Big Tech is Going Nuclear!

[@PBoyle]

⚡Start designing today with Gamma for free ➡ gamma.app

[@VirtousStoic]

❤Nomad capitalist sent me here liked ur interview❤

[@NaisgShhs]

You should really incorporate some humor, it is getting way too serious, I know it is a serious issue but your should not have to

[@vardekpetrovic9716]

In sweden the former government made sure to acid wash and sabotage the shut down reactors so they could never open again. The communist party (MP) is just batshit insane, but even though they got the least votes of all parties in that election, they were still part of the ruling coalition and got the most important political positions somehow in said government.

[@orsonzedd]

No I refuse to use AI bullshit, please don't use Generative AI

[@artificialgravitas8954]

So how much more power does Gamma consume compared to conventional Powerpoint?

[@Croz89]

Honestly, I see this as a win-win. Even if the AI bubble pops, we'll have lots of clean, reliable baseload energy to put to better use.

[@samsonsoturian6013]

At what point do we overproduce electricity?

[@AsokaTw-mz3lr]

you can't store energy for so long. energy is not like petroleum. they have to constantly run the power plants to produce the energy. if they have no incentivise to do it, they won't run them.

[@ElMarcoh]

If the AI bubble pops, they will have to somehow close the gap to expected returns (even if they don't reach it) they will sell the energy back, but "slowly" so the price doesn't drop

[@gamemusicify]

Bold to assume they wouldn't use this power for there other projects as we use more and more data even if the ai bubble pops they are more likely to use it for there own needs vs anything you might want

[@deth3021]

​@AsokaTw-mz3lr Wow what an embarrassing comment.

[@Shadowpaw67]

Nuclear’s PR problem is that when something goes bad at a nuclear plant, it’s big, loud, and immediate. Coal and oil pollution is slow and ignorable, like a frog in a pot slowly brought to boiling. 10 people vaporized in a nuclear meltdown is a lot more understandable and scary than 100 people dying young to lung cancer and heart problems.

[@pawel8365]

No on has ever been "vaporized" in a meltdown you double-digit IQ brainlet.

[@JuanSmithers]

funnily enough, coal and oil production are also WAY more deadly in absolute and relative terms than nuclear production. Even individual disasters tend to be more dramatic -- anyone remember the refinery explosion in Philadelphia a few years back? That came very close to resulting in thousands of gallons of extremely toxic and corrosive gas being released into an urban area. A typical oil spill or dam failure is also worse (both for humans and the environment) than Chernobyl. There have been people living in the Chernobyl exclusion zone for decades with no ill effects. The only difference is that it is somehow acceptable for our streets to be filled with carbon monoxide, but a bunch of extremely strong sealed barrels full of barely-radioactive material, which can actually be recycled now, is somehow dangerous.

[@atrumluminarium]

Yea but there are only 2 cases where things went bad, one was human error and the other was human error as a result of typical Soviet negligence. Both of which are irrelevant these days with modern designs and more powerful computer control

[@MrPlannery]

​@@atrumluminariumtwo cases? I can think of at least two more, and I'm sure there are others. (3 mile Island, Chernobyl, Fukushima, windscale are the four that pop into my mind) But your assesment is right overall.

[@wishteria234]

@@JuanSmithers untrue

[@et34t34fdf]

Environmentalists teaming up with big oil to be against nuclear power is one of those things that shouldn't be a thing, but big oil really did a number on them, sadly.

[@thevoxdeus]

We're starting to see some environmentalists champion nuclear energy, as it has become abundantly clear that they must choose between the quasi-religious disgust for nuclear energy or the much more practical goal of stopping climate change.

[@BresciGaetano]

i higly doubt as an environmentalist to be anyway near the positions of any petrolhead. The fact you belive something so nonsesical speak a huge deal about the amount of brainwashing that some influencial people are doing.

[@davec8153]

That's the issue with any organization that is rabid on a single cause, to the detriment of any rational argument. Environmentalists, animal activists etc. all tend to suffer from the same issue.

[@Yttiwgnihtemos]

@@davec8153 theyre essentially religious zealots with tunnel vision.

[@MrRenanHappy]

@@davec8153 Thats just any organization

[@getnohappy]

Fukushima managed to survive an earthquake and tsunami mostly in tact, so of course it was sensible for Germany - a country seldom afflicted by either - to abandon its nuclear plants out of safety concerns...

[@Jakob_DK]

A bit more knowledge and you may understand. It is not important what the reason for lack of power from the diesel generators is, the problem is to easily indentify reasons why the won’t work. Even Sweden had a near meltdown as their generators did not start. But the basic reason is economic. It was not profitable.

[@getnohappy]

​​@@Jakob_DK first, we'll ignore how quickly the economics became problematic after the (not quite) disaster. But given the the decision left Germany dangerously reliant on Russian gas, making Putin confident the West wouldn't challenge his invasion of Ukraine, we'll see whether the decision made economic sense.

[@ConcerninglyWiseAlligator]

And it wouldn't have been a problem if Fukushima's governor hadn't cheaped out on the tsunami precautions he was told were necessary.

[@yurialtunin9121]

@@getnohappy If you look on Ukraine as on part of Russia, this so-called "invasion" becomes just a brutal civil war. It is very easy to split the country and it is very difficult to bring it together.

[@sebsebski2829]

What's not to like about the green party and green communists?

[@Antcarhuman]

Did you hear about the crab that went to the underwater disco? ….. He pulled a mussel.

[@Sol103-06]

Hate

[@haroldsandahl6408]

I must disagree with you. Fusion is 50 years away and has been 50 years away for the last 70 years

[@ronald3836]

It is now only always 20 years away thanks to progress being made.

[@sickbailey21]

@@ronald3836 the optimists have always felt this way. I would love to see its rollout within my lifetime

[@whitewall2253]

​@@ronald3836 its been 20 years away for at least ten years, lol.

[@TehIdiotOne]

We have made some genuine progress the last decade or so, with some reactors achieving net energy, but otherwise i have to concur we are still genuinely decades away from fusion being commercially viable.

[@iBlindPanic]

So is efficient energy storage, both fusion and energy storage need a fundamental breakthrough.

[@instanoodles]

Big tech is finally realizing that you cant power servers with renewable energy credits.

[@molochi]

Oh weve been aware that high end dcs are gonna need their own plants for a decade and that fission is the best way forward.

[@BresciGaetano]

no, they just realized how to sell the old wastes as green panacea.

[@Casey-dy2oo]

Nuclear is clean energy. It has 100x less waste than solar and wind. .

[@xenon6947]

Nuclear energy comes under renewable.

[@nokungfuforyou323]

Big tech needs all that energy to fuck us out of our jobs and our future.

[@bestdungeonever]

I come for the financial analysis, I stay for the deadpan “fish disco” 😂😂😂

[@efovex]

Financial analysis, what are you talking about? I'm here for the rap news.

[@durrer9038]

For how long are you planning to stay?

