skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Nuclear power plants take an average of 7.5 years to build. Consistently for the last 40-50 years.

Citing numbers from the 70s does nothing to further your argument. We can take a look at all plants we have attempted to construct in the west the past 20 years.

- Virgil C. Summer: Contract: 2008. Cancelled 2017

- Vogtle Contract 2008, first reactor done 2023, second 2024(??)

- Watts Bar: Construction start 1972, cancelled 1985. Restarted 2007. Finished 2016.

- Flamanville: Construction start 2007. Hopefully finished 2024.

- Hinkley Point C: Political decision and construction start 2008. Investment decision 2013. Hopefully done by 2028.

- Olkiluoto 3: Construction start 2005. Done 2023

- Hanhikivi: Never passed the phase when they tried to certify a Russian reactor for western safety requirements

- NuScale SMR Cancelled before they even started building.

7.5 years is simply a laughable prospect in 2023.

> "LCOE of less than $30/MWhre for 40-60 years" even for the "expensive" US Westinghouse AP1000

A 60 year payback time + 15 years construction is 75 years. That is like Stalin, FDR and Churchill at the height of the second world war making investments that only pans out in 2023. In the real world, where you spend your own money, that is called insanity.

The risk is huge, and extending the amortization cost like that is simply bad math. You should understand the Time Value of Money and suggesting such amortization times are simply nonsensical.

Understanding the Time Value of Money: https://www.investopedia.com/articles/03/082703.asp

But this is typical nukebro accounting. Finding the lowest possible number in the face of reality and then with the blindfold on repeating it hoping that we can subsidize nuclear enough to make it happen one more time. Just skip seeing the subsidies.
You're literally putting the password in plain-text into the (unencrypted) browser bookmarks (and also into your terminal where it's likely logged to your ~/.bash_history).

That is the bigger security issue you have, not how Firefox is handling the display of the URL.

If anything, Firefox is highlighting your insecure security practice.
So it’s been discovered in 2020, and there’s no carbon 14 datation yet ? Why ?
We don't need nuclear for base load. Nuclear and renewables don't play together well either.
I share the frustration that we haven't discovered anything yet and honestly I didn't even think of the title being like that until you said anything. I just like the project. The more you dive into this the less shocking it is we haven't found anything and the more faith I have that we will find something, one day.

There are so many technical challenges to face with this and one of the major ones is with the software that scans the absolutely huge amounts of data. The data is available publicly so with a bit of study, the average engineer with understanding of radio waves and what not could get up to speed enough to potentially do some good.

Whether or not radio waves are even the best route to go is up for debate. There's a lot of interference and the longer they travel the weaker they are...There's some interesting techniques being used but like I said, the more I learn about how we're approaching this, the less faith I have in the project, which actually is a good thing. It means we're not doing "all that we can do" and when their 10 years is up and they haven't discovered anything, we don't have to lose hope that we aren't alone.
This is phenomenal advice. You might, for example, recommend outsourcing non-corrosive functionality rather than building it in house, if you feel that is better for the company.

You should do this even if it leads to layoffs for your department, because, again, your goal should be a thriving business, not a thriving engineering department and a lackluster business.

Source: I did recommend and lead this course of action once (the outsourcing, not the layoffs). Company is still using an outsourced solution.
> someone has the evidence

For what? These threads are littered with citations and specific data.

> Do you work in the industry?

Nope.
Curious, can you give some examples of PWAs you use, and why? I've rarely seen any benefit of actually installing a PWA vs just bookmarking the site.

