scarabic comments on Microsoft Needs So Much Power to Train AI That It's Considering Small Nuclear Reactors

Our Rules

Only tech related news or articles.

Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.

Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.

Politics threads may be removed.

No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.

Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.

Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

[–] 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

[–] 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

[–] 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

[–] 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