[@bennwalton]

I work in energy and it's hard to overstate how much the grid planners' forecasts have changed in the last 18 months. The NYISO is saying there will be supply shortages (see: blackouts) in nyc if certain key utility projects don't finish construction on time, I think in '26 and '27. They forecast "peak demand" going out 25 years (the "Gold Book" is the publication) and last year the forecasts increased by 20-30% from the previous year, due in large part to planned data center growth. Never seen projected growth like this in my entire career, as Patrick says load has been forecast as flat or falling since the 2000s. This is the problem with using market signals to prepare critical infrastructure: by the time the market signal arrives, the system is in crisis. Prices for capacity in the PJM BRA auction 10xd this year, similar stuff in MISO and CA has already happened. And it's coming for NY!

[@chrisnoname2725]

Isn’t it better for the producers to lag behind and get better prices? It’s the users that need more cheaper power not the producers. They would be stupid to not lag behind the market

[@rohantayler560]

I also work in energy and I'm incredibly sceptical there is a commerical case for any new baseload power in the US grid moving forward, nuclear or otherwise, without massive Government subsidies. The numbers simply don't add up. I expect the whole thing to fall over.

[@TalleyrandsPuppet]

As a residential ratepayer near a data center hub, I can feel the tech companies groping for my wallet. If they want to pay for nuclear, fine. By there’s 0% chance that they will.

[@bennwalton]

@TalleyrandsPuppet even worse: they'll pay to repower nuclear and, with direct agreements with the utility, offtake 100% of the energy to f****** train copilot (or the like). So, the country is undergoing a nuclear renassiance, but the energy isn't actually going to relieve congestion or improve people's lives. Just feed servers. We simply shouldn't allow the tech company to offtake 100% of the nuclear plant. I don't care if they can pay for it! we have to diversify our energy sources and the tech companies cannot stand in the way of that. It's mind boggling the perpetual robbery of the commons in the 21st century. There isn't much left.

[@bennwalton]

@@chrisnoname2725 well, right, exactly, now that the price signal is here, everybody wants to take out loans and finance these projects. It's good that it's finally happening but it's way way too late in the big scheme of things. And it's bc prices were flat for so long. The grid should be a public project organized by the army corps of engineers and the goal should be to deliver high quality electricity to every resident and business in the nation. It should be an object of great national pride and communal ownership. Electricity and internet are almost as important as water now to human subsistence.

[@Satook]

The irony of the UK insisting on 7000 changes for Hinkley Pt C is that it will now have unique issues and therefore be less safe than all its standard-issue brethren. A larger community being able to share insights and improvements is always a good thing and they have thrown that away because “they know better”. I really dislike know-all/arse-covering bureaucrats. 😡

[@piccalillipit9211]

this is ALL as a result of the horrifically corrupt Conservative government over the last 14 years and in the 80's. The electricity companies are allowed to rip consumers off and the Govt didnt want to build infrastructure so tied it up in red tape. It has NOTHING to do with " know-all/arse-covering bureaucrats" they were entirely POLITICAL decisions.

[@muhdiversity7409]

The UK never ceases to make me ashamed.

[@dulouser1751]

​@@muhdiversity7409hey at least you didn't quit a power source because there were a couple of meltdowns after a tsunami on the other side of the planet despite your country not being at risk of any comparable natural disasters ...

[@LeonardTavast]

It's the same problem in Finland with their overregulated, delayed reactor. Nuclear tech isn't a good place for gut feelings from people in power.

[@felicianomiko5659]

This was my exact thought. So frustrating.

[@jjll9244]

Disappointed there was no information about the need to decarbonise the rap scene with nuclear energy in this video

[@ronald3836]

@@jjll9244 at the moment the rap scene mostly uses lead-based processes to decarbonise.

[@davideyres955]

@@ronald3836you are on a role there my friend 😂😂

[@JM-cv7nv]

@@ronald3836 someone cooked here

[@YouzACoopa]

Depleted uranium is just too expensive for the average rapper

[@Busto]

​@@YouzACoopaI doubt they want that tucked in their waistband

[@johnlynch1353]

As much as I like nuclear power for energy. I’m not sure I like the idea of the tec bros of silicon Valley, whose motto is move fast and break things mess around with nuclear power.

[@JamieBainbridge]

Surely this industry is well regulated and the reactor would be run by a power company, who then sell the power to a tech company?

[@hillbilly4895]

Yeah, with no boomers who takes serious things seriously...not optimal.

[@EscapeePrisoner]

@@JamieBainbridge because no industry titan ever bought up entire supply chains before?

[@FlintStone-c3s]

Copenhagen Atomics, been testing the processes without using nuc fuel.

[@Jokoko2828]

Nuclear powerplants have to be built like fortresses, I do not tech bros to stick to those standards.

[@antoniovillanueva308]

If you have an inverter hooked to the grid, it MUST be a grid following inverter. ANY power source that is hooked to the grid absolutely must match the timing and frequency of the grid. In the beginning, power generators used a 3-bulb system to match phase of turbines to the grid before they were electrically attached to the grid.. What do you call a power source that is out of phase with the grid? A fire.

[@caav56]

Reminds me of how some generator in UK got hooked up 180 degrees off-phase and had rotor ejected onto a different street

[@Not_Sure-i6o]

Ehh, what? You can have an inverter detect the grid is down, disconnect from the grid, and keep powering local loads until the grid is back up and stable, then sync and reconnect. A reactor might need a way to dump energy for a moment if load is reduced rapidly, none of which involves fire.

[@beetlejuice5416]

No, inverters do not have to be grid following. Grid forming is an alternative, where the grid phase is not (directly) measured. Instead, it synchronizes via power measurements.

[@stephenbrough8132]

@@caav56 I've GOT to read that story - Where / when did that happen?

[@T33K3SS3LCH3N]

The point is that if you have too many grid-following inverters, imprecision is amplified until they turn into fires. Grid-forming inverters in contrast actively counteract deviations to keep them within very tight tolerances.

[@0xBorges]

Nuclear energy isn't the danger. It's the irresponsible companies or governments running them.

[@AlexBooster]

One American football field 3 yards deep is definitely NOT 18 Olympic-size swimming pools. You don't even need to do any mathematical calculations to understand that it can't be anywhere near 18 Olympic-size pools. Spoiler: it's about 5.9 Olympic-size pools.

[@Jumpyfoot]

The latest reasoning model called O1 Preview actually gets the right answer. But thank you for your correction.

[@GoranPeuc]

But how may Teslas can you put in there, that’s the main question.

[@ronald3836]

@@AlexBooster The Paris Olympics swimming pool was rather shallow, though.

[@stoyan.dimitrov.01]

Just a joke, chill men, not everything all the time is a straight fact

[@johnjordan3126]

We have to factor in the displacement by the Teslas.

[@OvisMilitaris]

The best trick Big Oil ever pulled was making it seem like nuclear reactors with regular maintenance, better safety oversight, and redundant systems couldn't be made safer and cheaper.

[@samsonsoturian6013]

This idiot thinks oil drillers have mind control

[@JohnSmall314]

@@samsonsoturian6013 "This idiot thinks oil drillers have mind control" Oil and coal companies spent hundreds of millions on disinformation about nuclear power. They don't have mind control rays, but they do own client journalists, think tanks, policy wonks, all the media infrastructure required to control people's thinking.

[@Think666_]

You seem very convinced that nuclear is dangerous and expensive, much more than solar, or wind. How are we supposed to believe that a modern nuclear ractor (in terms of LCOE) is not much cheaper, reliable, and practical than other options?

