Once these get advanced enough and the human cost of starting a conflict goes to zero (because they most likely will be able to scale these to whatever kind of conflict is wanted) why wouldn't countries be more likely to start a war.
Or if most regular military battles only become an economic problem then why wouldn't an enemy turn towards more terrorist like attacks like happened in Russia with ISIS.
In a potential future conflict, high-value GPS satellites risk being hit or interfered with. If this happens, the loss of GPS could have severe consequences for communication, navigation, and banking systems in the United States.
The worry isn't that HFT stops working. It's that it causes a failure state that brings down the legitimate parts of the financial sector.
Like how we're not worried about AI pilots malfunctioning and being grounded, the same way we'd worry about AI pilots malfunctioning and bombing humans.
I worked in a place where the machine room had a network time device that connected to an attena getting gps reading to give time to all the other hosts. Im pretty sure any ntp server a host has configured is only a hop or two away from a device like this.
This footage also showed how the latest iteration of Phoenix was trained using teleoperation by a human “trainer.” Using this data, the robot’s Carbon AI software could learn and replicate the process independently.
I wish they went into more detail on the training process. Can it learn just by watching, or do some action still need to be coded manually?
Thanks, now we've established you have no argument apart from a straw man and the realization that most people are wrong about the need for new nuclear. You can run along now.
The argument is one of efficiency and load distribution. Base load power plants are capable of greater efficiency than variable ones. This is down to optimisations made around specific output levels and the infrastructure required to support said loads. For example if you know the characteristics of your power output and that of the grid you can build a transformer or switch mode power supply to bridge that specific gap. This outperforms variable input transformers in every case.
There is an argument that low efficiency doesn't matter if the source is renewable, but this fails to take into consideration the embodied energy cost of producing renewable generators, not to mention the increased cost. An inefficient system may not produce enough energy over the course of its lifetime compared to the energy it cost to make.
Finally, most sources of renewables are intermittent and are not necessarily related to the population's power consumption. This makes the storing of energy necessary in order to regulate supply. Storage of energy is a large source of inefficiency and one of the key areas that is being focused on. Base load plant is absolutely necessary to minimise this inefficiency as much as possible.
Maybe I missed some points by skimming, but the arguments made in that article are that:
1 Australian researcher agrees with his stance
a region had 22% of its power produced by wind at one point
I guess the claim "it can be argued" is technically proven true, but the majority opinion I keep hearing from the electrical grid engineers in the news is the opposite
And, well, sometimes it just simply is night, and sometimes the wind doesn't blow. We don't have the battery tech to run from storage alone
But, honestly why wouldn't we use nuclear? It's the one power source we have without any real downsides untill ITER finally brings positive results
And, well, sometimes it just simply is night, and sometimes the wind doesn’t blow.
Do you really think this isn't already taken into account?
We don’t have the battery tech to run from storage alone
Nobody is making that argument, as far as I'm aware. There are plenty of ways of storing energy, e.g. pumped hydro, that would work in conjunction with battery storage.
But, honestly why wouldn’t we use nuclear?
The obvious one. It's wildly expensive when compared to renewables, and that's before the usual nuclear build issues of cost and schedule overruns.
I hate to be pedantic, but the things in the picture are windmills... you know giant whirly things that are powered by wind... kind of very different from things that lie around and absorb sunlight.
interestingengineering.com
Hot