skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Nuclear had roughly 60 years to deliver clean, cheap and reliable energy. If it did all that, no amount of green lobby could have derailed it. Unfortunately, and I feel that deeply as an engineer, it did not achieve those goals.

What we have currently have are slightly evolved designs over those of the 60s, which are fantastically expensive, take up to a decade to build and three more decades to recover investment, and present a large economic failure risk - see the Nukegate fiasco. No sane financial investor wants to approach nuclear, no one wants to insure it, so the only ones willing to eat the risk are states.

Yes, we had a window in the last 20 years to reinvent fission, have new, secure and cheap reactors which cannot proliferate, are passively safe and fast to deploy. The industry and regulators remained paralyzed, structurally risk averse. That window has now closed.

Renewables are cheaper then nuclear, fast to come online and have very low risk. Storage is quickly dropping in price. Together, storage and renewables, coupled with a smart grid, will be able to cover more and more of the demand and require fossils to be fired less and less. It does not matter if you go fosil for a whole week in a year where there is no sun, wind or rain, that's still only 2% of the production and you can use very expensive mitigations like CCS, as long as you have cheap renewables in the rest of the time.
Sorry, I should've left that out. Edited.
This inevitably makes me think of a video about how meat consumption is not as bad by "things I've learned" on youtube. Search for that name and "meat" and you will inevitably find it. I thiught the claims in the video sounded too good to be true, so I read the study most of the claims in the video were based on.

They were comparing against a scenario where we kept producing the food fed to animals, but that humans had to eat it. Which meant no actual land gains, only a modest reduction in co2 emissions, and that people would become unhealthy by eating 4500kcal/day, mostly from corn.

Even worse than the 3.1mn views is that the study in question was covered positively on TV and in newspapers.
Sounds like perhaps it was the judge that was bought?
Yes, all of those are likely going to be true. Are they true at this instant? Maybe not, but a nuclear plant we start building today also won't be available at this instant.

Note that the application of green hydrogen I'm talking about here, grid backup, does not require replacing existing natural gas use with hydrogen. Nor does it require long distance hydrogen pipelines.
Not just a risky investment. The downside risk is too large to be insurable. Which is another form of privatized profit and socialized risk.
The main power grid should be always from a predictable source. wind and solar are far from that. And there's the problem of disposing solar panels and old wind turbines. We came a long way, but there's a lot of space for improvements. Meanwhile, nuclear energy is a stable and mature technology.
Yes, and that code had bugs.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/lanceeliot/2019/07/16/apollo-11...

There are 0 do-overs on smart contracts in production. No stopping the network for a minute to triage, no rolling back a minute, no circuit breakers. No "Error 1202, do you want to continue?" pop-up messages.
The theme is Gokarna. Its a hugo theme (https://github.com/526avijitgupta/gokarna)

Thanks for the kind words, I am the author of this theme :)
Must consoom
> the last straw for me has been OneDrive

Did you ever use Windows 95? Seems like the quality of now and then is a bit the same.
If we're choosing power sources based on the amount of lies told about them, then I'm afraid renewables win on that metric as well.

They invented a conspiracy theory that the entire planet's scientific community was trying to destroy the economy for secret marxism reasons for goodness sake.

You'd need to find someone who thinks Godzilla is a documentary to equal that level of nonsense.
well, don't you get more solar power in the summer?

seems like that can minimize seasonal storage requirements once higher level of renewables are in the grid
in theory SMRs don't need much maintenance so could work in these situations. And on the plus side, when they do melt down - not many casualties.
Like many commenters here, lifelong night owl, have two kids that have forced a schedule shift. For a while I found that getting up stupid early worked better than getting up sort of early. Wrote about it here:
https://baugues.com/430
>Weight of a person is stone and lbs

This one is definitely changing. Lots of people here only know their weight in kg now (including me).
Yes, it's interesting that although patents were intended to allow huge corporations to suppress competition, now these huge corporations have to spend endless legal fees fighting patent trolls.

Will it be enough to kill patents? Maybe
Rooftop solar is more dangerous than Chernobyl (2008)
I’m a development manager and divide my time between Washington, DC, where my wife and I own a small rowhouse, and rural southwest Wisconsin, where we own a house on 38 acres, mostly wooded with some meadow. I lived on my grandparents’ farm in Iowa when I was a kid, before my parents transitioned away from farming.

We use the WI house for summers and holidays, and it’s 2-3 hours drive from either set of parents. We have a garden, a few gnarly old apple trees, and several small sheds for storing firewood and junk. We also spent 6 months there in 2020, to avoid the initial wave of the pandemic in DC. There are a number of organic farms nearby; we support them, but those folks work -hard- for a pittance. Over 30-40 years they will likely build wealth through farmland, but they’ll lack disposable income.