[@RobinLundqvist]

I'm more annoyed by the delusion that nuclear energy is somehow worse for the environment, yea, maybe if we only take measurements around wherever the radioactive waste would be stored...

[@pjd418]

the best trick they did was buy the media and fear monger nuclear power

[@bossdoorpodcast]

Insane that nuclear energy is being built and dominated by AI server farms so that it can tell us measurement units like Olympic swimming pools filled with Teslas. I hope they build all these reactors and then go completely under so that we can put all that energy to actual good use.

[@JHimminy]

Obesity will just increase. Why not replace power plants with “sweat equity.” While it may devastate the healthcare industry, it would be good for health. All this tech toys just convinces us that someone, usually nonwhite, should grow our food for us.

[@PapaOscarNovember]

That's what consumer sees. But there are some interesting use cases (code generation and data mining) which have large economic implications, and there are bound to be more as AI tools become more mature and usable by larger user base.

[@maciejglinski6564]

@@PapaOscarNovember code generation for example is a great way to spend less time doing boring things like making products and developing new things and focus what is actually important: debugging someone else's code and compilation failures!

[@Xazamas]

I'm somewhat speculation that several projects to build up hydrogen-producing facilities rely on the idea that once the "exciting hyped-up hydrogen economy" dies down, those facilities will instead produce "boring and practical" ammonia. Said inorganic chemical being one of the most produced, 88% used as fertilizer.

[@mavor101]

No one knows if the current AI boom will result in something approaching GAI or not. If it does reach that point, it's literally more valuable than any other technological advancement in human history. Why would you be wishing for the efforts being made towards that going completely under? If governments really wanted to, they could generate a *shit ton* of nuclear power, but they don't, and they haven't. Maybe you should wish that our political systems "went under" and were improved instead?

[@gmp2474]

Talking about Angela Merkel as a trained physiciat without mentioning she was the chancellour of Germany at the time is somehow funny to me.

[@michaelchomiczewski7937]

Knowing she was the chancellor of Germany is kind of a prerequisite to understand any of this 😬

[@KongDonkey-jo2ij]

@@michaelchomiczewski7937😂

[@benjiusofficial]

Now **this** is humor lol

[@ClitGPT]

trained putinist

[@mipmipmipmipmip-v5x]

she'd better be remembered as physicist than as chancellor. Made Germany totally dependent on Russian gas, let Putin take Crimea, and then played Mother Theresa as Putin was weaponizing EU immigration by clusterbombing Syria. She reigned when global economy was booming, so any dweeb could have made the numbers look good. But she lacked guts or insight to use any of the temporary prosperity to make Germany geopolitically resilliant.

[@backgammonbacon]

For the UK the Tories didn't want to build it (or do anything at all) so they kept making changes to the requirements until it gets so expensive that they say its not cost effective, they did this to all infrastructure projects in the last 14 years.

[@boozecruiser]

I LOVE neoliberalism! I hate long term thinking and investing in society!! Maximise profits so I can live out the last 20 years of my life in nihilistic excess!!!

[@TheOriginalJAX]

Right just the Tories, not the entire British government or anything no. Not like Labour has literally doubled down on every policy the Tories have gone with prior, or that the Tories did the same under Cameron after Blaire and the cycle continues.... wakey wakey.

[@jawadarif5676]

​@@TheOriginalJAX Stramer is a Tory

[@RoonMian]

This is completely reversing the problem: Nuclear electricity is never cost efficient without massive government subsidies.

[@AncelDeLambert]

@@RoonMian citation needed

[@Desi-qw9fc]

Truly disgusting that we’re finally getting nuclear power, not for saving our loved ones from living in a polluted world, but for AI and crypto.

[@netspirit79]

I absolutely love his dry humor.

[@eddenoy321]

Add some sweet vermouth

[@Em4gdn1m]

You would.

[@yohann2768]

Imagine a Nuclear plant runing on Microsoft software, with Amazon HR politics and OpenAi values toward law and ethics.

[@viennois0123]

...and Musk as CEO...

[@homeopathicfossil-fuels4789]

The literal electric boogaloo of Three Mile Island

[@orthodox-mp6hv]

@@homeopathicfossil-fuels4789 The reactor 4 disaster would be like new year's fireworks in comparison.

[@Maladjester]

This is the way the world ends This is the way the world ends This is the way the world ends Not with a bang but AI

[@Fabio-y5o]

I was told they still use Linux and BSD for sensitive stuff, there might be hope.

[@Murph9000]

Rolls Royce and Westinghouse SMRs are not being developed from scratch. Both companies have a 50-ish year history with reactors of roughly that size from supplying the reactors for UK & US nuclear submarines. In theory, their SMRs should be an evolution of their naval reactors, so shouldn't require such major leaps in technology for them.

[@Poctyk]

Well yes, but also US/UK submarine reactors are reportedly run on 93-95% enriched uranium (i.e. weapon grade), which is a nonstarter in civilian sector even for the most pro-nuclear groups.

[@theairstig9164]

@@Poctykdifferent fuel for SMRs and the SMR is typically cooled with an air secondary loop not a water secondary loop

[@FlintStone-c3s]

GE have been working on Super critical CO2 instead of steam which reduces the turbine size.

[@12pentaborane]

​@@theairstig9164 What that guy was saying is because the fuel is so enriched naval reactors can't be used as a basis for civilian small reactors.

[@caav56]

@@12pentaborane Except for AREVA K15, which uses 7.5%-enriched fuel

[@undefinedother]

Now we just need to get rid of AI and we'll have a decent power supply.

[@PonutsAreGreat]

Don't bite the hand that feeds you, or is going to feed you. If AI develops, we will have lots more stuff, and many cool robots.

[@GSimpsonOAM]

@@PonutsAreGreat I would rather eat than have cool toys

[@sujimayne]

​@@GSimpsonOAMYou can have both, kid. Spend less time on the internet.

[@MakerInMotion]

@@PonutsAreGreat People need jobs to buy stuff and cool robots.

[@PonutsAreGreat]

​@@GSimpsonOAM Universal basic income will work with AI, so you won't have to. People can concentrate on things they actually like.

[@Mike_221]

Straight to the point no endless intros, thank you

[@Bob.martens]

Crypto and AI, the two main industries driving increased power needs are also the most useless.

[@mrcead]

It's used as an excuse to push the accelerationist's agenda to spped up the reset of the entire world system

[@kaoskronostyche9939]

Have to agree. Curious why so few others see this. Cheers!

[@winnershandbook1069]

AI is not as useful rn but could be useful in the future.

[@tapio_m6861]

At least with AI there is a potential for usefulness.

[@Bob.martens]

@@winnershandbook1069 agreed, but current usefulness does not justify the rate at which new power guzzling datacentres are financed by VC and built, just for AI purposss.

[@mikewright4967]

It’s impressive how he sits so still till it starts

[@nikbear]

'Fish Disco' is a brilliant name for a band 👌🤣🐟🐠🐡

[@kenon6968]

Great, let's rely on public funding for long term waste storage

[@Dante-ki4ol]

Bingo. The Era of Privatized Politics is here.

