3 ms·

The article is full of surface-level thinking. Probably read a propaganda book and is still buzzing with the anecdote-based arguments and "why can't we just pl

The article is full of surface-level thinking. Probably read a propaganda book and is still buzzing with the anecdote-based arguments and "why can't we just play around with cool reactors??" rethorics. Afaik reactors are only really built with national backing due to risk and externalized costs of decommissioning and long term waste disposal. We stopped dumping nuclear waste into the coastal ocean and now it became a lot more expensive. We can't even deal with fricking plastic in the ocean and phtalates in drinking water, I have real trouble taking someone seriously who swats away any sort of concern, wishing back thr good old 60s way of doing things. "Cool" anecdotes about strict regulation seeming rediculous, superficially mind you. I really struggle with the nuclear propaganda as of late, especially with this anti-renewable stance mixed in. Meh, even if I like the technology from a nerd-perspective, fuck nuclear power. We can't even get mainstream software buffer-overflow free. The techno-progress enthusiasm of our grandparents era has long lost it's shine.

zosima 6y ago
Of course we can write code that is buffer overflow free and safe and secure in every other manner too. We just can't do it when prioritizing new features, writing to a spec defined by committee and having limited resources, with thousands of competing interests. For a nuclear power plant where focus is on safety first and the code in the critical paths would be limited and the spec defined then and there for verifiability, the system could probably even be proven correct.
dan-robertson 6y ago
How does this explain why new reactors in the US are incredibly expensive while they have not experienced such massive inflation in South Korea? Are you supposing that South Korea is dumping nuclear waste into the ocean or building unsafe reactors or not pricing in some massive externality (into the planning and construction costs) or something else?
emteycz 6y ago
Your stance seems contradictory to me. We are unable to manage comparatively very compact nuclear power facilities, so we will litter the world with solar, hydro and wind generators, all of which are required in incomparably large quantity? It seems like nuclear power would make the risk more centralized and predictable.

zosima 6y ago

Of course we can write code that is buffer overflow free and safe and secure in every other manner too. We just can't do it when prioritizing new features, writing to a spec defined by committee and having limited resources, with thousands of competing interests. For a nuclear power plant where focus is on safety first and the code in the critical paths would be limited and the spec defined then and there for verifiability, the system could probably even be proven correct.

dan-robertson 6y ago

How does this explain why new reactors in the US are incredibly expensive while they have not experienced such massive inflation in South Korea? Are you supposing that South Korea is dumping nuclear waste into the ocean or building unsafe reactors or not pricing in some massive externality (into the planning and construction costs) or something else?

emteycz 6y ago

Your stance seems contradictory to me. We are unable to manage comparatively very compact nuclear power facilities, so we will litter the world with solar, hydro and wind generators, all of which are required in incomparably large quantity? It seems like nuclear power would make the risk more centralized and predictable.