I’ve thought up all sorts of lame-brained schemes for making money off the WI property, but they’re a lot of work and a pittance compared to career advancement. Gathering walnuts and hickory nuts? Maybe a couple thousand dollars. Logging? A few thousand dollars and the pleasure of heavy equipment coming in, chopping down trees, eroding the soil, and leaving a mess of branches and brush, for a one-time gain. I could rent out my rowhouse for the summer and make just as much money with very little effort.

And even without trying to make money, there’s more than enough work to do on the grounds, and I frankly need to hire some of it out to keep from building up too much deferred maintenance. I would say, enjoy the country, invest in limiting your environmental impact (solar with grid-tie for an EV; good insulation for limiting HVAC), and don’t try to make a living from it if you don’t have to. Additionally, remember that city living, at least in dense walkable cities, is far more sustainable than country living.
It's only a matter of time. Linux really only has a good malware track record due to lack of popularity.
I just remember that 1hp is 754 watts, but lets just call it 750. Another magic conversion that I remember from working on that stuff is that Nm * RPM / 9549 = kW. We never used ft-lbs though.
Why is it false?

I'm talking about absolute numbers here, not TWh, and I'm comparing to fossil fuels, but even if we talk about just wind:

> In England, there were 163 wind turbine accidents that killed 14 people in 2011. Wind produced about 15 billion kWhrs that year, so using a capacity factor of 25%, that translates to about 1,000 deaths per trillion kWhrs produced (the world produces 15 trillion kWhrs per year from all sources).

> These are pretty low numbers. By contrast, in 2011 coal produced about 180 billion kWhrs in England with about 3,000 related deaths. Nuclear energy produced over 90 billion kWhrs in England with no deaths. In that same year, America produced about 800 billion kWhrs from nuclear with no deaths.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2013/09/29/forget-ea...

I'm sure deaths are going to increase in the production, erection, and servicing of tens of thousands of wind turbines, by tens of thousands of employees.

But you can simply tally up all the deaths for nuclear accidents, direct or indirect, and they're still less than other forms of energy generation.

Presumably you're disputing the deaths, but the link you gave is deaths per TWh is lower. Except by absolute deaths it's.... higher. Which was my point, and is reinforced in the quote above.

> Second, even with the correct metric, solar and wind are now beating nuclear and projected to continue to do so, widening the gap over time.

Yes, deaths per TWh will go down, but power generation will go up, as there is more solar/wind, but so will deaths as more people build, install, and maintain those systems. Those absolute deaths keep rising.
The alternative is producing emissions from coal and oil which we just dump into the air.

Nuclear is far and away the less harmful solution.
I'd love to know if they floated any of these patents to Google, Apple, etc... and if those companies did the math and decided that litigation against a patent troll would cost less than what Blackberry was asking for.
In The Netherlands, more than 90% of all homes is heated using natural gas.

Part of that is historical, but also cooking on natural gas was for a long time the best solution. So if you run natural gas to every home anyhow, there is little reason to have a separate hot water distribution system.
TLDR; You can have both, but going full rural homestead is hard.

I have a 2 acre tropical fruit orchard in North Florida with 80+ fruits that don't grow here natively, and I'd like to turn it into a side business eventually, but for now I work at a FAANG remotely and my wife is in management. You don't have to give up your life to dip your feet in. I do have Zillow fantasies about 50 acres in the tropics or 100s of rural acres but I temper that with the loss of quality of life. If I'm going to risk everything and start something of my own, it won't be on farming margins, it'll be chasing tech profits.

My great grandfather homesteaded in Montana and North Dakota, dances with wolves style. He had hundreds of acres and built wealth. This is completely different than Youtube homesteaders who build minifarms on 5-10 acres and open the equivalent of a petting zoo. The land and the work is bondage and you can't free yourself from it unless you hire help to do the work, generate more profit per unit of work than industrial farming, or find a profitable ancillary activity. Here are what I've seen be some of the success scenarios:

1. Market Gardens - Look at Curtis Stone or Jim Kovaleski who make pretty good money farming peoples yards. This route requires selling, entrepreneurship, hard work, lack of flexibility. Curtis now makes money from books/workshops/etc in addition to his farms which he has help for.

2. Agrotourism - Make money off the experience of visiting your farm. You will need to build an experience people will want to visit/pay for, and probably require products to sell, and require a steady supply of wealthy customers (example: https://www.congareeandpenn.com/agritourism).

3. Get Youtube Rich - Make supplementary money from Youtube/Patreon, use it to grow your farm and switch to one of the other activities.

4. Online Sales - Use your internet presence to sell plants, seeds, books, workshops, guides, Amazon affiliate money. Pete Kanaris of GreenDreams (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JwgfS1k7n0c) had a homestead and market garden and edible permaculture landscaping business, but has rapidly grown into a major online nursery with tons of employees.

