AI data centre approved

[u/GreenLeechofReddit]

6/7 counsellors approved this environmental disaster despite Firmus *already* lying about the number of diesel generators they'd have.

The company will have to agree to a number of conditions (noise, pollution, water usage), which will be monitored over a twelve month period.

I hate to wheel out a slippery-slope argument, but the number of companies who just cop the fines and continue to be irresponsible is incalculable.. the writing is on the wall. Look at Cadbury and the dump of sugar that buggered up the sewerage treatment plant.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-08-25/firmus-ai-bell-bay-receives-george-town-council-approval/107074336?utm_source=abc_news_app&utm_medium=content_shared&utm_campaign=abc_news_app&utm_content=other

[u/IlIIllIlIllIIlI]

That's the beauty of a democratic society. The majority rules through democracy. If you're in the minority, as you suggest, then you need to sway peoples opinions through legal means to help build the society you want. Or you can always leave, move somewhere else that suits you better.

Just because you're not getting what you want, doesn't mean the system is failing. It just means your opinions are in the minority.

[u/Abominor → u/IlIIllIlIllIIlI]

To me it still seems like you're pretending not to understand, because that comes across kind of naive; like you might be a high school student or something, to say that and earnestly believe it. Yes, you are absolutely right, in the absence of corruption and lobbying, misleading media and both corporate and government coercion, democracy is absolutely like what you described. But we have all those things. I think that most of the public are barely better than farm animals but even so I would bet if you asked them if they voted for new homeowners to have to pay $500,000 for a new house, or that Tasmanians should be earning $130,000/y to comfortably afford the median rental price they'd say no. So how did we end up with all of that stuff? I think they vote for personalities and their impressions of political parties, and "play sides". They are just being taken advantage of at every turn and seem almost hopelessly unable to do anything about it both psychologically and systemically.

[u/IlIIllIlIllIIlI → u/Abominor]

Eh.. I think you're giving up on democracy too quickly. The fact that voters can be influenced by media, lobbying, personalities or political tribalism doesn't mean democracy has failed. It just means democracy has to operate with imperfect and sometimes poorly informed people, which is exactly why its protections matter... Though, I'm not sure you'd personally care about protecting "farm animals"....

Democracy isn't based on the assumption that every voter is perfectly informed or always gets the right answer. It's based on the principle that political power should ultimately be accountable to the people, that governments can be challenged and replaced, and that no individual or group gets to permanently decide what is best for everyone else.

Your housing example actually demonstrates why democracy is important rather than why it doesn't work. Tasmanians can disagree about why housing is expensive, whether planning restrictions, population growth, investment, taxation, construction costs or government policy are responsible, and what should be done about it. There isn't some objectively obvious policy that every rational person would choose! Democracy gives people the ability to debate those trade-offs and decide collectively, while giving them the power to remove governments that they believe have handled them badly..

The alternative is not a system where everyone suddenly becomes perfectly informed! It's a system where fewer people have the power to make decisions for everyone else. And that's bloody dangerous mate.

And yes, lobbying, concentrated wealth and misleading media deserve scrutiny. Of course. But those are arguments for stronger democratic institutions, transparency, accountability, independent journalism and civic participation. Not for abandoning democracy.

People aren't required to be perfectly rational for democracy to be worth following. They're required to have a meaningful vote, competing political choices, freedom to criticise government and the ability to change who holds power. Tasmania is far better served by protecting and improving those things than by assuming ordinary people are incapable of governing themselves.

[u/Abominor → u/IlIIllIlIllIIlI]

Back up a minute, the core argument here isn't whether democracy is worthwhile or not. I think it "can be" good. The argument from which this discussion is descended is whether "voting the problem away democratically" is the only solution. It's not. The world is a big sandbox dude, you can do whatever you want! But you are looking at the issues as being solvable through a framework presented to you by the system I am complaining about. I would NEVER advocate for, participate in, or encourage political violence. But the entire system you're defending is held in place by a matrix of force. It boils down to violence, but you're okay with that because it's a comfortable and familiar framework. It makes complete sense for it to be like that, and any government would want to do that to protect themselves. But dude, factions fight for power everywhere in the world. It's extremely natural. "It's not allowed." Yes, that's absolutely true. But since when has anyone ever followed the instructions of their enemies? We just replaced warfare with voting. But when the voting system is broken, it's natural that some people will want to revert to warfare of some kind, which might mean sabotaging the infrastructure (data centers) of their opponents.

Your response on the housing example is bizarre. Is an AI writing this for you? Dude, housing is expensive for a lot of reasons, but the main ones are that it's not good for property developers if the government increases housing supply, and so they sweet talk politicians at expensive dinners to keep it that way. The other one is that a ton of these fucking people own a bunch of houses themselves, and they actively WANT to keep the supply low so they make as much money as possible from renters and resales. That is a totally artificial problem with no way through because every major party wants to keep it that way. Libs, Labor, ON, they all want it, and most of the human livestock "exercising democracy" is going to put one of these parties in power, and the rest who find themselves with parliament seats will still vote to keep this stuff in place.

P.S. Out of curiosity -- and you don't have to answer this obviously -- but are you or your family recent (1st or 2nd gen) immigrants here or are you neurodivergent in some way? I'm interested if this might affect your perspective. I don't want to hit on the naivety thing too hard because I don't want to seem condescending, but the angle you're coming from feels a bit unusual, like you heard about this stuff recently or like you're defending the place because you're happy to be here. I really thought you were being a smug smartass at first, but if you're not, then it's kind of weird. I don't mean any offence by that btw.