Project Washington Dead? Appears to be, at least in its current form:
Plans for a massive data center to be built near Delaware City appear to be at a dead end, at least in their current form.
Earlier this year, the development, dubbed Project Washington, faced its first major setback when Environmental Secretary Greg Patterson ruled that the plans would violate the Coastal Zone Act — a landmark Delaware law designed to limit heavy industry along the state’s shorelines.
The data center project’s developer, Starwood Digital Ventures, then appealed the decision, but it was subsequently upheld by a state board.
Starwood then appealed again to the Delaware Superior Court. But in early July, the company voluntarily withdrew the appeal with no public acknowledgment. It came two days after the state legislature passed several bills imposing new, stricter regulations on the data center industry.
Gov. Matt Meyer signed those into law earlier this week.
Since there are no other challenges to Patterson’s ruling, the proposed data center project is not allowed to move forward under its current design.
Am I the only one wondering whether BHL, egged on by Maravelias’ Minions, would have followed the same path that Meyer did? Nope. Elections matter.
Wow–a big story with an under-the-radar ending.
One Reason Why The Black Community Loved Dolly Parton:
Dolly Parton’s death at 80 has generated an extraordinary outpouring of affection that extends far beyond country music, including within Black America. One revealing reason appears in The Reality Check: Whitney Houston turned Parton’s “I Will Always Love You” into a worldwide phenomenon, generating millions in songwriting royalties for Parton. Parton then used some of that wealth to buy her Nashville office complex in what was then a predominantly Black neighborhood, affectionately calling it “the house that Whitney built.”
- Whitney Houston multiplied the value of Parton’s song. Houston’s 1992 performance in “The Bodyguard” transformed a country composition into an international cultural landmark. Parton openly acknowledged Houston’s contribution rather than pretending the song’s extraordinary second life belonged to her alone.
- Parton put some of the resulting capital into a Black Nashville neighborhood. This was an investment rather than a charitable grant, an important distinction, but Parton explicitly connected the purchase to Houston and the community around it.
- She recognized shared economic creation. The discussion correctly identifies the deeper lesson: wealth rarely emerges from a single person. Houston’s talent created enormous additional value for intellectual property Parton owned.
- Her racial solidarity went beyond symbolism. Parton publicly supported Black Lives Matter, rejected the notion that only white lives deserved recognition, and later removed “Dixie” from the name of her dinner attraction amid concerns about Confederate associations.
- Her philanthropy reinforced that reputation. Her Imagination Library ultimately distributed more than 300 million free books worldwide, while her giving also supported disaster victims, medical research, pediatric care, and education.
If Trump knew all this, he wouldn’t have ordered the flags to be flown at half-staff.
Quick Aside: I no longer care about the status of Mitch McConnell. He’s not coming back to the Senate, meaning the Rethugs are down one vote.
Now Bill Gates Tells Us:
Bill Gates says it’s time to hit the AI panic button.
The technology has crossed dangerous thresholds in biology, cybersecurity, white-collar work, and human relationships, Gates said in an interview with Semafor.
His warning is a striking shift from three years ago, when he wrote that the coming “bumpy” AI job disruption would lead to a “manageable” transition and that the technology would help people work efficiently. Now, he says it will wreak economic catastrophe, with “far fewer” jobs than exist today, thanks to the speed of AI’s advancements and what he calls a non-existent response from government and tech leaders.
“I am in a state of shock that I’m sort of the first one saying, ‘This is crazy. This is insane,’” he said. “I’m just deafened by the silence.”
In a blog post published Wednesday, Gates asks technology and political leaders to respond more urgently to threats from AI — namely to create new policies to protect workers and to tax companies based on their use of it.
One of Gates’ fears about letting AI continue unchecked is that society will turn against it entirely, derailing its potential to improve humanity, particularly through advances in science and health. “What is the backlash going to be as these jobs go away?” he asked. “It’ll make the data center thing look like nothing.”