5. Own a Nonprofit/Educational Co-op? - Teach people to farm in exchange for their labor to give you the freedom to remove yourself occasionally. Something like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmkgbS8RQ2k maybe.

Additionally, you need to be maximizing the value of every single inch of your land. How much land do you have, what type of environment is it, what growth zone, how are you currently making money, what're you growing, how many helpers do you have, what are your current future goals?
Just buy a smart car that is based from your standards, in that way, you can weigh in its pros and cons yourself.
I try to force myself into a good mood. I fill my brain with good happy things even if I’m grumpy. I’m not a morning person so unless I do this I attack the day with the wrong attitude.
When I drive to work I like to look up at the sky and the trees when I can and appreciate the beauty of it all.

Let me say again that I force myself to do this. I’m not perfect at it, but I notice that the days I’m more negative I just don’t want to do anything work related.

Other than that I try to have a morning ritual. I have some Mates with cookies which makes me do a bathroom stop before leaving and I try to just accept the day after that.
Source? Is this inherent in all nuclear plants, or only in certain designs?
You could do a working GUI with the JVM. But most people demanded Windows desktop apps, and for Windows only you could use .Net and C# for a better experience. Linux community was in big part against Java or Mono because of license and FUD so Python was the winner for the higher level language there.
Should books be destroyed after the life of the author as well?
Even the CDC admits that vaccination has not reduced spread and infections. You're spreading misinformation now. Your graph includes no sources, no raw data, and is open to interpretation. For example, fully vaccinated people are much more fearful of covid and are more likely to self isolate. Fully vaccinated people are more likely to have minimal or no symptoms, so are less likely to be tested, while still being contagious.

I watched in December a community that is over 99% vaccinated have an omicron spike which led to 10% of the population test positive in a week. This started a spike which then spread to the outlying areas, and was likely only even discovered because of surveillance testing. If 10% of a fully vaccinated population could become infected within a week, then clearly the vaccines were not reducing spread or infections.
Ordering a pizza I otherwise wouldn't have with the money would not be my current life. It's a question of degrees. If I win a 100M lottery and do literally nothing except hand it over to my financial advisor to invest at a modest 4% return and draw a generous 500k salary from that I would still be making 3.5 million compounded compounded per year.

This is more or less how retirement works so it's a pretty well-trodden path.
I am building an open source web framework comparison.

The idea is to put together a project that gives an overview of how to set up a minimal viable web application from scratch via all the different frameworks.

For each framework the project features a self explanatory shell script that builds a web app with routing, templates and user accounts. So there is no ambiguity of how to reproduce the results. And it is even possible to just copy&paste the steps into a docker container and see the framework in action.

Here is the repo:

https://github.com/no-gravity/web_app_from_scratch

So if you want to compare how the frameworks do templating, you can look at the "Let's use templates" part and have a quick overview of how it is done in Django, Laravel, Flask, Symfony, NextJS...

I wrote the beginning of the Django script and two developers contributed Laravel and Symfony scripts. So far we have routing and templates. All three still need user accounts.

If you are experienced in a web framework, feel free to add to one of the scripts or a new one and send a pull request!
Yes, there needs to be more storage or backing by gas plants. But nuclear power needs the same gas plants as you cannot change the output levels quickly enough to drive the grid. In a sense, constant output is almost as bad for the grid as peak energy, which can easily be throttled.
In both cases you need additional flexible plants or storage. In the moment, when there is true surplus renewable energy production, storage buildup will increase quickly.

Side note: electric cars will be a large part of the grid balancing in the future.
My own experiences are identical to yours. Not 90%, not 99%, 100% identical.
Neither can an internal combustion, of course. When doing a max speed test, holding high horsepower output levels for a long time, an internal combustion engine will overheat quickly. That's true even with massive airflow over large liquid radiators, with coolant flowing through the casting along the cylinder walls - not to mention literally being a pump which moves cold air in and hot exhaust out at a rate of thousands of liters per minute.

In both cases, it's fine that the power doesn't last, because it takes merely 10-20 horsepower (7.5-15 kW) to move an average car on a flat road at 60 MPH/100 km/h. To accelerate to that cruising speed in ten seconds takes about 180 horsepower/135 kW.

I had the pleasure last week of working on an industrial vacuum pump installation with twelve 100-horsepower/75 kW electric motors - these guys:

https://www.baldor.com/catalog/EM4400TS

Don't look at the photo and think "Oh yeah, there's one of those hanging on the back of my dad's drill press." The shaft is the size of your wrist, not your finger. The casting is the size of an oil drum, and it is made from extremely dense cast iron and copper on a level that non-metalworkers probably don't understand: It weighs 1,200 lbs/550 kg.