[@imadedistocomment5936]

Not a real problem, storing waste is easy

[@noobulon4334]

Its almost entirely recyclable, we just haven't built the facilities for them while France has

[@efovex]

Every technology produces waste; especially old wind turbines are a huge volume of waste and there's nothing you can do with it except bury it. The nice thing about nuclear waste is how little volume it is. And once the highly active, short-lived isotopes have decayed (which only takes ~100y), it's more akin to toxic chemical waste which no one seems to ever give any thought.

[@jakebrodskype]

Nobody has ever conserved their way to prosperity. You have to build and building ultimately takes more energy even as your designs get more efficient.

[@ariellubonja7856]

That fish loudspeaker thing is insane

[@Renekjaer]

Fascinating insight on big tech’s nuclear investment! With sustainability at the forefront, could this be a prime opportunity for investors? What investment do you think is best to boost our financial income; nuclear energy, green tech, or perhaps something else?

[@AustralisNick]

Trading has been my go-to for boosting financial income. It allows for quick gains and flexibility that other investments can’t match. What strategies do you believe are essential for success in trading?

[@Bencasparus]

For anyone interested in trading, platforms like Robinhood and Webull are popular among beginners due to their ease of use and lack of commissions. Additionally, Thinkorswim by TD Ameritrade offers great tools for more advanced analysis. I also recommend checking out Graham Stephan for valuable insights on trading strategies and market trends. His content is really helpful for understanding the basics and managing risk. What other resources or strategies have you found useful?

[@Bencasparus]

I’ve been wanting to dive into trading but haven’t had much luck. Would you mind recommending a reliable professional in the field? I'm looking for someone who can guide me, whether it's a financial advisor or a portfolio manager. I've tried trading on my own, but I've faced losses and really need expert help to generate profits. I don’t mind paying for their services!

[@Mariaadvisory]

If you’re ever looking for insights on trading, there're professionals in the trading field like Graham Stephan, he offers some fantastic advice. It’s always advisable to explore his KZbin channel or other resources for valuable strategies to enhance your trading skills. His approach to financial education is truly enlightening!

[@Williamsbonner]

I appreciate the insights from Graham Stephan’s videos! Does anyone know if there are ways to reach out to him outside of KZbin? Just interested in connecting!

[@SusCalvin]

The big lesson I take from this video is that US tech giants are now so large that they want to build their own private infrastructure. These projects are still so large, and the risk of overrun so big, that some large actor needs to be ready for risk. Now I await their plans for iWater and connecting the power bill to a Metaverse account. The tech giants will never advice a solution where you do not buy stuff. No "Do i really need all these devices and a new always-connected fridge?"

[@theskankingpigeon965]

Imagine if we taxed them enough so we could just build and control the electricity generation ourselves for our own needs, and not let unelected billionaires determine where nuclear energy is built and what it's used for.

[@SusCalvin]

@@theskankingpigeon965 I could not tell from the video which form these plants should be operated and owned. Do they dream of starting their own subsidiary power companies to compete with existing ones, or some kind of in-house Google power service.

[@srikrishna2561]

​@@SusCalvinJust for themselves from Nuclear Power Start-ups. To power their Data Centers.

[@robertr.hasspacher7731]

Large companies in the early 20th century made power plants on site for their factories before the grid existed. Now the grid is sufficiently unreliable that they're returning to this policy.

[@katrinabryce]

Chat GPT's maths is as useless as it usually is.

[@AK-74K]

ChatGPT is as useful/useless as the person using it

[@emptiester]

​@@AK-74Kfalse. It can write a blurb of fluff with no actual content and virtually nothing else. Until my job is writing ads for apartment rentals, chatgpt has very limited utility. "Lots of space, close to downtown." Truly revolutionary annoyance.

[@AK-74K]

@@emptiester The limits of ChatGPT capability is really more down to the user is lack of understanding how it can be used. Also it helps to have the paid version where you can upload documents, and use way more functionality. I use it daily with my main job and my side businesses and I find it extremely useful. Lots of people I know do the same. If you think ChatGPT only writes fluff, you really don't understand how to work with it

[@emptiester]

​@@AK-74Kthe little ai helpers on bing and google are next-level annoying. What they say is explicitly wrong and wordy. Its a remarkably crap product that blames the user base for hating it.

[@AK-74K]

@@emptiester working with AI is about quality of your prompts. A bit like coding, the quality of the output depends on the quality of the code. The cider cant blame the programming language if the output of the work is low quality.

[@kif1983]

Something fun, I had the unfortunate situation of being invited to Microsoft's London office so they could try and sell us on the idea of using AI for all our software (regardless of any future legislation concerns and black box issues), the most striking audacity to me, aside from a coffee foam art printer, was a big screen that says 'continue on your sustainability journey with AI'

[@vylbird8014]

Those are funny. I was visiting an airport recently and there was a big poster along one of the corridors bragging of their commitment to sustainable carbon policies. There was some joking about it between my friend and I because it's rather obvious that the only way an airport is going to have a sustainable carbon policy is to get rid of all the planes.

[@PauloZunguze]

Excited to see the latest events in the rap scene from the rap Man himself

[@tomtech1537]

Minor point on efficiency of office vs datacenter rack equipment being more efficient. This is pretty questionable, generally it's the same equipment hosted elsewhere, maybe you have efficiencies in the facilities (eg: coolers) but in reality businesses would need to keep running their onprem equipment to service the office staff (so you actually only have an increase in consumption at the datacenters). Realistically the draw reduction is probably facilities for office workers being reduced (climate control, hot water, smaller facilities, etc).

[@TooSlowTube]

I would guess the biggest saving was in the transport of people to their work place.

[@tomtech1537]

@@TooSlowTube Fair call. My argument against transport is that electrified transport (rail) hasn't reduced scheduling anywhere (that I'm aware of?), which means you're not really going to have significant savings there. So unless it's factoring petrol/diesel (in whatever the source he used) then it can't really be transport (given how efficient rail is I don't think the loading of passengers results in a significant difference in power?)

[@TooSlowTube]

@@tomtech1537 I hadn't considered the scheduling. Carrying passengers vs empty must still cost something though. Say for example they aim to accelerate the train to the same speed. It takes more energy to do that when it's loaded with passengers.

[@tomtech1537]

@@TooSlowTube Yeah there's additional problems with scheduling in cities like mine where if you stop that one train from running you no longer have it coming back in the other direction (or on another line) which cascades. I'm not sold on the train loading being the primary factor; rail is notoriously efficient and facilities not so much... According to one estimate 0.04MJ-0.18MJ (massively efficient compared with others cars at 2.5) per passenger kilometer for rail. Assuming a 10km transport at the high side this is like running a 15w light bulb for 7-30hr (probably double for journeys both ways). Makes a difference, though that's the difference of boiling an electric kettle or forgetting to turn off a couple of lights for the day or running a space heater for a couple of minutes or a computer monitor for a day... Or a fraction of 1 gpt search apparently xD. A number of these conceivably *added* to the load as result of WFH on average.

[@tomtech1537]

@@TooSlowTube One thing I didn't consider was running less carriages. I'm not sure if any cities actually did this though, due to scheduling issues.

[@eliyuber]

When I asked the same question chatgpt I got this answer: "A box the size of a football field and 3 yards deep would hold approximately 5.87 Olympic-size swimming pools worth of water." I believe this answer because it showed each calculation step.

