Must be an attack on a datacenter specifically, and not a part of an existing conflict that targets "lots of things, including datacenters".
1,000People are also trading
@IsaacKing Yesterday's U.S.-Israeli airstrike on Sharif University's datacenter causes this to resolve YES, I believe:
- CNN: https://www.cnn.com/2026/04/06/world/live-news/iran-war-us-trump-oil?post-id=cmnnhgyrk0000356s3jf35no3 "an airstrike targeted Tehran’s Sharif University of Technology on Monday morning, the semi-official Tasnim News Agency reported.
The strike damaged the university’s computing center and GPU facility, which provides infrastructure to the country’s AI capabilities, according to Tasnim, which is affiliated with Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC)."
- https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/us-israeli-jets-bomb-artificial-intelligence-infrastructure-in-iranian-capital/3894678 "A US-Israeli strike targeted a data center at Sharif University of Technology in Tehran"
- https://gvwire.com/2026/04/06/us-iran-study-ceasefire-plan-as-deadline-nears-on-trumps-hell-threat/ "A U.S.-Israeli attack hit the data center at Sharif University of Technology in Tehran, damaging infrastructure underpinning the country’s national artificial intelligence platform and thousands of other services, Fars News Agency said on Sunday."
- https://breakingthenews.net/Article/Strike-on-Iran%27s-tech-university-damaged-data-center/66014093
- https://www.news18.com/world/iran-threatens-strike-us-ai-centre-abu-dhabi-openai-stargate-data-centre-iran-missiles-warning-sharif-university-attack-ws-l-10018399.html "[the semi-official Tasnim News Agency] mentioned the attack in Tehran damaged the computing centre and GPU facility at Sharif University of Technology"
@Kingfisher isn't that a 'part of an existing conflict that targets "lots of things, including datacenters".'?
@billyhumblebrag Not sure its "tough" - striking datacenters as part of the Russia - Ukraine conflict has not counted (see my comment below) for precisely this reason, so I don't think this is "tough". And it appears Israel and US has exhausted their target lists so they were keen on hitting almost anything of value, so I don't think there was any strong motivation that it is specifically a data center.
The question gives two criteria:
> Must be an attack on a datacenter specifically
I think we can agree that this is satisfied? Multiple sources describe the strike specifically hitting the computing/data center infrastructure.
> not a part of an existing conflict that targets "lots of things, including datacenters".
I read this intent as "not merely incident collateral damage from broad campaigns where datacenters are not an identifiable target" - to rule out something like a data center destroyed in a carpet bombing campaign. By that measure:
- Multiple reports explicitly single out the computing/GPU facility as a struck target (Tasnim, Fars, CNN citing those reports, AA, others).
- The reporting frames the strike as hitting AI/data infrastructure specifically, not merely generic infrastructure among many indistinguishable targets.
Construing "existing conflict" as "entirety of the U.S.-Iran War" seems like an unlikely interpretation - it's hard to imagine a scenario where an airstrike is performed on a datacenter that is NOT part of any broader geopolitical context - even if a state of war didn't exist beforehand, it certainly would afterwards. In the most charitable interpretation, this interpretation would seem to solely allow a YES resolution where the literal first target in a war was the datacenter - quite dubious. Even if a datacenter is the intended target, taking out air defenses and other military targets would come first.
And that's exactly what happened here: the data center was destroyed within the first 5 weeks of the war (with the first 3 weeks spent largely on destroying air defenses), so it seems safe to say that this was a high-priority target.
@IsaacKing to weigh in?
@Kingfisher the problem with that interpretation is that the Ukraine attacks would have also met the criteria long time ago.
@MartinRandall Hmm, yeah, if the later intended target is the datacenter, that counts. (Once it's actually hit.)
Seems to have happened in Ukraine already, so I'll bet it is going to repeat soon (e.g. https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2022/03/15/internet-technicians-are-the-hidden-heroes-of-the-russia-ukraine-war/ shows a photo of "Kyivstar data center after an attack"). Unless "air strike" would be defined narrowly to exclude both aircraft-launched cruise missiles and drones. Verification might be a problem though....
@IsaacKing wouldn't it make more sense to tie the resolution to claimed rationale for the attack? You might otherwise find yourself in the difficult discussion on what is a war... Also an airstrike on data center for reasons other than AI still looks way more plausible even without larger conflict. mana link needed I lost just a bit.
@Lovre The discussion about the proposal(s) appears to me to focus on weird longtermist speculation while forgetting about the dangers of things that are already happening or could happen in near future, so there might be a metaphor here 😀
@fejfo Presumably it wouldn't be unprovoked; the precipitating country would probably have asked politely first.