On mobile, I could see privacy reasons for wanting to use a PWA vs a native app, but every time I've seen a site that supports a PWA, they also support a native app and the PWA is usually a sad substitute in comparison.
I think those in the nuclear business understand this is the last hurrah. It's now or never, so the marketing is being pushed to the maximum. It also means you shouldn't trust a single word from them; they're desperate and care nothing for their future reputation if they fail.
Explaining why you find it better would be helpful
Not as good for networking and performance as chrome dev tools, but the visualizations for styling are notably better.
Any argument of the form “if you knew that all along you’d be rich by now from playing the stock market” is fundamentally flawed because it overlooks one of the most well known dangers of the stock market:

“The market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent”

It absolutely was obvious ahead of time that most of the competing streaming services would fail because they couldn’t possibly recreate the infrastructure of Netflix, but it was not possible to predict when they would fail.

For a concrete example, before Paramount+ launched I predicted that it would be dead in less than a year.

Clearly I was wrong because it’s still going 2 years later. I still think it will die relatively soon, but predicting exactly when is virtually impossible.
Archive Page

Bypass Paywalls Clean

CSS Exfil Protection

Decentraleyes

DDG Privacy Essentials

Ghostery

NoScript

Privacy Badger

Privacy-Oriented Origin Policy

Stylus

Tampermonkey

uBlock Origin

uMatrix

Yes, there is overkill in there but that's fine. It does not impact my browsing experience.
> I’m sure the art world would be more than happy to consider these alternative ways to get paid.

You are correct, which is why a lot of artists actually already live in a post copyright world. Commissions, patronage, live performances... these don't need copyright to function.

Edit: The issue for this is that even when no copyright is needed, people do not give it up. I think at the very least, copyright should be opt-in and costs money to register, much like patents.

> But “here’s another option, otherwise I’m going to steal it anyway” isn’t proposing an alternative, that’s coercion.

It's not possible to steal public data. And the free culture community has proposed many over the years.

> Presumably software companies should all be obligated to release their source code right?

> [Snip]

> [Snip]

Yes.
Flaring does not eliminate coal or wood burning, it does not generate electricity or heat. We burn usable natural gas for no direct benefit in order to produce more oil.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Associated_petroleum_gas
When Did We Stop Being Naked? [video]
Yes. The auth part should not be displayed when you hover over a bookmark. Chromium does not display it.

In the end, every security mechanism is "plain text". Even ssh keys. When someone gains access to your ssh key, which is just an ascii string, they can log in as you.
+1 for Dave Thomas's course. Very refreshing and fun.
I've been using FireFox for about 4.5 years now, but I have to have Chrome installed for a few reasons unfortunately.

- Some websites still will just not work in FireFox. It's not super common anymore, but if I sense something is fishy, I pop open the console and see some strange error and swap over to Chrome. Things will just work then. All extensions disabled even. I even ran into this on Vanguard's website, albeit for some obscure forms.

- When I worked at a company that had a larger web app presence, I would have to test in Chrome. That's a given, but my Chrome counterparts did not do the same with FireFox. I would fairly regularly (few times a quarter) find things that were completely broked on FireFox.

All that said, I don't really care about my choice in browser very much, but I'd rather support Mozilla over Google still. Especially since they're the only non-Chromium and v8 engine out there aside from Safari, which is also owned by a massive for profit company. I'd like to help support a more open web, even if it's just a little bit.
So if we’re reading this and concerned about the level of support for Firefox, then we should be somewhat consoled by the fact that the Mozilla Corp uses the money for Firefox development before it even hits the Foundation?
At the scale where the savings is meaningful, like millions of dollars meaningful, you should be able to afford a million dollars of efficiency refactors.

You need to make a product that is fast/efficient enough to do the job. It needs to be delivered on a schedule that is probably really stupid from an engineering point of view. Efficiency can be patched over by throwing extra resources at the problem (up to a point). Functionality and market timing can't be patched over in the same way.

I think it makes sense to throw resources at inefficient code to get yourself into a position where that efficiency has a meaningful consequence. Customers aren't buying your product/service based on the number of instructions or memory used to do a task.
Nuclear is going nowhere. It’s too expensive, takes too long to build, requires significant government subsidies and the failure modes have an exceptionally bad long tail.