[@TooSlowTube]

They're basically just fancy search engines that only ever give one result. Sometimes it's a good result, quoted from a good source, sometimes not.

[@JakeStine]

@@TooSlowTube Or they give one result that is two bad answers munged together into a third even worse answer that arguably sounds somewhat more believable than the two original obviously bad answers.

[@antoniovillanueva308]

The natural gas markets in west Texas have fallen below $0 many times this year. I have been out there many times, the place is already unsuitable for human habitation (even without the gas and oil fields). If the region was tied to a national power grid that gas could be converted to electricity and sold to the grid near the gas fields. The first step to greeniness is a national power grid.

[@professorspark2361]

Texas is the only state to refuse connection to the US East and West grids, and would have to conform to nationwide standards to start sharing power freely with neighboring regions.

[@electrified0]

That is a unique Texas problem, because apparently "wasteful regulations" like winterizing the grid required to join weren't necessary for the Texas climate. *Historic winter freezes lead to a failed energy grid and Louisiana is unable to help because we're not connected to the national grid* My state is run by morons.

[@scipioafricanus4328]

I love your no nonsense straight forward delivery style. I’m convinced it’s imperative we revisit nuclear electricity generation.

[@homeopathicfossil-fuels4789]

Yeah but maybe not a literal Electric Boogaloo of Three Mile Island Profit motive and mass public safety really do not mix well.

[@mipmipmipmipmip-v5x]

10 years ago Big Tech would solve the global food problems. Instead we got phallic rockets and chatgpt.

[@boozecruiser]

Believing that private companies could solve anything besides the "workers are too rich" crisis was delusional to begin with

[@JHimminy]

@@boozecruiserbut we were told DIFFERENTLY!

[@BlunderMunchkin]

All rockets are phallic.

[@sebsebski2829]

@@boozecruiser Stop it, they want to fix the world, help the minorities and oppressed and clean the planet.

[@unnamedchannel1237]

AI is helping with quite a few health sector issues .

[@davidoff7312]

Nuclear waste disposal has not "not been entirely resolved" , it has just not been resolved. 16:20

[@williamlloyd3769]

Serving at Naval Air Station Keflavik, Iceland in 1979-80, base load geothermal development has been grossly underinvested in

[@tapio_m6861]

The Finnish nuclear regulator was so pedantic with our latest reactor that it forced the reactor to be opened almost 20 late from the original date. The underlying problem was Areva, the French nuclear manufacturer, but our nuclear regulator made sure that all the small issues were checked and corrected.

[@cartilagehead]

Built like a French car, I see

[@mpx1]

There is a big industry that does not want reactors to be complete, profiteering from building is far more profitable.

[@Rom3_29]

Us Finns did cut the power and gas bought from Russia. Electricity prices fluctuate quite bit and that hurts families.

[@SianaGearz]

20 of what, days weeks months years? Ah, apparently it's 12 years after the deadline, so probably close to 20 years since it's been commissioned.

[@boozecruiser]

@@mpx1 Private industry is incentivised to use the lowest paid workers, poorest safety mechanisms, relaxed safety regulations, low quality materials, irresponsible disposal methods, etc.

[@AlanTheBeast100]

I'd like a quote to build a 7 Tesla pool please.

[@warrenwalker8170]

Make it nuclear powered cause we can make really little ones. what could go wrong

[@janakakumara3836]

why is jeff bezos eating a iguana

[@AGS363]

Many Lizards are cannibals.

[@ArtieKendall]

Jeff Bozos: 🤤🍽🦎

[@cheezemonkeyeater]

Is this a joke? Oh, I see that it is not.

[@Sonny_McMacsson]

I've eaten alligator and rattlesnake. Iguanas are also known as "chickens of the trees".

[@renecardona4806]

they taste good tho

[@Mightydoggo]

"Competitive in AI" but in what? What exactly is AI doing right now? Fr, I see and read it on literally even toasters these days and I have absolutely no clue whatsoever what it does.

[@benjiusofficial]

Sounds like a skill issue to me

[@emptiester]

The ai component is wildly over hyped. The real value of tech advertising is data. They are literally spying on you. They have your data. Yout microphone. Your camera. Everything. Spoiler alert. You dont need cutting edge algorthms when you have nearly perfect data.

[@jfep1449]

skill issue

[@emptiester]

@@Mightydoggo "skill issue". Yeah. Why dont you understand how to use an empty prompt bar with zero instructions and works as a black box. Clearly thats on you.

[@midorifox]

​@@emptiester ai-bros are some of the most brainrotten individuals you can find. As you can see by their dumb copy-pasted replies.

[@edic2619]

"This fish disco", funny.

[@BumbleTheBard]

You said (14:55) Britain is not suitable for solar and wind generation. Not solar, yes, too far north and too cloudy. But Britain and Ireland are very windy.

[@oliverfern8039]

I'm not an expert, but wouldn't there also be a problem with getting land? Wind needs a lot of space to be effective.

[@MidnightSouls]

@@oliverfern8039 The British isles has plenty of shallow seabeds in its exclusive economic zone. Hence why all new wind farms have been offshore. The UK has 7 of the 10 largest offshore wind farms in the world.

[@oliverfern8039]

@@MidnightSouls cool!

[@JPEight]

Crazy to say that wind is no good despite it producing as much as 50% of the UK’s power at times. Solar works just fine in the uk. Modern solar still produces decent amounts of power on cloudy days, and being further north just means they need tilting further towards the equator. No, it doesn’t produce as much as it would elsewhere, but still useful. Much more useful than wind because it’s predictable. If every roof in the UK was covered in solar we’d have enough to provide 100% of the power demand for most of the daylight hours. And yes it’s economically viable. The ROI on solar is 5-10 years in the UK.

[@firefox5926]

0:31 taking energy and turning it straight into entropy lol

[@raoul1234567]

Nuclear powered AI enhanced surveillance state. What’s not to love.

[@samsonsoturian6013]

Shut up

[@pll3827]

Techbros look at cyberpunk dystopian fiction and go: 'I want that.'

[@ArtieKendall]

Just think of the stonk value

[@BresciGaetano]

it's all about the choice of words... low carbon emission renewably powered safety focused democracy sell a lot better. The best dystopia is the one people ask for

[@reddeano]

@@pll3827I think this is why black mirror has stopped putting out a lot more episodes. They use it as a source of inspiration 😂

[@ashishpatel350]

Energy diversity is key

[@SillySausage-mq3so]

You should be in government.

[@Samuel-s1e]

This!

[@eliotmansfield]

wait, what, i will need to check what the electrons preferred pronouns are?

[@boozecruiser]

@@eliotmansfield Why is every middle aged man who wasn't smart enough for uni with a shit sense of humour from or named after Mansfield? Do they have an invalid factory there or what?

[@sebsebski2829]

Not so long ago leftists screamed about nuclear energy being nazi.

[@epoliv]

The chart showing that there are no rich countries that consume small amounts of energy leads to the question of whether energy creates wealth. It most likely does. Pursuing approaches to reduce the cost of energy generation should significantly boost a country's economy. So let's get those SMRs going!

[@reddeano]

Definitely does, the Industrial Revolution proves this.

