02 Your water
Plain versionBack to the room
The exhibit is still arriving. It will wake when all of it is here.
1 of 7 The rope
“The velvet rope is the terms of service.”
2 of 7 The label
02
Your water
The Server Farms How AI Drinks Your Lake and Sends You the Water Bill
The cloud has a water bill.
The record begins:
Reported On September 24, 2021, a reporter for The Oregonian asked the city of The Dalles, Oregon, for Google’s water use the year before. The district attorney’s order records that the city refused within hours, “under the trade secrets exemption.”
Decided “just the amount”
Settled the city sued the newspaper
The fine print
2.01 Reported Public records order on the petition of Mike Rogoway, The Oregonian (Wasco County District Attorney, October 15, 2021), filed as Exhibit F to the complaint in City of The Dalles v. Rogoway and Advance Local Media LLC, No. 21CV42306 Wasco County District Attorney’s Office (copy filed with the city’s complaint in the Circuit Court of Oregon for Wasco County, posted by Columbia Community Connection) · October 15, 2021 · as of October 16, 2026
On October 15, 2021, the district attorney for Wasco County ruled that the figure was not a trade secret: “Nothing about water use gives away the design or actual use of the water, just the amount.” He ordered the city “to promptly disclose all records responsive to this request.”
2.02 Decided Public records order on the petition of Mike Rogoway, The Oregonian (Wasco County District Attorney, October 15, 2021), filed as Exhibit F to the complaint in City of The Dalles v. Rogoway and Advance Local Media LLC, No. 21CV42306 Wasco County District Attorney’s Office (copy filed with the city’s complaint in the Circuit Court of Oregon for Wasco County, posted by Columbia Community Connection) · October 15, 2021 · as of October 16, 2026
On October 29, 2021, the city of The Dalles sued the reporter and The Oregonian’s publisher. It asked the court to rule that it need not disclose the records, because the district attorney had answered too late, and that they were exempt from disclosure “as trade secrets.”
2.11 Settled Complaint, City of The Dalles v. Michael Rogoway and Advance Local Media LLC (dba “Oregonian Media Group”), Circuit Court of Oregon for Wasco County, No. 21CV42306 City of The Dalles, filed in the Circuit Court of the State of Oregon for the County of Wasco (copy posted by Columbia Community Connection) · October 29, 2021 · as of October 16, 2026
Four questions. The record answers in its own words.
Asked?
Reported recommended: “deny all three rezonings”
Reported approved “four to three, with one abstention”
Decided void: the Board violated the advertising requirements
The fine print
The Court of Appeals of Virginia recounts that on November 8, 2023, Prince William County’s planning commission recommended that the county board deny all three Digital Gateway rezonings, and that the board’s own staff recommended denial too.
2.04 Reported Opinion, Board of County Supervisors of Prince William County v. Oak Valley Homeowners Association, Inc., Record Nos. 1590-25-4, 1584-25-4, 1592-25-4 and 2025-24-4 (published) Court of Appeals of Virginia · March 31, 2026 · as of October 16, 2026
At a hearing that began on December 12, 2023, the county board heard more than 17 hours of public comment, then approved all three rezonings four to three, with one abstention. It adjourned on December 13, “27 hours after the meeting had begun,” the appeals court wrote.
2.05 Reported Opinion, Board of County Supervisors of Prince William County v. Oak Valley Homeowners Association, Inc., Record Nos. 1590-25-4, 1584-25-4, 1592-25-4 and 2025-24-4 (published) Court of Appeals of Virginia · March 31, 2026 · as of October 16, 2026
After a five-day trial in June 2025, Judge Kimberly A. Irving of the Prince William County Circuit Court ruled all three rezonings “void ab initio,” void from the start, because the Board violated the advertising requirements of state law and the county’s ordinance. Her final order took effect on September 15, 2025.
2.06 Decided Opinion, Board of County Supervisors of Prince William County v. Oak Valley Homeowners Association, Inc., Record Nos. 1590-25-4, 1584-25-4, 1592-25-4 and 2025-24-4 (published), part I.E Court of Appeals of Virginia · March 31, 2026 · as of October 16, 2026
The first newspaper notice, planned for November 28, 2023, did not run. After the trial, the judge found that the county board, not the newspaper, was at fault (a finding the appeals court called “well-supported by credible evidence”), and that the plans could not be examined until December 7.
