Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Not worth it *now* (Score 4, Informative) 197

As mentioned above, other countries realize that free/inexpensive higher education is actually an investment in their citizens and in their country's futures.

But i the grand tradition of the American “free market,” the U.S. once again proves that if there’s a way to squeeze its own citizens for profit, it’ll find it.

Other countries invest in people; we just invoice them and call it freedom, leaving generations shackled to long-term debt.

Comment Re:They are objectively wrong (Score 5, Insightful) 197

Truth. Ever notice how every single one of the politico's who've been railing against "elitists" and who continually warn us against the dangers of "liberal" colleges all have their own advanced degrees?

Trump graduated from the Ivy League University of Pennsylvania and from the Wharton School of Business. Marco Rubio graduated from the University of Florida and the University of Miami Law School. Jeb Bush? University of Texas. Rand Paul? Baylor and Duke. Tom Cotton attended Harvard and Harvard Law, and Ted Cruz hails from Princeton and Harvard. JD Vance? OSU and Yale.

But you? Nah. Can't have the common folk bein' "overcredentialed". Might start gettin' uppity and askin' too many questions.

Best to leave all that higher learnin' to our new ruling class and be properly thankful for any table scraps they toss our way...

Comment Re:Anything for money (Score 3, Informative) 108

Most of the vehicles sold internationally meet **EU** safety standard. Standards which are almost always higher than those here in the US.

(Even more so today, in fact, since Trump has been busy cutting back US agencies ability to actually do what they're tasked to do.)

But yeah, convince yourself that they're all cheap low-quality garbage and that fat-assed American SUVs and pickup trucks are exceptional....

Comment Re:I don't believe it (Score 1) 61

Might want to check out the WNA's own economic assessment.

It explains in detail how nuclear is only competitive with renewables in a highly regulated environment where utilities pledge to pre-purchase power over the long term.

Without those agreements or in a unregulated, competitive environment where they have to compete on price, then the plant has to be idled during peak solar/wind generation periods and that prevents it from ever recouping its costs.

Or in their own words, "The increased penetration of intermittent renewables thereby greatly reduces the financial viability of nuclear generation in wholesale markets where intermittent renewable energy capacity is significant."

That said, I think nuclear has a chance of being commercialized for specialty applications like the proposed Mcirosoft/SMR-powered data center. The data center is the SMRs sole customer, and the power generated never has to be competitive in a wholesale marketplace.

And that's where we should be focusing our nuclear efforts.

But as been pointed out innumerable times, China is basically building out solar at a rate equal to five nuclear plants every two weeks. They are building nuclear, but nowhere close to the same scale (0.3%, IIRC)

So I'm not buying the arguments that say we shouldn't build wind and solar today because we should be building nuclear. And then not building anything at all.

It's simply a bad faith argument for maintaining the status quo.

https://world-nuclear.org/info...

Slashdot Top Deals

If in any problem you find yourself doing an immense amount of work, the answer can be obtained by simple inspection.

Working...