Nuclear reactors use most surface water, not ground water. So it doesn't normally affect drinking water or ground water levels.

Also, closed loop does not evaporate. The loop is not closed if stuff escapes from it. It just runs around in the piping system over and over again, but eventually water will become "dirty" and it will be dumbed into the sewers and replaced with new water.

You can arrange cooling also with non-closed loop where you use evaporation, as it was done in the old days, but in new data centers it is hardly used.

1. Ban nuclear in the law
2. Buy nuclear plants
3. Unban nuclear
4. Profit

AI doesn't necessarily need to be better than humans. Even if it is worse, it can still bring a better outcome. Cases where this might be are:
1. When human doctor is out of ideas. In such a case, even wild guesses can lead to better outcome than not trying anything.
2. When human doctors are out of time. In such cases AI making bad decisions might be better than delaying the decision.
3. When screening huge population. AI might have worse accuracy, but with the ability to do millions of screenings, it could find the most obvious cases quickly.
4. When patient can't afford a doctor. Even a bad doctor can be better than no doctor at all. But this one requires some guard rails to limit what it might suggest.

LLM can change the answer, but you can ask it x times and use majority vote to pick the best answer to get rid of random errors. This is an actual scientific strategy that is used with AI models to get more accurate results. There was one experiment where they managed to get over a million right answers without a single error using this strategy.

I think that the blind spot for many are the AI models used for science (Alphafold, AlphaEvolve, AlphaGenome, WeatherNext, AlphaEarth,AlphaZero, ... ). They already have multiple AI models that have made new scientific discoveries, some of which are Nobel-level, ground breaking discoveries. People are underestimating the potential impact of this. Demis Hassabis has already said that finding a cure for all known deceases within 10 years is a possible scenario.

Here is a study about triage where AI fails to beat humans:

"Results from a randomized, interface-blinded, crossover simulation study involving 120 hypothetical telemedical encounters performed by real primary care physicians, the AI co-clinician or GPT-realtime. "
https://deepmind.google/blog/a...

> I want my unicorn. Competent biologists should be able to do it.

"Why are there no unicorns?"
https://youtube.com/shorts/G1A...

By the way, I recommend also "How to build your dragon (training sold separately)". As dragons are something we could make.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

I think you can still get support for it using external kernel module. It is just removed from the main kernel.

Using guns and fans is forbidden by the law of table tennis. You would have to make a robot that uses paddle to hit the ball. When doing that, you have physics against you, so at most you might get something like 100 m/s speed for the ball. Faster than that and ball gets crused. With that speed it would be hard to return, but not impossible (it is about 3 times the speed humans can produce). The ball loses speed quickly, so standing behind the table might do the trick.

Here you go, enjoy reading
https://linux.slashdot.org/sto...
https://news.slashdot.org/stor...
https://tech.slashdot.org/stor...
https://linux.slashdot.org/sto...

4. We use AI to do tasks that it is good at and humans do tasks that they are good at.

I don't understand why everyone is trying so hard to make AI do things that are pretty impossible for it. Do they hate programming so much?

If I get a strange error code from my app (an error which I am not familiar with, usually caused by some 3rd part library we use), I feed it to the AI and AI will usually about 80% of the time guess correctly what is wrong, I check if that was the case and then I fix the error. Traditionally that was long hours of googling and reading manuals trying to figure out what is wrong. I did not enjoy it, nor did I rest when doing it. Using AI like that feels pretty relaxing to me.

I'm on Ubuntu 26.04, writing this using Firefox and I am currently using little under 2 GB of my RAM (16 GB in total). I'm not sure how much is used during the boot.

I think the better term to independent thinker is critical thinking, where it is not about doubting others, but doubting yourself. Do I have enough information about this subject? Could I be wrong? Are my arguments flawed?

Do you avoid random number generators just because they are not actually random? No, you just take that into account when using it. There are methods that allow you to get million answers from the AI in a sequence without a single mistake. ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?... )