▲ 1120 ▼ Microsoft Needs So Much Power to Train AI That It's Considering Small Nuclear Reactors (futurism.com) submitted 2 years ago by FlyingSquid@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world 381 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[+] MonkderZweite@feddit.ch -10 points 2 years ago (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] scarabic@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago (2 children) Hm… risk of nuclear disaster? Or more expense? Hm… I’ll have to think about this one. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] PlexSheep@feddit.de 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) Your logic is fallacious: the solution is not to build a nuclear reactor but seek an alternative. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] scarabic@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago (1 child) Yes I understand. It was a cheeky reply. But alternatives are actually limited if you consider all the benefits of nuclear: high energy output, limited land use, no dependence on weather or time of day, no massive subsidy to Chinese manufacturing, no carbon, all resources mineable in the US, waste all physically contained… Got alternatives to that? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] PlexSheep@feddit.de 1 point 2 years ago The best alternative is probably a diversified system of sustainable energy sources, along with batteries. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Anamana@feddit.de 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) Hm.. invest into your companies cybersecurity before or after you get hacked? Companies don't care enough about risks if they are not forced to account for them. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] scarabic@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago (2 children) Hm… risk of nuclear disaster? Or more expense? Hm… I’ll have to think about this one. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] PlexSheep@feddit.de 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) Your logic is fallacious: the solution is not to build a nuclear reactor but seek an alternative. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] scarabic@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago (1 child) Yes I understand. It was a cheeky reply. But alternatives are actually limited if you consider all the benefits of nuclear: high energy output, limited land use, no dependence on weather or time of day, no massive subsidy to Chinese manufacturing, no carbon, all resources mineable in the US, waste all physically contained… Got alternatives to that? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] PlexSheep@feddit.de 1 point 2 years ago The best alternative is probably a diversified system of sustainable energy sources, along with batteries. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Anamana@feddit.de 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) Hm.. invest into your companies cybersecurity before or after you get hacked? Companies don't care enough about risks if they are not forced to account for them. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] PlexSheep@feddit.de 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) Your logic is fallacious: the solution is not to build a nuclear reactor but seek an alternative. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] scarabic@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago (1 child) Yes I understand. It was a cheeky reply. But alternatives are actually limited if you consider all the benefits of nuclear: high energy output, limited land use, no dependence on weather or time of day, no massive subsidy to Chinese manufacturing, no carbon, all resources mineable in the US, waste all physically contained… Got alternatives to that? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] PlexSheep@feddit.de 1 point 2 years ago The best alternative is probably a diversified system of sustainable energy sources, along with batteries. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] scarabic@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago (1 child) Yes I understand. It was a cheeky reply. But alternatives are actually limited if you consider all the benefits of nuclear: high energy output, limited land use, no dependence on weather or time of day, no massive subsidy to Chinese manufacturing, no carbon, all resources mineable in the US, waste all physically contained… Got alternatives to that? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] PlexSheep@feddit.de 1 point 2 years ago The best alternative is probably a diversified system of sustainable energy sources, along with batteries. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] PlexSheep@feddit.de 1 point 2 years ago The best alternative is probably a diversified system of sustainable energy sources, along with batteries. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Anamana@feddit.de 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) Hm.. invest into your companies cybersecurity before or after you get hacked? Companies don't care enough about risks if they are not forced to account for them. permalink fedilink source parent