$122 billion has been spent in the Fukushima clean up to date with no end in sight. Likely this will take decades, maybe a century or more, and when all is said and done, may well cost over $1 trillion.

The Chernobyl absolute exclusion zone is still quite literally 1000 square miles, nearly 40 years later.

Yet the very real examples get hand waved away despite their being multiple catastrophic incidents when we’ve only built less than 700 nuclear power reactors.
Note that your parent uses time from first concrete poured to grid connection as „construction time“, which is naturally much shorter than what you cite.
>On 4chan I prefer to check the generals instead of whole boards.

Same, I really only go to the daily programming thread and the web dev general. Also, the judo thread on /xs/.

What do you like about Vecchiochan? I'm gonna request they add an /int/ so I can post in English there lol.
I have heard of people recompiling the kernel to improve gaming performance (mostly to use a different scheduler or what be it), but don't recall seeing anything beyond single digit percentage improvements in performance. Which makes sense, since you can only recompile the kernel and a subset of open source libraries that the game may use. Those are going to be fairly well optimized to start with.

The games themselves though are a different story. Outside of open sources games (which are usually less demanding than commercial ones), you don't have the source code to rebuild it. Even if you did, enabling optimizations beyond what the developer used risks breakage so you will have to do your own testing. Even then, simply rebuilding the software wouldn't address the quality of the code created by those developers who are scrambling to meet a deadline with as little effort as possible.
imho we're today already at a point where investing in nuclear is a waste of (taxpayer) money.

Base load is no issue anymore in a grid which is large enough. There is always wind/sun/water somewhere.
This tool [1] does the exact same thing - except that you nuke the chroot when you're done. And the reason is the same - to find all necessary dependencies. I had a small script that eventually became a Rust program. Then I kept adding features to it until it became what it is now. That's the reason why I never really got to explore the alternatives. Anyways, it's usable and nearly done.

Thanks for suggestion though. I'll take a look at it.

[1] https://crates.io/crates/genpac

[2] https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Chroot_for_package_testing
> And they would slowly dwindle and die as their revenue streams dried up

Presumably they wouldn't just do literally nothing in this new Copyrightless world, I imagine with their trillions of dollars they can come up with new business ideas in this new world devoid of intellectual property rights.

> They're already "harming" small creators in these same ways, particularly because extended copyright means we can't have derivative works, thus stifling innovations of smaller creators right now.

Okay, but I don't get what type of innovations - other than AI chatbots, and I mention this with a huge asterisk because all people are asking for is for these trillion dollar corporations to pay the people who's work they're benefiting from - are being stifled right now? There's more media than ever before and it's only accelerating despite all the claims of stifled innovations. Genuine question, do you have a list of things that you'd say are being stifled by over-aggressive Copyright laws? Even if we venture out of Copyright and into Patents and Big Pharma, I especially can't imagine many people who have the skills necessary to come up with new medicines doing their work for no compensation.

> Reselling what? Something you would be able to download for free on the Internet if copyright didn't exist?

But who would create all of this free music for the open source Spotify to gobble up? Sure there'll be a chunk of people out there still creating things because they want to create things, but they also have to put food on the table at the end of the day, how are they gonna do that if everything they ever produce just gets swallowed by the black hole known as the internet? Why would anyone create anything at all, if the moment they do it gets redistributed to everyone else for free? Even open source licenses often come with strings attached, I can't imagine that most people would be happy with all their work being gobbled up without even acknowledgment of where the work comes from, which is already a part of the most commonly encountered OSS licenses.

I just don't see how this world you're envisioning can exist in a non-Utopian non-post-scarcity world where the majority of people are living paycheck-to-paycheck and are barely scraping by as is.

> An open source Spotify would immediately pop up that would only charge you enough to cover hosting.

Who'd wanna pay for that, if you can just download the music yourself?

> What commercial enterprise do you think could compete with that long-term?

