The hidden cost of scaling AI: infrastructure, energy, and the push for liquid cooling.
Updated
January 8, 2026 6:31 PM

The inside of a data centre, with rows of server racks. PHOTO: FREEPIK
As artificial intelligence models grow larger and more demanding, the quiet pressure point isn’t the algorithms themselves—it’s the AI infrastructure that has to run them. Training and deploying modern AI models now requires enormous amounts of computing power, which creates a different kind of challenge: heat, energy use and space inside data centers. This is the context in which Supermicro and NVIDIA’s collaboration on AI infrastructure begins to matter.
Supermicro designs and builds large-scale computing systems for data centers. It has now expanded its support for NVIDIA’s Blackwell generation of AI chips with new liquid-cooled server platforms built around the NVIDIA HGX B300. The announcement isn’t just about faster hardware. It reflects a broader effort to rethink how AI data center infrastructure is built as facilities strain under rising power and cooling demands.
At a basic level, the systems are designed to pack more AI chips into less space while using less energy to keep them running. Instead of relying mainly on air cooling—fans, chillers and large amounts of electricity, these liquid-cooled AI servers circulate liquid directly across critical components. That approach removes heat more efficiently, allowing servers to run denser AI workloads without overheating or wasting energy.
Why does that matter outside a data center? Because AI doesn’t scale in isolation. As models become more complex, the cost of running them rises quickly, not just in hardware budgets, but in electricity use, water consumption and physical footprint. Traditional air-cooling methods are increasingly becoming a bottleneck, limiting how far AI systems can grow before energy and infrastructure costs spiral.
This is where the Supermicro–NVIDIA partnership fits in. NVIDIA supplies the computing engines—the Blackwell-based GPUs designed to handle massive AI workloads. Supermicro focuses on how those chips are deployed in the real world: how many GPUs can fit in a rack, how they are cooled, how quickly systems can be assembled and how reliably they can operate at scale in modern data centers. Together, the goal is to make high-density AI computing more practical, not just more powerful.
The new liquid-cooled designs are aimed at hyperscale data centers and so-called AI factories—facilities built specifically to train and run large AI models continuously. By increasing GPU density per rack and removing most of the heat through liquid cooling, these systems aim to ease a growing tension in the AI boom: the need for more computers without an equally dramatic rise in energy waste.
Just as important is speed. Large organizations don’t want to spend months stitching together custom AI infrastructure. Supermicro’s approach packages compute, networking and cooling into pre-validated data center building blocks that can be deployed faster. In a world where AI capabilities are advancing rapidly, time to deployment can matter as much as raw performance.
Stepping back, this development says less about one product launch and more about a shift in priorities across the AI industry. The next phase of AI growth isn’t only about smarter models—it’s about whether the physical infrastructure powering AI can scale responsibly. Efficiency, power use and sustainability are becoming as critical as speed.
Keep Reading
A global survey shows robot anxiety drops when people encounter robots in real life
Updated
March 13, 2026 2:25 PM

Ameca the humanoid robot, featuring a grey rubber face. PHOTO: ADOBE STOCK
People often assume robots make people uneasy everywhere. But a new global study suggests something more nuanced. Robot anxiety tends to be highest in places where people rarely see robots in real life. Where robots are more visible, attitudes are often far more positive. That insight comes from a global study by Hexagon AB, which surveyed 18,000 participants across nine major markets. The research explored how adults and children think about robots and how those views change depending on everyday exposure.
In the United Kingdom, anxiety about robots is the highest among the countries studied. Around 52% of adults say they feel worried that something might go wrong when they think about interacting with or working alongside robots. South Korea sits at the other end of the spectrum, with only 29% reporting similar concerns. One factor appears to explain much of the gap: familiarity.
British adults are among the least likely to have encountered robots in real life. Only about 30% say they have seen or used one. In contrast, countries where robots are more visible tend to report greater comfort. China offers the clearest example. Around 75% of adults there say they have seen or interacted with robots. At the same time, 81% say they feel excited about the technology’s future potential.
The study suggests that attitudes toward robots are not fixed. Instead, they shift depending on where people encounter them and what tasks they perform. When robots are seen solving clear, practical problems, confidence tends to rise.
Across the surveyed countries, adults report the highest comfort levels with robots working in factories and warehouses. Around 63% say they are comfortable with robots in those environments. These are settings where tasks are clearly defined and safety standards are well understood. Acceptance drops in more personal spaces. Only 46% say they feel comfortable with robots in the home, while comfort falls further to 39% when robots are imagined in classrooms.
In other words, context matters. People appear more willing to accept robots when they take on physically demanding or dangerous work. Half of the respondents say improved safety is one of the main advantages of robotics in those environments. A similar share point to productivity gains as another benefit. Another finding challenges a common assumption about public fears. Job loss is often described as the biggest concern surrounding robotics. But the study suggests security risk worries people more.
Around 51% of adults say their biggest concern about robots at work is the possibility that the machines could be hacked or misused. That fear outweighs worries about physical malfunction or injury, which stand at 41%. Concerns about being replaced at work appear at the same level.
For many respondents, the issue is not simply whether robots can perform tasks. It is whether the systems controlling them are secure. According to researchers involved in the study, these concerns reflect how people evaluate emerging technologies. Instead of having a single opinion about robotics, people tend to judge each situation individually.
A robot helping assemble products in a factory may feel acceptable. The same technology operating in more sensitive environments can raise different questions. Dr. Jim Everett, an associate professor in moral psychology, says trust in artificial intelligence and robotics is often misunderstood. People are not simply asking whether they trust the technology, he notes. They are thinking about specific tools performing specific roles.
A robot assisting in a classroom or helping in healthcare carries different expectations than an AI system used in defense or surveillance. Even though these technologies are often grouped together in public debates, people evaluate them differently depending on their purpose.
Finally, the study also highlights another important factor shaping public attitudes: experience. When people actually encounter robots, fear often declines. Michael Szollosy, a robotics researcher involved in the project, says reactions tend to change quickly when individuals meet a robot for the first time.
The idea of an autonomous machine can feel intimidating in theory. But when people see a small service robot or an industrial machine performing a straightforward task, the reaction is often much calmer. Exposure can shift perceptions from abstract fears to practical understanding.
That shift matters because robotics is moving steadily into everyday environments. From manufacturing and logistics to healthcare and public services, machines capable of autonomous or semi-autonomous work are becoming more common.
As that happens, the study suggests public confidence may depend less on technical breakthroughs and more on visibility and transparency. Burkhard Boeckem, chief technology officer at Hexagon AB, argues that trust grows when people understand what robots are designed to do and where their limits lie.
Anxiety tends to increase when systems feel invisible or poorly understood. Clear boundaries and clear explanations can have the opposite effect. When people see robots working safely alongside humans, performing well-defined tasks and operating within clear rules, the technology becomes easier to accept.
In that sense, the future of robotics may depend as much on public familiarity as on engineering. The machines themselves are advancing quickly. But the relationship between humans and robots is still being negotiated. For now, the study offers a simple insight: the more people encounter robots in everyday life, the less mysterious they become. And once the mystery fades, the conversation often changes from fear to curiosity.