Still safer and cleaner than all those broken solar panels. Read the article, lots of fun toxic substances now under concern for polluting the area.

They malfunction but I would say they are especially prone to malfunctioning in a way that people have termed "hallucination", where the results have made-up facts.

All of these boomers say we need to limit AI research because AI will "kill us all".

But here we find the real danger - people who wantonly deploy AI without realizing the limits it has, including hallucination of answers, AI as we know it today, should never exist in the role they have placed it in, given how it can simply make up information.

Instead some kind of advanced search engine should hewn been applied to look up online docs, or else the AI should have been heavily constrained to have to point to origin sources with a secondary system deciding if the origin source agreed with what it said.

Until we are anywhere close to eliminating hallucination we must allow for open ongoing research, and be more cautious about rolling out AI in positions of public trust.

Restarting the plan only works with government subsidies and continued government subsidies

Solar and Wind entered the chat

BOOM

They don't live without subsidy and massive government expense either. The difference is that the nuclear power plant will continue to provide power for decades going forward, when the solar and wind farms would have had to be replaced four times over before the nuclear plant shutters.

Being anti-nuclear is simply the most retarded possible stance at this point in time.

I personally disagree and would rather see the money spent on wind and solar.

Solar might end up being a lot more expensive than nuclear - weather events can break solar and wind farms, will do nothing to nuclear plants.

For the amount of power it will supply, certainly this particular pre-existing plant is VASTLY cheaper than new wind/solar.

This is literally a reactor from the '70s so you can't even argue that modern tech makes it safe.

That's a really stupid argument since it was actually RUNNING JUST FINE from 70's onward until recently when they shut it down, it's proven to be safe.

Nuclear plants do not make any financial sense.

It is your LCOE lies that do not make any sense. If you decide you can run a nuclear plant for decades longer, what does THAT do to LCOE? Why look, since all of the LCOE being high for nuclear is based around construction costs, it massively lowers LCOE when you extend the life of a plant - or re-open one. Because simply running a nuclear plant day to day is incredibly economical compared to solar or wind...

Re-opening the plant was cheaper than any solar or wind system that would produce an equivalent amount of power, over the many decade remaining lifespan of the plant.

If it was really an error around landing, you are not nearly high enough for a parachute to do anything but cover your mangled remains after the crash.

Apple already knows the EU is going this way.

Apple is probably already close to leaving the EU, since the financial risk of staying there is too great.

A higher minimum wage in a number of states will usher in many uses of robots to take over lots of jobs, and more robots doing jobs like that means more robots being able to move into other jobs more quickly.

AI needs interconnections.

Starlink exists, for locations that cannot be tied back to the primary internet connections of the area.

Also this is more about future profitability than current, assuming projected power needs for AI are correct. At some point it could easily be profitable.

This seems like a pretty good use of otherwise wasted power....

However I wonder if any some point, it would actually be more profitable to use that energy to power compute for other things - possibly AI farms.

1) Got nuclear?

2) Got coal?

Apple could've implemented the indicator in some other manner rather than making each and every bubble that God-awful bright florescent green color.

OOOOHHHH ! I know! They can make it rainbow!

Suit DISMISSED.

Kermit was right I guess, personally I always liked the green.

Is this Reddit? Because YTA.

Been a while since I've seen such an egregious collection of misinformation in a post.

Just a few random points you got wrong, out of the large total:

1) Not up to Apple to port third party iOS apps to Android.

2) No one pressures people to switch to Android because it's not liked as much it's just there.

3) Market capitalization has nothing to do with how much they are making.

4) You could have used a Lightning to headphone adapter all along champ, you never had to use Bluetooth.

5) The blue/green bubble is not vindictive, it's a technical indicator giving you important information about what you can and cannot send to other other side. It was humanity at large that came to the conclusion that green bubble people were lower on the social stratum.

Have to say your wife sounds nice though.

A few times, I've fallen asleep watching some YouTube video on the couch, and woken up an hour or two later... with several videos having been played through while I was basically AFK.

Seems pretty bad to capture data on people watching anything, on a platform that auto-plays random strings of videos based on what it thinks you might want to see. Or, at the very least a pretty useful dataset.