Gates said it isn’t the speed of the revolution that worries him. It’s the breadth. “There isn’t a job that isn’t affected,” he said, predicting that, in the majority of occupations, humans will eventually be “vastly inferior to the AI doing the job.”
In other words, even if adoption takes time, the effect will be so widespread that the aggregate impact will be enormous.
“It’s different not because the speed is different, but the breadth is what makes it utterly, utterly a unique moment in evolutionary history,” Gates said.
Why Hakim Jeffries Sucks, Ctd.:
A backlash is underway within Democratic ranks after House leaders named a vocally pro-Israel Democrat to their top slot on a key panel that oversees Middle East policy, the latest reflection of bitter divisions in the party over support for the Jewish state.
Democrats on Tuesday chose Representative Jared Moskowitz of Florida to serve as the ranking member of the Foreign Affairs Committee’s Middle East and North Africa Subcommittee, elevating a lawmaker facing a tough re-election race who has called for “unwavering support” for Israel. Mr. Moskowitz has backed continued U.S. aid to Israel even as many Democrats have turned against it, and aggressively condemns critics of the Jewish state.
The selection put Mr. Moskowitz in line to lead the panel should Democrats win control of the House in November. Leaders also placed two other staunchly pro-Israel Democrats on the panel, Representatives Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida and Wesley Bell of Missouri, who like Mr. Moskowitz have been heavily backed by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.
Progressives immediately condemned the moves, calling them tone-deaf and a sign that Democratic leaders have failed to grasp how voters in their own party have shifted on the issue of Israel and Gaza.
In a series of irate posts, Benjamin J. Rhodes, a former top foreign policy adviser to President Barack Obama, wrote that Democrats were “showing zero regard for the vast majority of their own voters,” adding that their “disregard for war crimes and voter concerns could not be clearer.”
A New York Times/Siena national poll conducted in May found that 74 percent of Democratic voters opposed providing additional economic and military support to Israel, and a Pew Research Center poll in April found that eight in 10 Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents had an unfavorable view of Israel.
Are We Facing A ‘Meta-Morphosis’? Zuckerberg’s trials are hardly over:
On Wednesday, Meta settled a lawsuit brought by 29 US states who argued it had designed addictive products that hooked young people. The social media company agreed to pay $18bn and to change certain features of its platform in the US. California’s attorney general said it was a victory that would make “a world of difference for children and their families”.
But elsewhere in the world, in jurisdictions as far flung as Amsterdam and Nairobi, other claims have yet to be heard. Far bigger questions about the power of a single US technology company to shape politics and democracy everywhere on Earth are still to be answered.
For the US, the settlement is a victory. A jury has done what the US Congress could not – put controls on a powerful tech company. As a part of the settlement, Meta has said it will set time limits on children’s use of its platforms Facebook and Instagram and block night-time usage.
For Meta, the settlement is also a victory. Its share price rose in the hours after the deal was announced. Its CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, was not forced to testify. The sum it is to pay, while not meaningless, is far less than the states had sought – $200bn – or the amount Meta itself had suggested in a court filing it might have to pay, which was up to $1.4tn.
In the early days of the Meta trial in the US, it seemed plausible that states would push the social media firm to finally make some changes to this algorithm. Those changes had the potential to fundamentally alter how the company does business. Meta’s algorithm is intended to keep users scrolling, stuck on the platform, and then it shows them ads.
But that is not what appears to have happened. The terms of the settlement will slightly change what is shown to minors, in that they will not necessarily have personalised feeds. But it is hard to see this concession changing the equation in war zones or creaking democracies.
Arturo Béjar, an ex-Facebook employee and whistleblower, said the limitations were “the equivalent of saying: ‘Well, you can smoke as many cigarettes as you can in two hours a day.’ It doesn’t make the cigarettes any safer.”
Yep. Looks like Meta skated.
What do you want to talk about?
