Switching facilities are expensive, but you can design grids such that they are able to break into smaller grids, and that does get continually cheaper. Restarting and synchronizing grids can be difficult, but the more battery storage you've got, the easier that gets. So what we'll more likely wind up with is a grid with more compartmentalization, with a lot of people left in weird and unreliable sectors of the network with unreliable power because nobody will force the providers to actually provide them with power reliably.

There's a lot of space available because it doesn't need it all to itself. There's a lot of desert nobody is using, a lot of canals and reservoirs we could cover, a lot of nice safe flat commercial roofs, a lot of commercial glass, a lot of car parks. So since that's not a real problem, can we just legislate it and move on?

Because so many lies are being told about it, yes.

Show me your A*

The "on rails" complaint is indeed goofy any time the game is not open world, and all games don't need to be.

OTOH it used to be common for games to have both single and multi player, and that was good.

Seems like if you were sure of how that came out, you'd have gone and looked it up and had a stronger comment.

Supposedly it's as many as "breast, pancreatic, and prostate cancer combined." https://www.cancer.org/content...

Their economic analysis is BS. For example, they discount the cost of "shared" infrastructure, but clearly there is a cost because it has to be built, and scaled to the number of reactors they want to install. At only 300MW each, they will want quite a few of them to make the economics better.

The increased cost of waste handling and refuelling is not properly accounted for either.

Sodium is a rather nasty medium to use as coolant. It corrodes, and spontaneously catches fire on contact with air. Attempts have been made in the past, ending in expensive failures.

For what investment in GPUs?

Typically when rent seeking, the rent is a fraction of the cost of the asset. Some assets appreciate like houses, some depreciate like GPUs.

That was the original idea with numbers stations, so it was a natural evolution. Owning a consumer radio was not suspicious, so broadcasting on standard civilian frequencies made sense.

The "random" data in the GPS signal is supposedly there to aid with reception and validate the RNGs on the satellites, but it was a pretty obvious place to hide messages too. I'm sure all the other GNSS systems do it too.

They are building a BWRX-300, for around $21 billion Canadian. It's a prototype, so high costs are expected I suppose.

The Office for Nuclear Regulation has some issues with their design too: https://www.onr.org.uk/media/b...

It's mostly the usual stuff. The control rods aren't proven to be failure proof, and we have seen accidents due to them not inserting, or getting stuck, before. There isn't enough don't to evaluate loss of coolant faults, another known failure mode. While they don't rely on pumps to circulate the coolant (it's by convection), they still need it to circulate to avoid meltdown. It must circulate through cooling systems like pools or towers.

Good luck to them, but it seems very unlikely that it will be economically viable in the end.

Can you name one of these "can't melt down" designs that is more than just an unproven napkin sketch?

All the ones I've seen that are at least trying to build a prototype rely on having a cooling pool, meaning they absolutely can melt down if that pool is drained.

That means you need to protect the entire pool as well as you would protect a traditional reactor, and have an emergency supply of water on hand. So containment buildings, leak proof pools that can survive earthquakes and other natural disasters, all that stuff. Doubtful there will be any savings over traditional designs.

There are some types which are more likely to be actually meltdown proof, although even then you need to protect the reactor from physical damage. But they all have severe problems with the reactor vessel being damaged over time by the fission reaction inside, and every attempt to build one has been an expensive failure.

If you take the original game as the reference, they are supposed to be a wedge sticking out of her chest. The game was originally developed for the Sega Saturn, which used quads instead of triangles, and all the ports like the more famous (and released first) Playstation version didn't re-make the models. So they are wedge shaped.

Fortunately it was before jiggle physics were invented, so at least she gets to wear a sports bra.

If you go by the art for the game, she would probably have a great deal of difficulty doing all those acrobatics. Some sports professionals get reductions to help with that. The original tan she had is extremely dated now - in the UK it's the classic "Essex girl" look, straight out of a tanning salon and considered a bit uncultured.

Because 1) handling exceptions is hard and 2) keeping everything updated from the myriad of sources is hard too.

Whether the benefits are worth the risks is surely complicated, but if it means updates get done that otherwise wouldn't (and it does) then there's at least a reasonable chance that it's a net positive overall.

I'm down with practically anything, or at least just about anything practical, over NCM. It just has issues on every level from political to technical.

I've got my fingers crossed for sodium, but sure, nickel-iron would seem to make sense for stationary applications. I'm hoping though that they can come up with a sodium battery that wouldn't be toxic even if you blew it up.

That's interesting about the chargers. In the UK we usually don't need a service upgrade, and if changes are needed they are usually free and the responsibility of the supplier. Because the UK is supposed to reach net zero, some work is expected to be done by the electricity supplier, such as "unlooping" (it's a UK thing, was done to save money when copper was scarce after WW2), and fuse/cable upgrades.

Typically an install is in the region of â1,200 here, but you can get it for less with various schemes, sometimes "free" with the car. I had my first one installed on a government scheme that I don't think is running now, but it was free back then, and when I replaced it last year I did the work myself. A bit naughty but if it ever becomes an issue I can get it signed off by an electrician.