Thanks for that. I am not an expert by any means about reactors. I am just going off what my step dad has said and he was a nuclear engineer at Hanford. I did find an article that talks about the shortcomings of the Chernobyl reactor design.
https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/appendices/rbmk-reactors
Totally agree about nuclear for sure.
I think with the USSR at least, that their reactor designs were supposed to be less safe than western reactor designs.
Was it because they were a shitty oligarchy claiming to be communist? Maybe, they did make a lot of garbage decisions.
I think the US has the record for most nuclear disasters by a lot but two of the worst were in the USSR.
A lot of the cost is building a giant centralized nuclear facility. Once they are built it is not nearly as expensive to run them.
I think this is generally a good thing. Companies should be thinking of ways to supply their power needs.
Having said that, people want a good AI. The LLMs they are working on are probably not that. I am very skeptical we are anywhere close to where the hype train has taken us
Pretty sure it has to do with how the plant is designed and operated as opposed to what economic or governmental system it happens to exist under.
The real issue is we need to protect everyone from the extreme violation of privacy and psychological manipulation that has become endemic in our online culture. It is not just social media. It is also Google, Microsoft, and Apple.
This is why when the government goes after Tic Toc to protect children it is so hollow. It is a scapegoat for the industry. Only the system is so corrupt it can’t even sacrifice the lamb anymore. It is has become a lip service to a problem so large it will likely be the defining point for the new millennium.
We need real privacy protections yesterday. The government should have broken these companies up a decade ago. Everyday we normalize this behavior it is putting profits above human dignity.
Not at all. There is a wealth of research about this topic.
Ensuring severity and certainty of punishment will not stop crime. It may affect some rational actors decisions but most criminals are not rational.
Bullocks. You could make the crime for stealing death and execute everyone who does. There would still be stealing.
Simply put most criminals don’t think about consequences.
This only applies to rational actors. The problem is most criminals are not rational nor thinking of consequences.
Case in point, criminals know convenience stores have cameras but still openly rob and steal from them.
The leader of the KKK said he would vote for a black man over a white woman. Sexism has always trumped racism.
This is the way. This technology is too critical to our future to leave in the hands of the private sector at this point.
For real, all those guys were always cutthroats. How do you think they dominated the markets? It was not because they shared and encouraged competition. No, they stole, lied, and cheated their way to the top.
What in the hell are people with brain implants going to do when they stop supporting their hardware or keep additional features behind a paywall. People would be forced to pay whatever the company wanted.
This is ripe for human rights abuse on a level we have never seen before. Imagine being locked out of your own body. Without important safety guards and laws to protect people it would surely cause untold suffering.
There are plenty of judges without this conflict of interest available. They recuse themselves because ethically it is what is right. There is no shame, it is normal procedure.
A judge who has a large investment should not rule on a case that they have a financial interest in. Even if you believe they could remain impartial it breeds distrust in the process.
So you are arguing they should prove 100% that their claim is true but that is not how it works. Corruption is a real issue and your hand waving isn’t making it go away.
Let me get this straight, just because they could stand to gain financially does not mean they should recuse themselves. Furthermore we have to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt decision X results is Y extra money to satisfy you.
If you move the goalpost past Jupiter I guess there is no corruption at all. Keep moving along nothing to see here…
That is a long winded way to say you are a copyright defender. Your insisting on finding an alternative to a broken system so rent seekers can continue to exist is naive to say the least.
I think most people with your stance (don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater) really have no idea how broken copyright and intellectual property is.
AI companies have already proven copyright is DOA. It was never designed for the little guy. That is just propaganda you have fallen prey to.
Simply put copyright was not needed for all of human history and it is still not needed. Pretending you have a unique idea, song, painting, etc in a world of billions of humans is beyond ridiculous.
The concept was already broken from the start because everything in science and art is iterative. Giving monopoly power to rent seekers is the natural result of a broken concept.
Ding ding ding, winner winner chicken dinner
Look! We found the anti anti-microsoft user in their natural habitat of talking shit on social media. They are from the same family bootlickers and related to the Tossaladers. Don’t mention you are an alternative OS person around them or they may go into a blind rage.
4 for the win!
I bought a old Imac at a thrift store and put XFCE on it. It was a great machine until the power supply finally gave out. I would do it again if I had the chance.