Thank god for comments like this. I find it truly disturbing how much people are treating LLMs like fact-machines. They are pattern matching machines that match using whatever information they have that matches best.
It's closer to improv jazz than to factual authority; still super wonderful, and worthwhile listening to, but not really for the purpose of learning how the original sounded when it was first recorded. Sure, you might get a sense of the original, but that's all it is: an impression. When you ask for facts, you get an impressionist render of facts, which sometimes, maybe even often times, accurately depict the Truth. But sometimes they depict the Truth the way an artist depicts the truth: if it feels right, it's right.
Which indicates (correctly or not) a current capacity of 314MW for Solar Star 1 (still less than the 1GW needed for Zuckerberg's projected SOTA data center).
Google search for "largest solar farms" or similar, but my bad - should have checked the date of the source.
The point I was trying to make, echoing Zuckerberg (who noted that power, not chips or data, is the constraining factor for further LLM scaling), is that power needs to be near to the data center, else the lead time and red tape will be even longer. If we're considering clean power then solar is an option, which limits datacenter location to where that is viable on this 1GW scale.
It's funny that you're the second person in this thread to assume that just because the data was wrong (out of date as it happens) it must have come from an LLM (which it didn't). I guess this is the world we are moving into, where all content is suspect of being AI generated and therefore suspect!
There are many solar plants in US well in excess of 58MW.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copper_Mountain_Solar_Facility is one, at 800MW.
It was at 58MW in 2010... which might confuse a LLM, though.