面临的许多问题的根源。关于人们是否应该担心数据中心对其房产价值、电费、当地用水量的影响，以及这些问题是真实的还是被夸大的等等，有很多话可以说。我认为这很大程度上归结于这样一个事实：许多项目本质上是在秘密谈判中进行的。有时谈判是在[公众知道]这是数据中心的情况下进行的，但公众却不知道到底是谁在使用或占用它。这是科技行业长期存在的问题。我总是回想起 2010 年代中期 Uber 快速扩张的时候。Uber 是在与地方政府合作时大量使用这种策略的公司之一。我特别记得当时我在 The Verge 工作，我们的一位自由撰稿人写了一篇关于奥兰多郊外一个城市的报道，Uber 当时正试图谈判税收补贴，以补贴人们在乘坐 Uber 后使用公共交通的费用。整个过程都是秘密谈判的。不仅如此，这本身就令人沮丧，而且由于保密，你可以看到 Uber 在要求其他许多事情时也变得非常随意。所以需要更多这样的举措。我很高兴亚马逊这样做。我们将看看它是否真的会产生任何积极影响，但人们现在的立场已经相当固化了。

Rebecca Bellan: Yeah, I’m curious about what effect this will have and whether it will lead to communities successfully delaying or or killing any infrastructure that the companies need to build. What I’ve heard from some people I’ve spoken to, who deal with data centers every day, a lot of these moratoriums that are getting passed — and there are a significant number of them, including one recently in San Francisco, which is pretty ironic — but they’re only for like a year or two years. But these data centers aren’t coming online for the next two, three, four, five years. All of the buildouts are going to be massively delayed for a number of reasons from zoning to funding. Of course, if the pushback keeps going, then it might have an effect, but I often wonder just how much of an effect this political pushback is having on this.

Rebecca Bellan：是的，我很好奇这会产生什么影响，以及它是否会导致社区成功推迟或扼杀公司需要建设的任何基础设施。我从一些每天处理数据中心的人那里听说，许多正在通过的暂停令——数量相当多，包括最近旧金山的一项，这很讽刺——但它们通常只持续一两年。然而，这些数据中心在未来两、三、四、五年内都不会投入使用。由于从分区规划到资金等多种原因，所有的建设都将大幅延期。当然，如果抵制持续下去，可能会产生影响，但我经常怀疑这种政治抵制到底产生了多大的影响。

Anthony Ha: The moratorium I’m most familiar with is the one in New York. I believe it’s a one year moratorium, and that’s on permits for large projects. [Technically, it’s until the state finalizes an environmental review process, which is expected to take a year.] So already, there’s some wiggle room within that. And often, they’re framed as: “It’s not like we think [data centers are] bad, let’s not do this. It’s [that] we need to take the time to study this.” Which gives them a lot of room to say later on, “Actually, we’ve decided this is great. We love it.” But you can tell that the people trying to build these data centers are worried, which is why you have these unhinged tweets from people like Trump or David Sacks. Only time will tell in terms how long and how deep that [community] resistance is, but I do think they are worried. It’s also noteworthy that Microsoft, earlier this year, made a similar announcement about not using NDAs. I don’t think that getting rid of the NDAs automatically is going to make the people who opposed these data centers be like, “Great, let’s let’s do it. I’m in.” But I think the beginning of that conversation is, “Well, we don’t even know what the heck you’re doing, because you’ve negotiated all this stuff in secret.” So it does seem like a good first step.

Anthony Ha：我最熟悉的是纽约的暂停令。我相信这是一项为期一年的暂停令，针对的是大型项目的许可证。[从技术上讲，这是在州政府完成环境审查程序之前，预计需要一年时间。] 所以这其中已经有一些回旋余地。而且它们通常被表述为：“并不是我们认为[数据中心]不好，所以不去做。而是我们需要时间来研究它。”这给了他们很大的空间在以后说：“实际上，我们决定这太棒了。我们很喜欢它。”但你可以看出，那些试图建造这些数据中心的人很担心，这就是为什么你会看到像特朗普或 David Sacks 这样的人发出那些疯狂的推文。只有时间才能证明这种[社区]抵制会持续多久、有多深，但我确实认为他们很担心。同样值得注意的是，微软今年早些时候也宣布不再使用保密协议。我不认为取消保密协议会自动让那些反对这些数据中心的人说：“太好了，我们干吧。我加入。”但我认为对话的开始是：“好吧，我们甚至不知道你们到底在做什么，因为你们所有的事情都是秘密谈判的。”所以这似乎是一个良好的第一步。

Sean: The larger problem here is just a communication problem, right? This is a problem I think that goes across the entire tech industry, but it’s especially acute now, because we’re living in the era of “going direct” and “you don’t need to talk to the media, the media is dead,” etc. And I’m not trying to beat that horse, because we’re in the media and [we] think we’re still relevant. But we’ve seen, through a lot of the controversy and backlash to AI and data centers, that the industry just does a really poor job explaining itself, and that they are obviously and constantly frustrated with the fact that most people can’t envision a world in which this stuff is useful for them. And that’s because, a lot of time, the [technolog

Sean：这里更大的问题只是一个沟通问题，对吧？我认为这是一个贯穿整个科技行业的问题，但现在尤为严重，因为我们生活在“直接沟通”和“你不需要与媒体交谈，媒体已死”等等的时代。我并不是想老调重弹，因为我们身处媒体行业，并且[我们]认为我们仍然具有相关性。但通过围绕人工智能和数据中心的许多争议和抵制，我们看到该行业在解释自身方面做得非常糟糕，而且他们显然对大多数人无法想象这些东西对他们有何用处这一事实感到持续的沮丧。这是因为，很多时候，[技术