2.07 Decided Opinion, Board of County Supervisors of Prince William County v. Oak Valley Homeowners Association, Inc., Record Nos. 1590-25-4, 1584-25-4, 1592-25-4 and 2025-24-4 (published), part I.B and I.E Court of Appeals of Virginia · March 31, 2026 · as of October 16, 2026
In a companion case, another judge of the same court had ruled from the bench on October 31, 2024 that the county “did in fact submit a correct and timely request” to the newspaper, so that “the notice is therefore deemed timely.” The appeals court reversed that ruling on March 31, 2026.
2.32 Decided Opinion, Board of County Supervisors of Prince William County v. Oak Valley Homeowners Association, Inc., Record Nos. 1590-25-4, 1584-25-4, 1592-25-4 and 2025-24-4 (published), part I.E Court of Appeals of Virginia · March 31, 2026 · as of October 16, 2026
The appeals court said its ruling was “not influenced by the vibrant public debate surrounding data-center development”: “It is not our place to take sides in that debate.”
2.29 Decided Opinion, Board of County Supervisors of Prince William County v. Oak Valley Homeowners Association, Inc., Record Nos. 1590-25-4, 1584-25-4, 1592-25-4 and 2025-24-4 (published), part III Court of Appeals of Virginia · March 31, 2026 · as of October 16, 2026
The three rezonings covered 884, 534 and 342 acres in “a largely rural part of the county previously zoned for agricultural uses,” where “as many as 37 data centers” could be built, the appeals court wrote.
884 acres + 534 acres + 342 acres = 1,760 acres2.08 Reported Opinion, Board of County Supervisors of Prince William County v. Oak Valley Homeowners Association, Inc., Record Nos. 1590-25-4, 1584-25-4, 1592-25-4 and 2025-24-4 (published) Court of Appeals of Virginia · March 31, 2026 · as of October 16, 2026
Paid?
Reported a 6.28% return, the lowest of any class but outdoor lighting
Forecast growth “driven by … data centers”
The fine print
The order cites Dominion’s own cost study: in 2024 the future GS-5 customers gave the company a 6.28% return, “the lowest return for all rate classes other than outdoor lighting,” against 20.75% from the rest of their class. Citing forecast data-center growth, it told Dominion to propose new ways to share plant costs.
2.09 Reported Final Order, Application of Virginia Electric and Power Company for a 2025 biennial review, Case No. PUR-2025-00058, “Jurisdictional and Class Cost of Service Studies” Virginia State Corporation Commission · November 25, 2025 · as of October 16, 2026
The order says that after almost a decade of flat-to-low growth, electricity consumption on Dominion’s system is “forecast to increase markedly,” and that the increase “is being driven by commercial and industrial customers—specifically, data centers.”
2.10 Forecast Final Order, Application of Virginia Electric and Power Company for a 2025 biennial review, Case No. PUR-2025-00058, “Jurisdictional and Class Cost of Service Studies” Virginia State Corporation Commission · November 25, 2025 · as of October 16, 2026
Told?
Decided settlement money “will be reimbursed” by Google
Reported Google paid the city’s legal fees, The Oregonian reported
The fine print
On November 14, 2022, The Dalles city council voted 4 to 0 to let the city attorney settle the newspaper case for up to $100,000. The council’s minutes say that amount “will be reimbursed” by Google.
2.12 Decided Minutes, Regular City Council Meeting, November 14, 2022 (CC 2022-11-14 Council Minutes) City of The Dalles (the city’s public records archive) · November 14, 2022 · as of October 16, 2026
The Oregonian reported in December 2022 that Google paid more than $100,000 to fund the city’s legal fight to keep Google’s water use secret, and would also cover what the city agreed to pay the group that represented the newspaper.
2.33 Reported Google’s water use is soaring in The Dalles, records show, with two more data centers to come (by Mike Rogoway), Internet Archive capture of February 21, 2026 The Oregonian/OregonLive · December 17, 2022 · as of October 16, 2026
In the settlement the city agreed to pay $53,173 for the newspaper’s attorney fees and costs, paid to the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. The agreement says it is not an admission of wrongdoing by either side.