You're literally describing a commercial enterprise here, the only difference being that the OSS version of Spotify just doesn't pay artist's for their music (ignoring that Spotify already barely pays artists anything). Spotify already charges people to cover hosting (+ employees and all the other associated costs), is an OSS version of Spotify that just pirates their catalogue really innovative to you? Cause that's exactly what you've described here.
> China's economy is a black box

We can independently verify the plant was built. And we can confirm what Westinghouse was paid. We can’t see other costs incurred, which is why I’m solely citing them for time, not cost.
Thatcher 'utterly shattered' by MI5 revelations in Spycatcher, files reveal
Same, it's simply easier to use Safari on my phone and Mac. The performance is fantastic, syncing is perfect, and switching between the two devices is effortless.

If I used windows or Linux I would probably give it a try again.
I don't know what browser you've tried, but it certainly is not Firefox Quantum. That browser in my experience is on par with Chrome's performance.
If you’re not careful, you might wrap around to IE.
Until wages catch up for inflation, prices haven't come down.
My mother used to have an old hand-cranked Singer with mother-of-pearl inlay. Not as fancy as the really old ones, but still a very nice machine! As a boy I was fascinated by it, and proud to be able to thread it and use it! It always felt as if there was a slight element of danger (needle thru finger) to using it!
The Desalination Thread
With Korea having one of the worst population pyramids of all the countries in the world, this problem will solve itself one way or another eventually.
No, there's no such thing as "advanced". It's just that people "forgot" fundamentals of things, then they see those "fundamentals" as advanced.

I do think, teaching is hard. It basically turned "advanced" into "fundamentals" with correct teaching/learning approach.
I agree with the implicit point. From the ethics standpoint, regardless of what happens at the top, Mozilla's waywardness isn't reflected in the browser, unlike Google's web and user hostility with Chrome (manifest v3 etc).
I'm not typing them in my terminal. I have scripts that automate my workflow. And part of it is logging me into websites.

Regarding storing them in plain text: That's not much different from ssh keys. When someone can read your ssh key, they can log in as you.

If you know a better way to automatically log a user into a website, let us know!
For all intents and purposes, working for federal reserve notes and working for yellow lumps of metal (via federal reserve notes) is the same. Yellow lumps of metal can't provide you with food or shelter, so you'd have to exchange it with someone else that has those things. There's no difference between the two aside from the fact that federal reserve notes can be printed at will in response to economic conditions, and yellow lumps of metal are extracted from the ground at haphazard rates.
I'll take this further since you really don't seem to understand what I'm saying:

There is no such thing as an inherent ethical or moral obligation to society. There are actions and there are consequences. There are laws and there are enforcers. Without enforcers there are no laws. Without consequences actions are irrelevant.

Nothing is written, in law or in "moral code", which obligates a human to give away their creations because they "owe something to society", as the concept of "owing something to society" is not actually a real thing.
> On desktop, various Firefox updates would change my settings subtly and nag me about features I had no interest in

If Firefox suited my needs 100% as well as Safari, this is why I’d still not use it. God damn is it noisy. You’re a browser, I have no interest in engaging with you more than necessary, whatever-I-was-trying-to-do is what I care about. Please stop acting like a kid who’s not getting enough attention. It’s off-putting.
Cartridges – GTK4 and Libadwaita game launcher
Consolidation drives consolidation. It’s a closed loop.

We’ve gotten to the point where ‘communist’ China has more competition than most of the west does.
FIDE statement on rating specific tournaments
The property you own or rent is not private information.

I never said the address needs to be your home address, you could send a PO Box register to a shell company and have a hobo pick it up and transport it across the country for you if anonymity is an issue but privacy certianly isn't an issue here.
I enjoy Firefox. Occassionally, I run into issues using it. I attribute this to bad website design as this often occurs with government, and large bureaucratic organizations.
I'm also not sure, but thinking about how to do that.