[@TooSlowTube]

Maybe it's just that wealth consumes energy.

[@TheAdamAdy]

​@@TooSlowTubeThats what hes saying. Where there is no wealth, there is less energy consumed. Therefore, the more energy and cheaper it is, the wealthier country can be

[@richardconway6425]

Good observation. For us (here in the uk) it was coal that powered the industrial revolution, as the first comment implies. But, there are different flavours of this. For example, Norway doesn't consume a great deal of energy, for mostly obvious reasons, but it is a very wealthy country, especially given its size, because it exports energy to everyone else. Fresh water and energy, and a sea port, the most important resources for every country in the world. (Except Switzerland, of course).

[@richardbaird1452]

@@richardconway6425 Norway consumes a lot of energy per capita. Just a tad below Canada and more than the US, Japan, South Korea, UK, etc... There certainly seems to be a strong correlation between energy consumption and wealth generation. There are exceptions, but Norway isn't one of them. This shouldn't be surprising as one definition of energy is simply "ability to do work".

[@WilliamDeVey]

Loved the shoutout to Practical Engineering.

[@TheMotlias]

The accident at 3 mile island was actually fairly minor, Jimmy Carter who was a trained Navy nuclear engineer said he thought it was barely noteworthy

[@LowVoltage_FPV]

Also Jimmy Carter visited the reactor 2 weeks after the meltdown and stood in the control room for a briefing. He is still alive and had his 100th birthday on Oct1st.

[@samblackstone3400]

3 mile island happened at the exact same time a movie about a reactor melting down and destroying the USA was released.

[@richardconway6425]

@@samblackstone3400 "the China crisis" ... right ?

[@richardconway6425]

TheMotlias wow! I didn't know that about Jimmy Carter. I've always thought of him as the most decent man in us politics in living memory, but I didn't know anything about his background. I shall look him up now. He was always, and somewhat demeaningly, referred to as the 'peanut farmer', as far as I can remember.

[@TheMotlias]

@@richardconway6425 it's noteworthy that he had that education because it means when he actually understood what was happening at 3 mile island, unfortunately he refused to publicly say that it wasn't a big deal because he didn't want to upset the anti-nuclear politicians in his party.

[@michaelchomiczewski7937]

This sounds like yet another bubble in the making. A lot of hype right now, but power generation projects take decades to come online. Which could hardly be any further removed from the move fast and break things approach of big tech. By the time all this electrical power generation is ready to come online -- tech companies will have already moved on to bigger and better (and less power hungry) ventures...

[@TimGreig]

...and broken a lot of things

[@JayKay9112000]

Nuclear waste is recyclable. It has been for a long time.

[@LordNementon]

Partially, there are a lot of different nuclear wastes. The most radioactive isn't. The combustible isn't either (years we are trying it in France without success, and we are at the edges of lacking cooling pools for all this fuel waiting to be refurbished)

[@bobjackson4287]

​@@LordNementon A singular spent fuel rod by mass can be reprocessed up to about 95% of the material into a new fuel rod. Another 1% of said fuel rod is actually Plutonium which is also a fuel source. UOX fuel typically can be reprocessed 2-3 times after which it becomes unsafe to do it further. While technically you could go further after that it becomes increasingly harder to reprocess with each reprocess cycle. Every time it gets reprocessed the quality of the said fissile material goes down kind of like how when a CD got copied and then 2nd 3rd and 4th generation copies from that degrade the contents on it. Undesirable isotopes accumulate each time this is done. In a typical 1000mw PWR there are about 50k individual rods. An individual rod is worth right around 20Kw of energy. Each rod can power right around 15 homes. After withdrawn said rod can then be reprocessed. While the current recycling is not perfect the size of said rod is very small compared to it's energy output. Even if the rods were only used once then stored it's still worth it. Size wise these rods are only 12ft tall and about 1 inch thick. Considering a coal plant releases unstable isotopes into the open air from the combustion of it, the fuel rods we can live with.

[@sephorusFR]

​@@LordNementon the planned setback of super Phoenix didn't helped. The """ecologist""" party preventing.any proper research finding on the subject didn't either.

[@franciscogodoy9158]

For the nuclear waste to be fully recyclable, fast reactors are needed. Otherwise, the effect of recycling is too small.

[@JayKay9112000]

@ there are other ways to recycle nuclear waste besides fuel for a reactor.

[@Kenneth_James]

We already build hundreds of small reactors for our subs and Aircraft carriers so why is it so challenging when its civilian?

[@Primergy89]

Propably because bigger plants are often more cost effective.

[@richardbaird1452]

Military naval reactors use very high enrichment (some >90%) which is not allowed for civilian reactors. They are designed for a specific purpose where the normal restrictions don't apply, including economic factors (they are very, very expensive. There are reasons why subs cost $4B+ and aircraft carriers $12B+)

[@FintechTVcouk]

Thanks Patrick for the clearly explained videos.

[@Schlabbeflicker]

Ideology takes a backseat to pragmatism when reality knocks on the door.

[@mason4354]

I'm stealing that, I said that now

[@bigpurplepops]

Isn't this the exact opposite? A cleaner, safer, and more efficient option getting picked up *more* due to real-world necessities seems like the peak of pragmatism.

[@mason4354]

@@bigpurplepops ✈️

[@firstname2072]

Computers became more energy efficient? Nvidia 5090 ti says hold my beer

[@electrified0]

Watt for watt, the 5090 Ti is able to do far more computation per unit of power than anything made 10+ years ago

[@Tank23333]

​@@electrified0 thats right but the energy efficiency used to do even more calculations A pc in the mid 90s only needed a sub 100watt powersupply, sure a 1 watt arm chip does the same today but my pc has needs a 500 watt psu Thats huge problem in any technology, efficiency is only usefull if its used for growth

[@wernerheikohenning3754]

As long as the company's major stockholder moves right next to the power plants, I´m okay with that.

[@factnotfiction5915]

Communities near nuclear power plants tend to be: * richer * healthier * whiter This is where shutting down Indian Point (providing clean power to New York City, and replacing it with fossil fuel burning plants closer to poorer and browner - and ultimately sicker - communities.

[@henriqueferreira5165]

Most probably, the safest places on earth are nuclear power plants.

[@gabrielrodriguez821]

Like the other comment said, I know of 2 uber elite neighborhoods next to nuclear power plants. One so exclusively for the rich, its one of the few places in the US where all government services are privatized and the other is a known location for many ex powerful people in government and media to retire at.

[@atypocrat1779]

going nuclear? like going to the bathroom? that easy? i thought it took decades for one of those fancy nuclear power plants

[@freshheck9066]

Most of that time is spent waiting for permits and inspections.

[@atypocrat1779]

@@freshheck9066 right. wake me up when they fire one of these new nuclear plants up. I'll probably be dead before it happens.

[@patrickdix772]

17:35 So, for better numbers an American football field is 120 yards long (with endzones, 100 without them), 53.3 yards wide, and the depth is 3 yards, totaling 19,188 cubic yards (1,990 without endzones). That gives 109.728 meters by 48.738 meters by 2.743 meters, totaling 14,669.354 cubic meters (12,225.232 without endzones). This is about the volume of 5239 blue whale hearts (4,366 without endzones).

