Pave paradise and put up a ~~parking lot~~ data center
this post was submitted on 08 Jun 2026
783 points (99.4% liked)
Technology
85245 readers
4196 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
AI is starting to show that it isn't worth the investment and they are STILL building more?!? WTF is going on?
That is crazy and would make no sense for them to do. Why do you think they're doing that?
The bailout money will be double what they lost I am guessing.
Red line go up.
It should be legal and acceptable to take back things given for one purpose that end up being used for something else.
It actually is if the gift is conditional on a specified use - in writing of course.
In my country it is legal to do so
Something worse happened in my city. The city hall expropriated some land from the owner with the justification it was needed for a public interest project. The project wasn't very detailed and pretty much half-assed like it wasn't serious. The owner was pissed since the land was sure to raise its price by a lot in a few years. The city was experiencing a major boom and the land was right where the city center was expanding to. But he loses the land and receives a "fair market price".
Right after the land is expropriated the city hall cancels the project and, since it was no longer needed and the land is considered useless sells it very cheaply to a known real estate entrepreneur with ties to the (very corrupt) Mayor. In a couple of years construction has started in the area (by other friends of the mayor) and the value of the land explodes. The entrepeneur sells it back for a fortune to the city hall. The city hall justifies the huge payment due to the need for a mall there. That mall never turned a profit and was bankrupt in a few years.
The original owner sued city hall and the old mayor. The case is tied in courts for decades now. It's ridiculous. My city is the capital of corruption in a corrupt country.
load more comments
(6 replies)
Shoulda got that in writing I guess.
I know the saying is "don't mess with Texas" but Texas seems to fuck itself over all the time. I would be raising hell about this if it was my backyard.
That's kind of but not exactly a mistranslation. The original Chinese is closer to 'do not interrupt your enemy while he is making a mistake', but in the american vernacular, you can just say 'don't mess with Texas' and it means the same thing locally. Its one of those very regional sayings.
Pretty sure "Don't mess with Texas" began its life as an anti-littering campaign in the late 80s or early 90s. It has been appropriated to mean all sorts of things, though. The original meaning might be even more relevant to data centers...
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(17 replies)
Fuck me. I used to live around there a while back
She’s gonna get a share of the lease revenue on that, right?
…right?
Even if they didn't do her dirty, she wouldn't. She donated it to the city and relinquished ownership of it. The expectation, even written into the deed, was that the land was to be used as a park, but they turned around and sold it multiple times. Despite the stipulation in the original deed to the parks and recreation department, the data center is still going forward.
The story is just such a tragedy all around.
Huh, I’m not an attorney but that sure seems actionable if the intended use was documented in a contract.
You don't get it, they will build a data center park!
She's got an attorney and they're trying to stop it based on that, but it just seems like everyone involved (edit: besides her) just doesn't give a fuck.
They've been taught that if they ignore the law and do whatever they want to they don't get punched in the face.
That will only go on for so long but it's going to suck until someone gets punchy.
Especially with the recent East Wing argument, the lesson is "if you do it fast enough and ignore other people getting angry about it, you can do whatever you want."
The only reason they ever didn't ignore people getting angry about things was because when people used to get angry they also got shooty.
load more comments
(3 replies)
The relevant case law may be found in Molotov vs. New Construction .
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(4 replies)
One of the more fucked up aspects of eminent domain. City/county/state governments can nuke deeds by using eminent domain. It allows them to turn a plot of land, regardless prior restrictions, into things like dumps.
The fucked up part about it is they can also turn public lands into private lands with that same trick.
What's frustrating is we still need eminent domain for good. It's basically the only way to build railways and roads. It even ends up being one of the few ways to deploy things like district heating/cooling and new fiber lines.
Eminent domain didn't factor into this particular case. The Taylor Economic Development Corporation simply ignored the deed and sold the land to BPP Projects LLC/Blueprint while Taylor City Council and Judge Ryan Larson approved and upheld it respectively.
I believe eminent domain should have a very limited scope legally and should mostly only be used for public infrastructure projects and housing honestly…
We have different definitions of good. I don't see how building a highway system through other animals homes is considered "good".
People should know that donating land like this is not at all guaranteed to keep the land from being developed. Promises to keep parks in existence is nothing when the city "needs" a new development, hospital, data center, whatever.
And this is why you need a lawyer when you're doing this kind of thing.
If this farmer was smart, there would be a clause in the contract that the land may only be used for a park or other public space. And that if the city decides to resell the land, the farmer or their descendants will have the right to reclaim it.
Thus, farmer could either stop the data center or at least get a solid payday.
If you read the article, there was exactly this sort of clause in the deed, and now the courts are saying “fuck you”
and now the courts are saying “fuck you”
It's one Court and unsurprisingly it's the Court located right there in town. I strongly suspect that the Third Court of Appeals is going to have a different take on this mess.
At least where I live you can't wash away a deed restriction like this by transferring the property a couple times.
IANAL. The general approach to this isn’t to sell it, from what I’ve seen. It’s to lease it for purpose.
We have a number of scouting camps near me that have permissive leases. Technically, the family that “donated” the land has a conditional lease with BSA, with terms like “BSA may use the land so long as one Boy Scout sleeps on the property at least one night per year.” With stipulations that if this requirement is not met, the land returns full and unconditional ownership to the nearest living descendant.
In the mean time, BSA is responsible for all taxes, costs, upkeep and improvements.
Basically, until BSA dissolves, they will be free to use the land. Failure to meet the condition would immediately revert ownership and void the lease.
I was curious where the land was, and if I could help in any way.
It's in Texas. I made a promise to myself that I'd never go back to Texas.
Texas. Fucking. Suuuuuucks.
load more comments
(4 replies)
view more: next ›