All of these boomers which have given me everything good I have in the world and a safe place to indulge myself

I can understand your offense at this, but please know I myself am a boomer as well, and that what happened there is I wrote "doomer" and auto-correct altered it for me.

Doomers have never given us anything good, only fear.

The "training" materials are effectively a closed loop of reinfocing the correcteness or flaws of the training materials,

I totally agree with this, in fact I think general LLMs will get much worse over time because of this.

However domain specific LLM's carefully trained not on their own bullshit, so to speak, might offer quick insights into a body of understanding.

I am actively fighting the use of anything that might suggest these programs are anything other than pattern matching algorithms

I see, have to agree that is a really great point. I will stop using that term myself as I agree with your overall goal.

I think I would maybe say, malfunctioning with sometimes backwards output.

In actual reality, a nuke can just blow up once.

WHy mucst nuclear haters be so ignorant as to science?

If you knew anything about them at all, you would realize nuclear power plants of this design cannot "blow up".

But then I guess you prefer to remain stupid and wrong instead of getting with the program and actually trying to save the planet.

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?