3 ms·
This is exactly the reason why we need lots of Billionaires. Sure, Fusion may be risky for Bankers. It won't be for Billionaires or even ultra-rich eccentric B
by deltree7 4y ago
This is exactly the reason why we need lots of Billionaires.
Sure, Fusion may be risky for Bankers. It won't be for Billionaires or even ultra-rich eccentric Billionaires.
Billionaires can also take lots of risk with their capital.
Once again the Author dismisses human ingenuity and singular obsession of people to make things happen.
Money is the worst reason. You can always print Money (We printed $10 Trillion of them). What Next? Is there anything fundamentally expensive about the raw materials used? If not, you can reduce the cost to it's commodity prices. The commodity prices itself will collapse to ~$0 if energy and labor is ~$0. Finally you need labor. With ChatGPT and Robots, labor is also ~$0
So, never is absolutely the wrong choice of word
- dale_glass 4y agoThat's silly. Say, Musk is worth 169 billion. UK's Hinkley Point C is somewhere around 25 billion. Now, maybe that particular plant is a special problem child, but I wouldn't expect to have a new, untested yet technology built for cheaper than a troublesome nuclear one. So Musk can build a total of 6 of those, probably a good deal less because that's just theoretical wealth -- he'd have to sell everything he owns, and wouldn't get the full price for that. To build more he'd need more money. To get money, those plants need to make a profit, and pay off their loans. At that construction price it's virtually certain they never will. So the attempt would probably die at that -- at most 6 plants, producing power at a price nobody wants to pay. They either idle since nobody's buying, or sell at a huge loss until money runs out.
- deltree7 4y agoIf you have a 10,000 Billionaires, you wouldn't run into this problem