4 ms·

> The marginal cost of inference per token is lower than what OpenAI charges you Unlike most Gen AI shops, OpenAI also incurs a heavy cost for traning base mod

> The marginal cost of inference per token is lower than what OpenAI charges you Unlike most Gen AI shops, OpenAI also incurs a heavy cost for traning base models gunning for SoTA, which involves drawing power from a literal nuclear reactor inside data centers.

fransje26 2y ago
> from a literal nuclear reactor inside data centers. No.
- Tostino 2y ago
  Their username is fitting though.
  - ignoramous 2y ago
    Bully. I wrote "inside" to mean that those mini reactors (300MW+) are meant to be used solely for the DCs. (noun: https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english-thesaurus/inside https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english-thesaur... / https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heterosemy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heterosemy) Replace it with nearby if that's makes you feel good about anyone's username.
    - Tostino 2y ago
      You are right, that wasn't a charitable reading of your comment. Should have kept it to myself. Sorry for being rude.
candiddevmike 2y ago
> literal nuclear reactor inside data centers This is fascinating to think about. Wonder what kind of shielding/environmental controls/all other kinds of changes you'd need for this to actually work. Would rack-sized SMR be contained enough not to impact anything? Would datacenter operators/workers need to follow NRC guidance?
- talldayo 2y ago
  I think the simple answer is that it doesn't make sense. Nuclear power plants generate a byproduct that inherently limits the performance of computers; heat. Having either a cooling system, reactor or turbine located inside a datacenter is immediately rendered pointless because you end up managing two competing thermal systems at once. There is no reason to localize a reactor inside a datacenter when you could locate it elsewhere and pipe the generated electricity into it via preexisting high voltage lines.
  - kergonath 2y ago
    > Nuclear power plants generate a byproduct that inherently limits the performance of computers; heat. The reactor does not need to be in the datacenter. It can be a couple hundreds meters away, bog-standard cables would be perfectly able to move the electrons. The cables being 20m or 200m long does not matter much. You’re right though, putting them in the same building as a datacenter still makes no sense.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- kergonath 2y ago
  It makes zero sense to build them in datacenters and I don’t know of any safety authority that would allow deploying reactors without serious protection measures that would at the very least impose a different, dedicated building. At some point it does make sense to have a small reactor powering a local datacenter or two, however. Licensing would still be not trivial.

fransje26 2y ago

> from a literal nuclear reactor inside data centers. No.

Tostino 2y ago
Their username is fitting though.
- ignoramous 2y ago
  Bully. I wrote "inside" to mean that those mini reactors (300MW+) are meant to be used solely for the DCs. (noun: https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english-thesaurus/inside https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english-thesaur... / https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heterosemy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heterosemy) Replace it with nearby if that's makes you feel good about anyone's username.
  - Tostino 2y ago
    You are right, that wasn't a charitable reading of your comment. Should have kept it to myself. Sorry for being rude.

candiddevmike 2y ago

> literal nuclear reactor inside data centers This is fascinating to think about. Wonder what kind of shielding/environmental controls/all other kinds of changes you'd need for this to actually work. Would rack-sized SMR be contained enough not to impact anything? Would datacenter operators/workers need to follow NRC guidance?

talldayo 2y ago
I think the simple answer is that it doesn't make sense. Nuclear power plants generate a byproduct that inherently limits the performance of computers; heat. Having either a cooling system, reactor or turbine located inside a datacenter is immediately rendered pointless because you end up managing two competing thermal systems at once. There is no reason to localize a reactor inside a datacenter when you could locate it elsewhere and pipe the generated electricity into it via preexisting high voltage lines.
- kergonath 2y ago
  > Nuclear power plants generate a byproduct that inherently limits the performance of computers; heat. The reactor does not need to be in the datacenter. It can be a couple hundreds meters away, bog-standard cables would be perfectly able to move the electrons. The cables being 20m or 200m long does not matter much. You’re right though, putting them in the same building as a datacenter still makes no sense.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
kergonath 2y ago
It makes zero sense to build them in datacenters and I don’t know of any safety authority that would allow deploying reactors without serious protection measures that would at the very least impose a different, dedicated building. At some point it does make sense to have a small reactor powering a local datacenter or two, however. Licensing would still be not trivial.