3 ms·
> and can be weaponized by terrorists or an invading army. These risks seem vastly overstated for a large fraction of the world. That such events happen occasi
by the8472 3y ago
> and can be weaponized by terrorists or an invading army.
These risks seem vastly overstated for a large fraction of the world. That such events happen occasionally does not mean the entire world needs to be on a war footing all the time. That would be incredibly wasteful.
> it's vulnerable to water/cooling issues
Yeah that seems more like an issue but may be solvable by using sea water for cooling?
- r00fus 3y ago> These risks seem vastly overstated for a large fraction of the world. That such events happen occasionally does not mean the entire world needs to be on a war footing all the time. That would be incredibly wasteful. That’s part of the problem. It’s an asymmetric risk/cost issue. The attackers only need to get it right once, you need to defend your installation constantly. Security for nuclear power stations already increase the upkeep cost considerably.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]