2.13 Settled Stipulated General Judgment of Dismissal, with the Settlement Agreement as Exhibit A, City of The Dalles v. Rogoway and Advance Local Media LLC, Circuit Court of Oregon for Wasco County, No. 21CV42306 The parties; filed in the Circuit Court of the State of Oregon for the County of Wasco (copy posted by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press) · December 13, 2022 · as of October 16, 2026
Shared?
Reported 39% of Loudoun’s budget, the county says
Reported tax rate $1.145 down to $0.805, the county says
The fine print
Loudoun County, Virginia, says its data centers generated $1.2 billion in real and personal property tax revenue in the 2026 fiscal year, 39% of the county’s overall budget, and that its adopted 2027 budget projects $1.3 billion, 40% of the total.
2.14 Reported Data Centers: The Loudoun Story Loudoun County, Virginia (official website) · October 16, 2026 · as of October 16, 2026
Loudoun says the revenue let it “generally lower the real property tax rate for homeowners every year,” from $1.145 per $100 of assessed value in 2016 to $0.805 in 2026, though bills “have varied due to increased property values.” It adds that it “cannot become overly dependent on a single revenue source.”
2.15 Reported Data Centers: Tax Revenues & County Budget Loudoun County, Virginia (official website) · October 16, 2026 · as of October 16, 2026
OPB reported in January 2026 that Google’s property taxes for its data centers in The Dalles “are discounted by 92% through its agreements with The Dalles and Wasco County,” and that in 2025 it paid $7.3 million in property taxes, including a community service fee.
2.34 Reported As Google’s water demands grow, The Dalles aims to pull more from Mount Hood forest (by April Ehrlich) OPB (Oregon Public Broadcasting) · January 15, 2026 · as of October 16, 2026
3 of 7 The number
What share of one small city’s water went to one company’s data centers in 2021? Guess first.
You guessed
Reported 29% of the city’s water in 2021
Reported “a third” of the city’s water by 2024, OPB reported
The fine print
The Oregonian reported that the released records showed Google’s data centers used 355 million gallons of the city’s water in 2021, “29% of the city’s total water consumption,” and that Google’s use had nearly tripled since 2017, the year before it opened a third data center there.
2.16 Reported Google’s water use is soaring in The Dalles, records show, with two more data centers to come (by Mike Rogoway), Internet Archive capture of February 21, 2026 The Oregonian/OregonLive · December 17, 2022 · as of October 16, 2026
OPB reported in January 2026 that city figures, released on a public records request, show Google used 383.9 million gallons of water in 2023 and 434.4 million in 2024, and that Google uses “a third of the overall water consumed by the city.”
2.17 Reported The Dalles’ mayor called OPB’s data center story inaccurate. Here are the facts (by April Ehrlich) OPB (Oregon Public Broadcasting) · January 23, 2026 · as of October 16, 2026
4 of 7 Their side
The companies’ own words, from their reports and statements, with what was reported beside them.
Reported 2022 review: sources “weren’t at high risk,” Google says
Reported The Oregonian: water “to support the company’s expansion”
Reported no longer a trade secret, Google confirmed
The fine print
Google’s 2026 report says its 2022 review found The Dalles’ water sources “weren’t at high risk for depletion or scarcity,” and that it gave the city a new underground water-storage system and the groundwater rights that go with it “at no cost.”
2.18 Reported Google 2026 Environmental Report, “Water stewardship and efficiency at our Oregon data centers” and “Investing in shared water infrastructure” (pages 35 and 36) Google · June 24, 2026 · as of October 16, 2026
The Oregonian reported in December 2022 that the city’s 2021 agreement with Google “commits The Dalles to provide an undisclosed volume of water to support the company’s expansion,” and that in exchange Google gave water rights, donated 35 acres to the county and “paid the full cost of the water system upgrade.”
2.35 Reported Google’s water use is soaring in The Dalles, records show, with two more data centers to come (by Mike Rogoway), Internet Archive capture of February 21, 2026 The Oregonian/OregonLive · December 17, 2022 · as of October 16, 2026
In December 2022 Google confirmed in an email, the Associated Press reported, that its water figures would no longer be a trade secret. A spokesperson spoke of “site-level water usage numbers for all our U.S. data center sites, including The Dalles.”
2.19 Reported Oregon city drops fight to keep Google water use private (The Associated Press, as published by KNKX Public Radio, December 20, 2022) The Associated Press (published by KNKX Public Radio) · December 20, 2022 · as of October 16, 2026
Google’s own 2026 environmental report says its data centers in The Dalles withdrew 654.3 million gallons of water in 2025, discharged 185.3 million and consumed 469 million.
