I was hoping to find out whether this is a viable business model for new startups, but they only ruled that it took too long for Musk to bring the lawsuit.

If it's as effective against stovetop fires as the KMPH video indicates, some kitchen manufacturer should license this tech and build it into their vent hoods. Some sizable percentage of house fire start on stovetops, so killing them off early would be a good thing.

30km/h implies urban/residential areas, not wide open highways.

But you can't implement average-speed based on an urban/residential area where there are lots of possible paths, you can only implement it on straight line highways with very few exits.

I think much more safety would be to enforce traffic laws much more strictly around kids/schools and the like.

Established players have large compliance teams and are able to amortize the costs of regulation over a larger install base.

Before emissions controls, they'd try to disperse soot and ash over wide area to minimize the impact to individuals, but natural gas burns a lot cleaner than coal, and doesn't really produce soot or ash, so it's not really a concern.

The only thing that article says about it is that the local government did a study and concluded that it wasn't an environmental hazard.

Think about it this way: why would a gas turbine mounted on a trailer emit more pollution than a fixed facility? It's burning the same fuel, with the same emissions controls.

Ok, but we should still be able to add that to the grid. In reality, it is much easier and cheaper to build a 1GW power plant than it is to build a 1GW datacenter.

2GW is basically nothing. The entire grid is something like 1,200GW so you'd need to add a fraction of a percent to cover a very large data center. The fact that people claim this is beyond our capability is preposterous.

It uses exactly the amount of power I think it does, because I can read the specs and they say how much power these things use, which is not very much.

See, this is the kind of retarded bullshit you idiots say, and then you expect me to take you seriously.

Mobile generators don't produce any more pollution than regular power plants. It is common for businesses to install mobile generators so that they can operate them right away (I believe the law allows them to operate for 1 year) before they get permanent air permits for them. By the way, Xai does have stationary permits for them now, so even that deeply flawed information is out of date.

It is hilarious to see morons like you vacillate between claiming these companies are irresponsible for using the grid without paying for new generation, and complaining when they do add the grid capacity to cover their use. It couldn't be more obvious that it has triggered a knee-jerk anti-development instinct in your lizard brain and that you have not capacity whatsoever to consider these developments rationally.

All this anti-datacenter nonsense is entirely unfounded in reality, so you are just another one of the stupid voters I am talking about.

It sounds like a good way to tank the economy forever, but ok.

Actually, the concerns are not real either. These don't really use all that much power, and they don't use any water or pollute the environment at all to speak of. Adding capacity to the grid to power these data centers should be entirely trivial. It's not because of other dumb rules that other dumb voters have supported in the past. Any attempt to solve the problem by limiting new development is completely nonsensical.

If this passes it calls the whole concept of democracy into question.

I tend to whip out Baby Shark or the Baby Shark EDM remix.