this post was submitted on 01 Oct 2023
1137 points (97.5% liked)

Technology

59600 readers
4059 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
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
1137
Microsoft Needs So Much Power to Train AI That It's Considering Small Nuclear Reactors (futurism.com)
submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
416 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 30 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Nuclear power means they can do both.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Hear me out:

What if we used that nuclear power only to fix the environment?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

Ok, find someone willing to pay for one for that purpose.

Microsoft isn't 'we'

[–] [email protected] -4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You're free to invest in nuclear power for that purpose if you want.

Microsoft is investing in nuclear power to run their AI projects. They likely wouldn't be investing in nuclear power if they didn't have projects that needed it like this.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago

And the U.S. government wouldn't have invested in all of the development that went into the Apollo program if they didn't want to beat the Russians, but we still all benefitted from the science and the research and the development.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

No. Nuclear power is not anti climate like the other fossil fuels, but still anti ecosytems.

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

How exactly is a nuke plant antiecosystems? Under that guise, pretty much anything humans do is as such.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

Uran mining & nuclear waste.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Nuclear power still requires huge front costs (goal of SMR is to reduce that, but first generations will not solve it), so it could be better to use them for every day life needs rather than a prospective commercial venture.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Only if there's a meltdown, and that's near-impossible with current reactor designs. Just don't build in very disaster-prone areas like Florida or Japan.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think you have misread the comment you replied to.