this post was submitted on 15 Oct 2024
481 points (98.8% liked)

Technology

58674 readers
4033 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 5 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (1 children)

It's almost like the brand spanking new tech to make small nuclear reactors are extremely cost prohibitive and risky, and to lower the cost someone needs to spend money to increase supply.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

If only that was the government that invested in the R&D and tech to make it happen.
Gaining funds from taxes (meaningful taxes), and investing that money in making their country better.

Hopefully this decision is because carbon taxes that will make consumer products representative of the actual cost of the item (not the exploitative cost). >

No no, let the free market decide.
Fucking AI threatening to replace basic jobs (when it's more suited to replace the C-Suite) gobling up energy and money, too-big-to-fail bailouts and loophole tax rules bullshit.

So yeh, someone needs to spend the money and that should be the government.
Because they should realise that carbon fuel sources are a death sentence.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (1 children)

I'm glad you don't make the decisions because I don't want my taxes, that I work hard for and pay money into, to be spent by the government on highly-likely dogshit experimental brand new nuke tech that may eventually cost more money later on to maintain, and I prefer they spend it renovating existing infrastructure or building tried/true legacy nuke plant designs.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Your taxes already go towards this.
That's how governments leverage capitalism to placate the people. Grants for green energy initiatives.
Private companies get free money for taking some amount of risk because they are likely to profit massively from it.
https://www.canarymedia.com/articles/nuclear/google-agrees-to-multi-reactor-power-deal-with-nuclear-startup-kairos
Kairos is getting free money (grants & tax breaks) and profits from this. Google is extremely likely (can't find a source) to be getting free money for this

Companies EXIST to extract profit.
Of one of the worlds most successful companies is doing this, it's because "line goes up".

I'd prefer this happend so that "humans survive".
But "humans don't die faster" is fine for now.

(I guess "humans" means "poor humans". As in anyone that doesn't outright own 2 homes.)

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 hours ago

The day I lost all respect for my father was when he told me in all seriousness that the fundamental purpose of capitalism was to make people happy.