The middle distribution of Gen Z’s feelings about AI range from apprehension to downright hatred. Despite the fact that more than half of Gen Z living in the U.S. uses AI regularly, according to a recently released Gallup poll, less than a fifth feel hopeful about the technology. About a third says the technology makes them angry. And nearly half say it makes them afraid.
Gallup’s own senior education researcher, Zach Hrynowski, blamed the bad vibes at least partially on the dwindling job market. The oldest Zoomers, he told Axios, are the angriest, as they are “acutely aware” of the ability of a technology to transform cultural norms without a second thought, unlike a Gen Xer who is trained to see new technology as toys and are still “playing around with AI.”
Indeed, job prospects for the recently graduated Gen Z are abysmal; Bloomberg just reported that 43% of young graduates are “underemployed,” meaning taking on jobs that require less education than they have.
[…]
This is not just a Gen Z problem, either. In the American heartland, data centers are being proposed at a pace that local communities never anticipated and for which they were never asked permission, and they’re increasingly pushing back.
The numbers are serious. According to a report from 10a Labs’ Data Center Watch, at least $18 billion worth of data center projects have been blocked and another $46 billion delayed over the past two years owing to local opposition. At least 142 activist groups across 24 states are now actively organizing to block data center construction and expansion. A Heatmap Pro review of public records found that 25 data center projects were canceled following local pushback in 2025 alone, four times as many as in 2024, with 21 of those cancellations occurring in the second half of the year as electricity costs grew.
The concerns driving this resistance are less about existential AI risk and more about typical kitchen-table complaints; communities consistently cite higher utility bills, water consumption, noise, impacts on property values, and green space destruction as their primary objections. Water use is mentioned as a top concern in more than 40% of contested projects, according to a Heatmap Pro review of public records.
I don’t understand why they just don’t charge AI data centers higher costs for electricity, so they are a net benefit to the area.
Why would the electricity company making extra profits affect how beneficial the DCs are to a region?
Sure, it’d pay for a few more CEO yachts, but that’s about it.
Because that would give power companies to control who gets electricity and who doesn’t. Just like how banks shouldn’t be allowed to dictate who was money, and grocery stores shouldn’t charge you by how much money you have, and the can’t increase prices during an emergency.
AI data centers can get electricity. They just gotta pay.
You know, like other large industrial users of electricity.
Ya, but they said it shouldn’t be that way. That data centers should get special treatment. In theory, I see why they’d think that way. But in practice, it’s a terrible choice. I just gave comparable examples.
Why not? Their usage profile is different from homes and industrial areas. Seems like prudent planning.
Unless you’re saying I could fill my residential basement with racks and sell it as a data center because “they shouldn’t be treated different.”
Well, under those circumstances, they would be paying less if they bought power in bulk :/ But again, I explained why not. By that logic, phone companies can decide who owns a phone line, power companies decide who gets electricity, water companies decide who gets water, banks decide who gets money, etc.
Phone companies already decide who owns a phone line.
They’re utilities.
That’s how utilities work.
Why make it complicated? Just hit them with a “we hate you” tax.
How does it benefit the area? The money goes to the power cartels either way, and the data centers harm the environment and the people living near them regardless of the electricity cost.
because they are in the pockets of key people involved in making that decision
Many local government’s aren’t on the home rule, they follow some form of the Dillon Rule. This applies to utilities and land use. For some local areas they are required by some degree to follow the State’s allocation and billing of utilities to remain classified as a public utility in the State.
In many areas our legal framework at the State and local level were never made to handle what’s coming down the pipe with new advances. This is why I always indicate that data centers and their impact need to be addressed at the local level. That’s why I think Federal regulation is the wrong step for the building part of AI. This is very much a local and/or State level that needs to desperately be answered there.
The good news is that we see more people who are involved with their local government with this issue. But this underlying issue has been one since the 1970s, it’s just that these companies have hired firms that are incredibly well versed in the shortcomings of local ordinances and State law. It’s super difficult to patch up flaws in the laws when they’re being exploited at rapid fire pace.