Because the powers that be in Texas will siphon off funding to make things work better to fund their own projects. "Should we winterize our power grid" Nah, it's Texas where it doesn't get that cold for that long. Should we implement a warning system in an area that is historically known for being prone to flash flooding? Nah, it doesn't happen that often and we have other things to spend money on instead.

I wasn't looking for conspiracies and disconnected facts (i.e., flash flood through a rural, summer camp).

Dallas was a T5 datacenter hub before Uri in 2021 and did well during the storm because they were designed to service level guarantees [0].

It's also silly to claim that TXSE's performance is disconnected from serious TX investors.

[0] https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/analysis/how-data-cent...

What conspiracies? These are actual things that happened delivered as a sarcastic dialog that goes to show how the government in Texas behaves. Also, I never claimed anything about investors of TXSE. At the end of the day, it doesn't matter where an SE's data centers are located. They will all need redundancy plans. If you think Texas is a better location than other sites, then you have to focus on what have historically been issues for Texas. If you depend on the state's government doing things other than lining their pockets or at least the favorite pet project's coffers, then you are prone for failing. Those unwilling to study history are doomed to repeat it

I get you're heated about Texas politics.

I'm afraid your comments just come off as an attack on local politicians and their priorities, not the topic of addressing whether TXSE could be more resilient than peers.

The discussion evolved into where the data centers would be and pros/cons of having them in the various locations. I was discussing the cons of a Texas location