[@bogdancimpoiasu]

The new thumbnail is way better. Good job!

[@benoithudson7235]

The thing that got TMI shut down was that there was only one unit. So you need a whole staff of highly trained Homer Simpsons sitting around eating donuts, all watching a single reactor 24/7. Other plants have multiple reactors so the same size staff can watch them all at once, which is much more economical. The same problem occurs with small nuclear plants: there’s a minimum size staff who need to get their salaries covered by the output of the plant. Anyway, this reopening is clearly good news for donut bakers in Harrisburg.

[@Daijyobanai]

But they won't need staff because the whole point is to use more Ai. /s

[@agoosecalledxaro6679]

Took em long enough. Nuclear has been the best energy source around for decades and will continue to be the best until renewables become more cost effective.

[@LordNementon]

And renewable appliances will become recyclable (lol)

[@Hjernespreng]

Renewables are already more cost-effective than fossil fuels (with far less subsidies, too). The only remaining barrier there is energy storage tech.

[@sunamori]

it's not renewables per se, it's more the energy storage that's a problem, with renewables. Unless you meant exactly that

[@AlexLaw-y9j]

Nuclear is the only renewable.. Solar is a scam, wind is a scam.

[@skierpage]

​@@sunamori renewables are obviously and undeniably cheaper than nuclear when the wind is blowing and the Sun is shining. When renewables aren't generating, the grid needs dispatchable energy sources. That's still not nuclear which is terrible at ramping up and down, but hydro, battery storage, and yes, even firing up a gas plant. New variable demands like EV charging and heat pumps are a great fit with renewable generation, because many customers will often recharge or preheat when electricity is plentiful.

[@yougallini]

Oooh good AI and Nuclear, that’ll end well

[@F1083]

Colossus is our future!

[@bigpurplepops]

At least now we'll have the power for when half the population is at home unemployed...

[@Cisco3Pancho]

There are safe NR but modern engineers would rather work on navy subs than providing practically free energy to their citizenry

[@Fisk742]

@PBoyle I am somewhat taken aback by how matter-of-factly you discuss this worrying development. How can nuclear energy even be an option to meet the growing demand for energy if there is still no place to store the waste that is produced? Are you by any chance familiar with the effort required to dismantle a reactor that has gone wrong once? It takes years to dismantle all the parts of the plant, store them in drums and transport them away as nuclear waste, which, as already explained, can only be stored temporarily.

[@Tank23333]

Also somehow nobody mentions the fuel problem, uranium is not Infinite, if we switch a large portion of production to nuclear than we run out of known uranium reserves in a few decades. At some point in the next 200-400 years humanity has to power its civilisation with renewable energy no matter what. Maybe fusion but thats a long way out to be a big player because of the complexity of operation I mean you can slap down a solar plant mostly anywhere and with low tech skill can be maintained and Delivers very reliable energy curve through out the day But i cant imagin building nuclear facilitys in rural areas all over the place

[@randomtinypotatocried]

I'm tired of tech companies trying to be involved in everything that they'll just half ass. This sounds like a disaster just waiting to happen at this point

[@michaelholmes8848]

What have big tech companies just half assed so far?

[@poulwinther]

@@michaelholmes8848 Self-driving.

[@poulwinther]

Fortunately there are others taking a serious approach. Check out Flibe in the US and here in Denmark two companies with very unique concepts: Seaborg and Copenhagen Atomics.

[@homeopathicfossil-fuels4789]

@@michaelholmes8848 Satellites, urban planning, self-driving as already mentioned, the automotive industry, literally everything outside of IT, and even IT they half-arse.

[@michaelholmes8848]

@@poulwinther what a ridiculous statement! Tell me exactly how Tesla is half assing full self driving? They are all in.

[@EmilNicolaiePerhinschi]

The new demand in datacenters is not about AI, it is about virtualization, which was supposed to be used sparingly where variable demand existed and instead is used by everybody for everything, and in very deep stacks of layered technologies, all for the sake of convenience and CV-driven development. New demand caused by AI supposedly is about 10% of all new demand in datacenters, the rest is online shops and banking and data collection and games etc., and in those about 2/3 is wasted resources, unless AWS is really overcharging.

[@ax14pz107]

Virtualization means you can have dozens on virtualized servers running on one physical server rather than having to have a physical server for each service.

[@EmilNicolaiePerhinschi]

yes, you can also have proxmox running a kubernetes cluster running several hadoop instances all on a single physical server ;-)

[@jackchid6040]

No, the story is about the extrapolated energy demand that might come with AI. There are good chances though that AI might fizzle out and/or there going to be massive improvements in energy consumption.

[@hydra7427]

The big concern I have is that Big Tech will make this a "nukes for me, none for thee" situation. Eat up all potential nuclear engineer talent and leave nothing for power plants intended for the public.

[@starstuff4ever]

This could even come true for the fuel itself needed to run those reactors since they could pay a premium to buy up a lot of it.

[@JH-pt6ih]

And no matter how safe nuclear energy is, or potentially is, how safe is it after we find out a company was cutting corners and putting out an unsafe reactor? Boeing crashes a plane - a nuclear reactor goes boom and that's a lot worse. And don't even tell me I should trust ANY of the people running these reactors now OR in 10 years or 15.

[@factnotfiction5915]

@@JH-pt6ih Well, the US nuclear industry has been running some 100 reactors for the last 5 decades, without a single death, worker or public. Even looking at Three Mile Island #2, no deaths. Although cancers apparently did increase post-accident TMI #2 - not that the coal plant which opened upstream of that, coal exhaust having known carcinogenic effect could possible be an explanation for that.

[@dongiovanni4331]

We could get the contractors who built the reactors for big tech to build some for everyone else. Save some money training them, and get some economies of scale.

[@hoangle2483]

With an increase demand, schools would probably encourage students to go for majors in nuclear physicists/ engineers. Pump up the talents pool.

[@judelarkin2883]

I wondered why these big tech companies were suddenly interested in power production.

[@mrboy5283]

what bubbles and people pay for when things blows up

[@reddeano]

Parallels with Amazon and AWS, build the infrastructure you need to grow your business and potentially commercialise that infrastructure. If you can commercialise it great, if not well you needed to build it anyway in order to grow. 20 percent of rep Ireland energy goes to data centres and that ratio is only going to grow.

[@spock949]

That’s going to attract aliens 👽

[@benjiusofficial]

No ones coming we are all alone with ourselves

[@Daijyobanai]

* more aliens

[@manpbb]

@@benjiusofficial kzbin.info/www/bejne/r3WVd4atid5lotk

[@AndreiLiubinski]

11:11 I come here for the humor.

[@joshphillips3738]

24:47 iam also firmly against being killed by robots.

[@mattanderson6672]

Excellent analysis Thank you Sir Interesting... very interesting Wonderful discussion Thank you Patrick Humour unmatched!!!

[@Goal-2-Go]

It's awesome. I had a commercial interrupting his commercial

[@Meitti]

Finland is a bit of a nanny state with crazy amount of regulation. I shudder to imagine how bad it is in the UK if Finland is considered to be an "easy" country when it comes to regulations.