Size absolutely is the issue! That sort of motor would be a terrible powerplant for an electric vehicle: It MUST be made very much smaller and very much more powerful. It's made that way because an industrial motor needs to be able to dissipate 4.6% of that max rated 75 kW (acting as a 3,450W space heater) as heat while running at full power for days, covered in dirt and debris, spinning tirelessly in the desert sun, probably with a significant safety factor on all those numbers. Industrial motors are not the same as EV motors!
Patent trolls buy patents for $600m?! How the hell trolls amassed so much money? Are there investment banks and VCs which invest in patent trolls?
Introduction to Free Monads
Looking at the New “Critical” Security Firmware Update – New Intel Microcode
Gmail runs JS but only in AMP4EMAIL things
This was long why I preferred to purchase Tab for home diet Soda, it was largely sweetened with Saccharine, and has an virtually limitless shelf life.
aspartam is not affecting the blood sugar though.
There are many companies who do not participate in this process. I did not want to spend lots of time setting this up and adding another middlemen when the alternative is much simpler (contact us and get a refund). I still do not believe this platform is meant to claim damages, that needs to be done in court.

But I will have another look and probably support it when I find some time.

Edit: It's fixed now, we support the process. But please just send en email to us it's much easier ;)
There is a scan of the frontpage but it’s not legible.

https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/pages/pageone/sc...

I get paywalled on the first article on nyt.com.
> The work of the teacher who shapes the future of our children or the work of nurse that take care of our dying parents don't generate any revenue, and thus has a lower market value, but I, and I think we as a society should, value it much more.

Teachers are glorified babysitters in the vast majority of instances due to many countries making truancy illegal. Yes, a great teacher is extremely valuable, but the vast majority of teachers are not great because there is not a high demand for great teachers. It’s even worse that we’re ruining the environment for both great teachers and great students by forcing students who have no interest in learning to be there.
Ive used Fetch in the past, great lib. I'm curious why Node core has decided to make this an official part of Node? From one perspective there could be a hard argument that this should never be a part of Node as it is an external library and not a building block of the language? Almost feels like feature creep for the core language? I know that's not the intent, but wanting to understand the logic behind this decision :)
And it's still the most reliable power generation method by far.
chickens.

having a garden.

learning how to maintain the systems in your house (plumbing, electrical etc)
Agree completely.

It seems very naive on the one hand to say that climate change is making climate more chaotic and and then turn around and say that we will put all our eggs in the baskets of tech that literally doesn’t work if there isn’t suitable climate (wind and solar).
As a non-white male person who successfully navigated highly diverse top U.S. institutions as an international student without all the DEI bullshit a while back, I’d rather work with faculty and staff who don’t cater to my ethnicity, gender or whatever irrelevant traits, thanks.
Obviously, the job market doesn't respond to demand in that way. Otherwise, more places would be paying more right now with the current shortages. Teachers, for example, should be getting raises.

I was responding to the fact that doctors aren't female-dominated right now, a point you missed. Which they aren't. We haven't flooded it with a bunch of women: We have a limited capacity to train doctors. Nor are we getting folks in the market that used to be housewives: That time period has long since moved, though in many places, women still carry household responsibilities in addition to work. Rather than a flood, women are replacing men, mostly. Which is generally how it goes: Women replace men in some fields, and then pay goes down.
this does the sums with storage (for a Georgia nuclear plant)

https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2021/08/05/youve-got-30-billion-...

massively over provisioned PV+Storage is still half the price of Nuclear. It even throws in extra money for grid upgrades.
You have invented a fictitious enemy in your own made up "culture war" to rage and rail against what you believe is the one true answer. Thousands of hectares of pristine remnant bush are bulldozed to move, note not install, move, wind turbines into place. Nobody blinks an eye when thousands of hectares of remnant bush gets covered in solar panels. I'm the greenest person I know, a self identifying eco-facist. And I want a nuclear power station in every suburb. And so should you, if you gave a rats arse about the actual environment, and not some fake "war" raging in your meme-space while actual living things get ground into dust in the actual real world.
Yes there are. Plenty of folks out there who want to make money from their money and don't care how. So funds get raised for this kind of venture pretty easily.
I could see myself having some land out in the country. I'd still have a day job but maybe I'd have a small vegetable garden and use the rest of the land for things like hunting, hiking, or 4x4 offroading. I doubt I'd ever want to have a real farm. I grew up with family friends that had horse farms and even though I'd help out occasionally, I knew it was hard work for marginal benefits. They'd make their money boarding horses but even taking care of their own horses and land was a full time job. You had to be good at fixing things yourself or else you'd go broke trying to hire someone to do it.

I think my ideal spot is 10 or 20 acres in the mountains and a small cabin. It would be a place only a couple of hours away from my main home. I'd be able to pack a big cooler and get away for the weekend. Somewhere I can go do my hobbies and maybe pickup a few more. Because I'm not living there constantly, I don't need luxuries like nearby grocery stores or even gigabit internet.