Data Centers and Privacy

The world knows from experience what happens when powerful individuals and groups are allowed unrestrained to increase their power and influence. Laws and regulations exist because of abuses that have harmed millions. Data centers and Flock cameras are new examples of technologies growing unchecked. However, Eunice doesn't think these technologies shouldn’t exist. Many have already benefited from their substantial influence on our lives. That said, Eunice believes their owners must be compelled to be transparent about their plans, must operate their facilities in ways that do not trample on their neighbors, and must pay their own way.

If emerging technologies are only curbed by optional guidelines written by the billionaire proprietors themselves, we cannot expect outcomes that will benefit most citizens. However, county, state, and national governments are already setting limits. New technologies need to be studied and carefully applied so that their benefits outweigh their risks. Eunice favors creating advisory panels of experts to create bills that set federal limits on AI and other new technologies, with continuous updates as development continues. In SC-03, already Greenwood, Newberry, and Anderson Counties have passed data center moratoria. Oconee County has passed a ban on Flock (and competitor) cameras, a good model for other governments. Eunice recommends...

• Data centers must be required to generate their own renewable energy unless a company can prove that fossil fuel models can be implemented more quickly and cheaply

• Rate payers should not see electricity rate hikes for the grid infrastructure needed for any new data center (i.e., data centers must pay for their own electrical grid improvements)

• New data center builds should be required to provide some community benefit - new local electricity infrastructure, putting power lines underground in a certain radius, generating clean energy for the neighboring community, etc.

• The federal government could mandate a minimum distance from neighborhoods, schools, and senior centers at which data centers must be constructed to prevent noise stress to nearby residents

• We could create a federal agency to collect data on the jobs that are most affected by AI and assess severance benefits over time by industry

• The government could own a percentage of AI and distribute proceeds to citizens and nonprofits for the common good

• We could enact a national AI pause to allow informed leaders time for frontier model training
  Local governments could be encouraged to create Flock camera bans and/or limits like the new law passed in Oconee County

• Companies building data centers could be required to give estimates to communities about how long the data center will be used (because some experts estimate new data centers would only be utilized for 5 years before becoming obsolete)

• Federal regulations could penalize data centers that are built with water-only cooling systems so that other cooling methods see a financial advantage (and thereby protect local lakes and rivers)

For more information about Flock cameras in SC go to www.deflock.org.

For more information on the location of data centers in the US currently see www.compute-atlas.com.

Suggested laws to set limits on surveillance data being automatically collected on individuals via Flock cameras and other surveillance devices:

• Require a judicial warrant based on probable cause for any search location data for a specific person

• Cap retention of data at a set number of days (not months or years) unless the data is tied to an active criminal case

• Publish the audit logs for every data search (every search code, every agency using it, etc.) on a regular schedule the public can check

• Prohibit searches for civil immigration enforcement, reproductive health care and first amendment protected protests in statute (not in a settings menu)

• Ban sharing data with outside agencies and federal databases absent a warrant and require each city or state to know every entity that has pledged its data

• Attach real penalties (meaning criminal liability) for  misuse of private data and automatic contract termination for a vendor's misuse of data