[@Jakob_DK]

The french company had similar problems in France building the same kind of plant

[@factnotfiction5915]

Well, the main regulation the Finns adhered to was the one about - you will build the reactor you promised for the price you bid! :)

[@SusCalvin]

​@@factnotfiction5915One risk with large infrastructure projects like this is overruns. No one really wants the project to fail, leaving a half-finished hole.

[@AK-74K]

It's not a nanny state for business. Rules are very consistent and transparent

[@TheAdamAdy]

​@@AK-74KNanny state is for citizens. For business, its called regulation hell

[@cara15]

By “long term storage problem is not entirely solved” he means the solution is to put waste in a big hole and that hole has to be in a very specific combination of clay and salt deposits where we HOPE radiation won’t leak out in the event of an earthquake (or glaciation- because this stuff will be threatening to poison us on that timescale) and the US hasn’t even begun efforts to find a suitable location for said hole. In the meantime this stuff is sitting in your backyard. These risks seemed worth debating when we were talking about bringing electricity to PEOPLE but now it’s in order to power these Clippy tier apps they shove down our throat in every would-be useful software, in a race to be the man who creates the golem they hope will enslave the rest of humanity.

[@FunRunEndsInTragedy]

Underestimating how essential online p0rn and cat videos are to the current and future wellbeing of humanity could very well spell the end for emergent clean energy technologies. As the world’s population increases, so to the need to meet growing demand for online p0rn and cats. That much is obvious. It is an existential issue and as much as I’m sure we would all love to live like luddites, existing in some sort of bucolic coal-fuelled wonderland, how will we be able to explain to our children, our children’s children and our children’s children’s children, that while we lived happily in a golden age of readily available internet p0rn and cat videos we made the decision, on their behalf no less, to deprive them of these essential building blocks to good mental health? And for their own good!? Think on, I urge you, think on!

[@msytdc1577]

There are numerous locations that nuclear waste can safely be contained for tens of thousands of years, some in are in active use, while some/seemingly most stuck in a state of partial construction, but with actual use being held up by poorly informed NIMBYs and Karens with political agendas unrelated to the actual science of the matter.

[@ShortArmOfGod]

There are reactor types that use spent fuel, as fuel.

[@ΣτελιοςΠεππας]

We have better solutions already, tested and proven. But the dipshits in charge and the single digit IQ environmentalists don't want to gear about them

[@FullLengthInterstates]

Renewable's biggest strength is the relatively low amount of minimum scale and red tape. If big tech can get past the red tape and operate their own nuclear reactors, it would be an incredible W. Also funny if they run out of ideas and end up pivoting into utilities.

[@agent7176]

I hope you don't mean the stringent safety regulations are red tape.

[@camilordofficial]

Great as always, rhanksss

[@gsacelm7753]

15:00 The UK cost stat is crazy

[@rampel1]

The do have a strong tradition in raves. Now for fish🎉

[@Jakob_DK]

It is, and the cost in Finland and France are also too high to be profitable.

[@MissRora]

10:10 I like how the caption made sure to tell us that Pichai is _not_ Pikachu, like we couldn't figure that out on our own.

[@CarlDidur]

Those waste stats are really dubious, in that we have nowhere offsite to store any of it, other than WIPP, which is for low level waste only (not included in this vid at all) and also it exploded. Nuclear lobby people always DRASTICALLY oversimplify this side (long term waste storage) of the industry with some hand waving and Musk-worthy idealizations and optimistic projections (that have never been approached, let alone met).

[@BresciGaetano]

don't spoil the dream, look how much people are sold to it...

[@raresi2916]

Can't you put it under a mountain and call it a day?

[@BresciGaetano]

@@raresi2916 that's true love for the environment and care for future generations to come. Touching

[@raresi2916]

@@BresciGaetano how so? Radiation shielding basically scales with mass

[@BresciGaetano]

@@raresi2916 sound nice, at least for now. Who care far later... Also we are pretty sure everybody will do it in the safest way possible all around the globe, never seen human incompetence or cost cutting going in the way of the best predictions. A plan that don't admit imperfections seem quite suspicious to me.

[@PlatoCave]

Very insightful as usual.

[@rodolfolarrea8493]

Always Patrick is ahead !

[@sciencefliestothemoon2305]

Damn the UK is such a bad place for wind, it only provided 28% of all electricity last year. The place is one giant windy area....

[@mamaw4732]

Windmills are wasteful and ineffiecient and should be scrapped.

[@incars1000]

Sometimes I find a fact in a video seemingly so poorly researched that I wonder if anything else in the video is worth listening to as well. Its so easily verifiably wrong with a google search through to the ONS figures, disappointing stuff

[@coldbinterp]

@@incars1000 Agreed. 28% of all power last year and at this very minute 52%.

[@noobulon4334]

​@@mamaw4732still better than any fossil fuel, by no small measure

[@HALLish-jl5mo]

​@@mamaw4732 Inefficient? Were you using the wind for something? It's not a finite resource

[@9y404]

"Generating an image consumes as much energy as fully charging your phone" Pretty sure that's incorrect, search for the article shown, go to the study that it sources and if i recall correctly it's more something like 5% of a full charge, maybe 30% I don't remember

[@tinad8561]

The mean consumption for image generation they measured in their study was 2.9 kWh per 1,000 queries, or .0029 per query. Charging your phone for an hour a day uses .035 kWh per week according to Energy Sage, or .005 per day. If these numbers are true, 1 image generation query ~ 30 minutes of cellphone charging.

[@JD-vj4go]

We're gonna just let the guys behind Windows 11 control nuclear power? I guess every other reactor will just melt down.

[@nathancochran4694]

Microsoft isn't running the power station, they are just agreeing to buy its power.

[@fwiffo]

Nice to see that tech companies are planning things out with 30 year timelines.

[@glinrenkrenko9613]

at 14:36 "Canada is particularly ill suited for solar power" but the poulation center around Toronto has resources comparable to italy. and at 14:58 "Britain is not only ill suited for solar and wind generation." How do you even get the idea that Britain is ill suited for wind generation?

[@MidnightSouls]

Yeah, it's simply bizarre. He lives here. On a not atypical day, over half the UK's electricity grid is powered by wind. The UK's wind resource is one of the best in the world with high capacity factors and abundant shallow seabeds for offshore turbines. How he can claim otherwise is bordering on anti-green propaganda.

[@JWdotnet]

@@MidnightSouls It's very sloppy on Patrick's behalf. Casts doubt on some of the other things he says too... I'm beginning to suspect he doesn't know anything about rap music.

[@christophercirillo5008]

Patrick's firm stance against A.I. killing us all, on the surface seems controversial... but I wouldn't have it any other way, no other rap channel goes this hard!

[@janosb6305]

15:00 isn t britain perfect for offshore wind?

[@JWdotnet]

Yes.

[@JWdotnet]

Not just off-shore, Britain has one of the best geographical wind resourses in the world. Ireland even better.

[@iSport2ka8]

These countdown intros just make it harder to find the start of the video.

[@jwadaow]

When the premiere is over then the countdown ceases to be part of playback.

[@dziban303]

can't click 'watch later' on the notification either, wish people would stop using it

[@glenisold79]

17:22 while accurate it does not take into account the attached non fuel radioactive waste. The ratio is massive

[@thatpointinlife]

I like the Genesis "Land of Confusion" style thumbnail. 😅 Very clever!