There was never real trust — at least not for people under 30.
Maybe we older adults fell for it occasionally, but my kids never assumed something was true just because it appeared online (or on TV, or similar).

Nope, you’re wrong. We’re already way too far with CO. Every day we keep using coal power plants, we’re causing much more damage than most people dare to admit to themselves.

Nuclear power plants make excellent targets in wartime — that really helps all the other countries in the coming global climate wars. Just spread them out nicely and show them off proudly, please.

It’s not a joke or something funny, it’s just plain reality.

Exactly, it's about 50% more than it was when humans evolved and adapted to the climate.

Global median earth temperature can quite easily be calculated by CO2 in the athmosphere:

0,03% CO (300 ppm): 13.40 C
0,04% CO (400 ppm): 14.64 C
0,05% CO (500 ppm): 15.61 C

The effect is tremendous, without CO2, as in level 0,000%, global median temperature on earth would be 11.3 C.

So maybe you can see now that 0,03% make quite a difference, and so does every 0,01% more.

The effects of 2 degree might still seem neglectible to you, but it means catastrophic outcomes for global food supply, local weather catastrophes, and pretty surely global climate wars with billions dying in this century as the result.

Venus for comparison has 96.5% CO2, it's temperature is 464 C, without CO2 it would be 46.5 C.

Every military that cares about homeland security should have long since bombed all coal power plants.

No, nuclear power plants make excellent targets in wartime — that really helps all the other countries in the coming global climate wars. Just spread them out nicely and show them off proudly, please.

CO2 from fossils cost easily 5,000$ per ton in collateral damage. Nuclear is not as easily calculatable, but sure nuclear power plants make up good targets in times of war.

No study needed for that calculation then ..

If you embrace intelligence, why shouldn't ai replace humans?

1. X million pure planning & construction costs
2. X million for additional planning & additional construction costs
3. X for errors in planning & additional construction costs
4. X for fraud
5. 10 * X for professional fraud
6. X for certifications & safety
7. 10 * X for corrections in planning & construction to fit certification needs
8. 100 * X for more professional fraud
9. 75 * X for adapting to new laws due to changes in 20 years later than expected completion
= 200 * X of the pure costs .. nothing new on the western front

Where does that usage come from? I heard there are lots of robots on the rise in the age of AI.

"openness is now considered superior from a security perspective."

Nice they got that finally, it's been like that for about 30 years now :)

Former it was like: AI might hurt itself when it gets more and more ai generated input
Now its like: AI will only get ai generated content at all

1.

Advancing nuclear, will also make it available to way more countries.
By that giving this tech to those.
Teaching those.
Building infrastructure and education to handle radioactive stuff.
From there it's only a small step sell stuff others can use for nuclear bombs.
By advocating nuclear, you also advocate giving atomic bombs to the whole world.

2.

risk of meltdown exists
newer nuclear is 100 x more secure
building 100 x more nuclear power plants / 100 x more secure equals the risk as of Tschernobyl and Fukushima alike
natural desasters are on the rise, and thus the risk will get higher, on 100 fold places

3.

nuclears need to be cooled
the planet gets hotter
nuclear power plants already had to be shut down as rivers got too hot in recent summers across europe

An important question remains unanswered: Are New York taxpayers also paying the nuclear waste disposal costs upfront? A gigawatt facility will generate substantial radioactive waste over its operational lifetime, requiring secure storage for decades and costing billions. It would be transparent if the state disclosed the complete lifecycle financing - including decommissioning and waste management - rather than potentially shifting these costs to future generations. Given the track record of nuclear projects exceeding budgets, New Yorkers deserve clarity on the full financial commitment they're making.