But I am very optimistic about it, and I think Argentina in the next years will recover from its economic crisis.
Apple is well supported in that it's "better than everyone except Nvidia", and that's really only because a bunch of well known boutique developers seem to like the high quality of apple laptops and refuse to budge about mainly developing on them.

Still, trying to do significantly fun or interesting things in any major AI ecosystem, such as the Stable Diffusion one through Automatic1111 or with the LLMs in Oobabooga (which supports nearly all LLM backends i.e. llama.cpp), will be mostly crippled and stuff will break in ways that simply don't happen to Nvidia hardware. I'll take the 2 4090s all day, because I know that quantization techniques which shouldn't even be possible (who knows maybethe fabled 1 bit quantization seems inevitable at this point) will make it possible for me to stuff even the most bloated LLM into my measly 48 GBs will be available on Nvidia first and Apple (maybe) second.
I have it on Firefox but it's a forced snap install so I can't download anything because snaps are sandboxed.

I switched it at some point to the app version and uninstalled the snap.

but it came back as a snap somehow!!!
I read that the other way. "If the guy who did it wants to come forward, that is his decision. But he [still talking about the guy who did it] did provide me the full story."

That is, the perpetrator gave him the full story, but he won't name names, because it's the perpetrator's choice whether or not to reveal his identity.
I unfortunately switched back to Chrome last week after having used Firefox for years due to not being able to use sites I frequent. I constantly ran into issues with Heroku, GCP (go figure), and a few financial sites I'd log into regularly.
On [5]:

It's not that Mozilla named their UI "Chrome", but that "chrome" is a graphical user interface word. For a browser it refers to the stuff around the web page content, but it's more general than browser use (you could refer to Blender's chrome around the 3D viewports to refer to its toolbars, etc).

i.e. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Glossary/Chrome
I've often wondered about this.

I think one reason for this is that the Soviet Union started infiltrating Western institutions about a century ago.

This extremely long-ranged strategy is still churning out results, even after they went belly-up. It's the kind of phenomenon that sustains itself - what conservative would ever consider becoming an academic in this environment?

And from there it spreads downward. It's also very helpful that the social "sciences" don't have a direct feedback loop to reality, so it's possible for large numbers of them to have completely kooky ideas for decades on end.

https://repository.usfca.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=100...

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2005/jul/01/schools.uk
I think an update flipped the setting, or added it.

Glad this worked for you!
Mozilla is a political organization. No thanks.

I’ll stick to safari, chrome, and brave. I’ll drop chrome if it ever removes v2 extensions.
Before the Collapse: A Guide to the Other Side of Growth [pdf]
> Have you ever held a senior role in finance or banking? If you’re going to go ad hominem, don’t bring a rubber duck to a battleship.

Why aren't you answering the point? Is it that hard to substantiate your claims that a 60 year amortization + 15 year construction = 75 years is reasonable.

> Data sorely lacking. (Outside hydro.)

You mean like the data available on economic nuclear energy? :)

> Oof, no, it’s not. Seriously, you can derive this and it’s elementary finance. Also, like, the marshmallow test.

Do you see the year in the investment time ending up in the exponent? Of course in reality you expect the money to trickle in over time reducing the risk a bit.

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/03/082703.asp#toc-calc...
I think this is one of those weird cases where they have to tell you the opposite of what they actually want, for legal reasons.

I think VELCRO(r) actually DOES want everybody to use their name the way it is commonly used - it's good for brand recognition.

But legally, retaining control of their brand requires them to clearly defend it from such generic use. This post is an example of that. If someone is using their brand in a way they don't want (like on a product not made by them), they can win a trademark case in court by pointing to posts like this.
Nope, this is including two accidents.

And Concorde was retired because they could no longer operate it, for example no spare parts.
Recommend doing this on mobile as well, if you are an android user. You get adblock and a URL bar near your keyboard.

The price is that occasionally there are sites (approximately 2% in my anecdotal experience) that you'll have to use chrome for.