2.20 Reported Google 2026 Environmental Report, “Water stewardship and efficiency at our Oregon data centers” (page 35) and “Water use by data center location” (page 97) Google · June 24, 2026 · as of October 16, 2026
OPB reported in January 2026 that, pressed about the records lawsuit, Google’s global head of infrastructure strategy and sustainability said the company was trying to protect the “physical security of assets that are critical to operations.” He also said: “We want to tell a community how much water we’re using.”
2.21 Reported As Google’s water demands grow, The Dalles aims to pull more from Mount Hood forest (by April Ehrlich) OPB (Oregon Public Broadcasting) · January 15, 2026 · as of October 16, 2026
Reported QTS: “tens of billions of dollars” and “thousands” of jobs
Reported Compass: “cannot move forward”
The fine print
In its notice of withdrawal, as InsideNoVa reported, QTS said the project was approved “following a rigorous process” and would have delivered “tens of billions of dollars in capital investment, substantial annual local tax revenues to support public services, and thousands of long-term jobs.”
2.22 Reported UPDATE: Digital Gateway data center project dies after final developer drops appeal (InsideNoVa staff) InsideNoVa · July 2, 2026 · as of October 16, 2026
On April 29, 2026 Compass Datacenters, a developer of the project, said it “cannot move forward” with it: “While we still believe this project offered significant benefits for the region and our neighbors, recent legal actions and compounding regulatory hurdles have effectively closed a viable path forward.”
2.36 Reported Statement Regarding Digital Gateway Project (Compass Datacenters, Dallas, April 29, 2026) Compass Datacenters · April 29, 2026 · as of October 16, 2026
After a five-day trial in June 2025, Judge Kimberly A. Irving of the Prince William County Circuit Court ruled all three rezonings “void ab initio,” void from the start, because the Board violated the advertising requirements of state law and the county’s ordinance. Her final order took effect on September 15, 2025.
2.06 Decided Opinion, Board of County Supervisors of Prince William County v. Oak Valley Homeowners Association, Inc., Record Nos. 1590-25-4, 1584-25-4, 1592-25-4 and 2025-24-4 (published), part I.E Court of Appeals of Virginia · March 31, 2026 · as of October 16, 2026
Reported “zero water for cooling” in new designs, it says
The fine print
Microsoft says every new data-center design since August 2024 cools chips in a closed loop that evaporates no water, with pilots due in 2026 and new sites coming online from late 2027; its current fleet “will still use a mix of air-cooled and water-cooled systems.” It expects “a nominal increase” in energy use.
2.23 Reported Sustainable by design: Next-generation datacenters consume zero water for cooling (by Steve Solomon, Vice President, Datacenter Infrastructure Engineering) Microsoft (Microsoft Cloud blog) · December 9, 2024 · as of October 16, 2026
Loudoun County explains two ways of cooling with water: in older “open-loop” systems, 75 to 85 percent of the cooling water “eventually vaporizes or evaporates” and the rest leaves as wastewater; in “closed-loop” systems, evaporation falls to between zero and five percent.
2.24 Reported Data Centers: Water Considerations Loudoun County, Virginia (official website) · October 16, 2026 · as of October 16, 2026
5 of 7 What fair looks like
What has been ruled, agreed and left open so far. Each line carries the exact word for where it stands.
Settled ten yearly totals, and later years on request
Reported site-level water figures, from November 2022
Reported the timing was “probably a coincidence,” Google said
The fine print
The city and the newspaper settled on December 13, 2022: the city agreed to disclose the yearly water total of “Design LLC, an industrial water user,” for 2012 through 2021, and the total for any later year when asked. For other records, it kept its right to claim exemptions such as trade secrets.
2.03 Settled Stipulated General Judgment of Dismissal, with the Settlement Agreement as Exhibit A, City of The Dalles v. Rogoway and Advance Local Media LLC, Circuit Court of Oregon for Wasco County, No. 21CV42306 The parties; filed in the Circuit Court of the State of Oregon for the County of Wasco (copy posted by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press) · December 13, 2022 · as of October 16, 2026
On November 21, 2022, Google said it was “publishing our annual water metrics for 2021 across our Google-owned data centers in the U.S.,” and would add sites in other countries in its 2023 report and every year after.
2.25 Reported Our commitment to climate-conscious data center cooling (by Urs Hölzle, Senior Vice President, Technical Infrastructure) Google (The Keyword blog) · November 21, 2022 · as of October 16, 2026
The Oregonian reported in December 2022 that Google had disclosed its water use for the first time the month before, reversing its secrecy “as The Dalles moved to settle its lawsuit,” and that “a Google spokesperson said the timing of the company’s reversal on water reporting was probably a coincidence.”
2.37 Reported Google’s water use is soaring in The Dalles, records show, with two more data centers to come (by Mike Rogoway), Internet Archive capture of February 21, 2026 The Oregonian/OregonLive · December 17, 2022 · as of October 16, 2026
In the settlement the city agreed to pay $53,173 for the newspaper’s attorney fees and costs, paid to the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. The agreement says it is not an admission of wrongdoing by either side.
2.13 Settled Stipulated General Judgment of Dismissal, with the Settlement Agreement as Exhibit A, City of The Dalles v. Rogoway and Advance Local Media LLC, Circuit Court of Oregon for Wasco County, No. 21CV42306 The parties; filed in the Circuit Court of the State of Oregon for the County of Wasco (copy posted by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press) · December 13, 2022 · as of October 16, 2026
Decided upheld on appeal: “we affirm”
Reported QTS: “terminate the Digital Gateway project”
Reported Compass: “cannot move forward”
Decided the county voted not to appeal
The fine print
On March 31, 2026, the Court of Appeals of Virginia upheld the ruling: “Because the Board violated the advertising rules … we affirm the trial court’s judgment declaring the Compass, DG South, and DG North rezonings … void ab initio.”
2.26 Decided Opinion, Board of County Supervisors of Prince William County v. Oak Valley Homeowners Association, Inc., Record Nos. 1590-25-4, 1584-25-4, 1592-25-4 and 2025-24-4 (published), Conclusion Court of Appeals of Virginia · March 31, 2026 · as of October 16, 2026
On July 2, 2026, QTS withdrew its petitions to the Supreme Court of Virginia. “QTS has made the decision to terminate the Digital Gateway project and withdraw its associated filings,” the company told Bisnow.
2.27 Reported Blackstone's QTS Abandons Digital Gateway Project, Ends Legal Fight (by Alexis Kramer) Bisnow · July 3, 2026 · as of October 16, 2026
On April 29, 2026 Compass Datacenters, a developer of the project, said it “cannot move forward” with it: “While we still believe this project offered significant benefits for the region and our neighbors, recent legal actions and compounding regulatory hurdles have effectively closed a viable path forward.”
2.36 Reported Statement Regarding Digital Gateway Project (Compass Datacenters, Dallas, April 29, 2026) Compass Datacenters · April 29, 2026 · as of October 16, 2026
On April 14, 2026, the Prince William County board voted unanimously to direct its lawyers not to petition the Supreme Court of Virginia to hear an appeal of the March 31 decision.
2.28 Decided Brief (action summary), Board of County Supervisors meeting of April 14, 2026, Res. No. 26-231 Prince William County, Virginia (the county’s meeting archive) · April 14, 2026 · as of October 16, 2026
The appeals court said its ruling was “not influenced by the vibrant public debate surrounding data-center development”: “It is not our place to take sides in that debate.”
2.29 Decided Opinion, Board of County Supervisors of Prince William County v. Oak Valley Homeowners Association, Inc., Record Nos. 1590-25-4, 1584-25-4, 1592-25-4 and 2025-24-4 (published), part III Court of Appeals of Virginia · March 31, 2026 · as of October 16, 2026
Decided from 2027, big users pay for most of what they reserve
Pending the order is appealed to the Supreme Court of Virginia
Decided 2026 opt-out: factories and warehouses, not data storage
Decided 2026 law: rate reviews to guard others from big users’ costs
The fine print
From January 1, 2027, the order puts sites with a measured or contracted demand of 25 megawatts or more and a steady load (a load factor of 75% or more) in a new class, GS-5. They pay for at least 85% of the grid capacity and 60% of the generating capacity they contract for, with exemptions; new ones sign for 14 years.
2.30 Decided Final Order, Application of Virginia Electric and Power Company for a 2025 biennial review, Case No. PUR-2025-00058, “Rate Schedule GS-5” Virginia State Corporation Commission · November 25, 2025 · as of October 16, 2026
On December 22, 2025, the Retail Energy Advancement League, a party to the case, filed a notice of appeal to the Supreme Court of Virginia from the Commission’s final order. The notice does not say which part of the order it challenges.
2.39 Pending Notice of Appeal of Retail Energy Advancement League, Case No. PUR-2025-00058 (Application of Virginia Electric and Power Company for a 2025 biennial review), filed with the Virginia State Corporation Commission Retail Energy Advancement League, by counsel (filed in the Virginia State Corporation Commission’s docket) · December 22, 2025 · as of October 16, 2026
A 2026 Virginia law let a customer due to move into the new class choose once, by July 1, 2026, to stay in its existing rate class, if it had at least 200 full-time-equivalent workers at the site “engaged in manufacturing, industrial, or consumer goods warehousing and distribution activities other than data storage.”
2.42 Decided 2026 Virginia Acts of Assembly, Chapter 1124 (Senate Bill 253, the Fair and Affordable Electric Rates and Reliability Act), as chaptered, enactment clause 4 Virginia General Assembly (Legislative Information System) · May 14, 2026 · as of October 16, 2026
A 2026 Virginia law tells the Commission, in its rate reviews every two years, to “take all measures to reasonably ensure” that the costs of customers billed on the terms for users with a demand of 25 megawatts or more and a load factor of 75% or more “are not being subsidized by other customers of the utility.”
2.43 Decided 2026 Virginia Acts of Assembly, Chapter 1124 (Senate Bill 253, the Fair and Affordable Electric Rates and Reliability Act), as chaptered, enactment clause 3 Virginia General Assembly (Legislative Information System) · May 14, 2026 · as of October 16, 2026
On September 3, 2026 the Commission found that six customers who had chosen, under a 2026 state law, to stay in their existing rate class should now be counted in GS-4, not GS-5, and let Dominion adjust the GS-4 and GS-5 rates to match, keeping the total revenue approved in 2025 the same. The order does not name them.
2.40 Decided Order Granting Motion, Case No. PUR-2025-00058 (Application of Virginia Electric and Power Company for a 2025 biennial review), September 3, 2026, pages 2 to 4 Virginia State Corporation Commission · September 3, 2026 · as of October 16, 2026
Decided EU: report water yearly, publish it unless confidential
Pending not in force yet: a public power-and-water grade per site
Decided the Parliament or the Council can still object
The fine print
Since 2024 EU rules have required operators of data centers whose computers need 500 kilowatts or more to report yearly figures including all the water their sites take in. Member states must make them publish those figures, except what law keeps confidential. The EU database shows only national and EU-wide figures.
2.31 Decided Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2024/1364 of 14 March 2024 on the first phase of the establishment of a common Union rating scheme for data centres (EUR-Lex, Internet Archive capture of September 21, 2026) European Commission (Official Journal of the European Union) · March 14, 2024 · as of October 16, 2026
On September 21, 2026 the European Commission adopted a rule, not yet in force, under which the EU’s database would give each data center that reports a yearly label from August 2027, grading how efficiently it uses power and water; the labels “shall be publicly available.”
2.38 Pending Commission Delegated Regulation C(2026) 3472 of 21 September 2026, amending Delegated Regulation (EU) 2024/1364 (a common Union rating scheme for data centres), as sent to the Council: Council document 13444/26 European Commission; Council of the European Union (public register) · September 21, 2026 · as of October 16, 2026
Under the EU’s energy-efficiency law, a rule like the label enters into force only if neither the European Parliament nor the Council objects within two months of receiving it, a period either can extend by two more months.
2.41 Decided Directive (EU) 2023/1791 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 September 2023 on energy efficiency, Article 34(6) European Parliament and Council of the European Union (EUR-Lex, the EU’s official law database) · September 13, 2023 · as of October 16, 2026
6 of 7 The stamp
Yours to give. There is no right answer, and the museum keeps no count.
In the room, this is where you stamp your ticket with one of five stamps. The plain version asks nothing of you.
Kept on this device only. Nothing is sent.
7 of 7 Three doors
Three ways on. All three lead to the series’ own site.
From the book · The Server FarmsThe water use is confidential. The empty lake is quite public.