Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Major breakthrough on nuclear fusion energy

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 827 posts

Re: Major breakthrough on nuclear fusion energy

#451

Post by ambrozk »

whatshisface wrote: post #387
ambrozk wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The guy's work has directly prevented the deaths of enormous numbers of poor people worldwide. That trumps everything else in my book. Also, don't fall for his wife's PR team. You have no idea why she's divorcing him. Claiming that the issue was Epstein is what any smart legal / publicity team would do in this circumstance.

> Claiming that the issue was Epstein is what any smart legal / publicity team would do in this circumstance. If a PR team was going to pick a fake reason to hide a blasé real reason, why would they pick the biggest scandal possible? I thought rich people tried to keep their personal lives out of the news. Saying that they had drifted apart naturally while the real reason was Epstein is something like what a PR couns…

Melinda Gates is trying to get the best possible settlement from her divorce. The Epstein issue is obvious leverage. Melinda loses nothing by Bill being embarassed in public, and she gains a lot at the negotiating table.

Re: Major breakthrough on nuclear fusion energy

#452

Post by xdennis »

jedberg wrote: post #417
jjoonathan wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did the British go with 240V because it makes tea faster? I don't know the history... but I want to believe.

I think you mean 230V, but it was picked because it's more efficient and cheaper (you can use smaller wires for the same output).

The UK used to be 240V and many countries in Europe were 220V. The compromise was for everybody to use 230V

But what I've heard is that the voltages staid the same, but 240V is still within spec of 230V with tolerances.

Re: Major breakthrough on nuclear fusion energy

#453

Post by emteycz »

civilized wrote: post #426
throwaway5752 wrote: post #399

As the article itself states: In the words of my colleague Jon Amos: "Fusion is not a solution to get us to 2050 net zero. This is a solution to power society in the second half of this century."

2050 is coming sooner than any of us can imagine. I'm glad there are people looking out on that horizon!

Yeah!

But we need to go nuclear [fission] in the mean time... I can't imagine any other way that wouldn't devastate the environment excessively at the same time (e.g. river dams are bad IMHO).

Re: Major breakthrough on nuclear fusion energy

#454

Post by WhompingWindows »

louwrentius wrote: post #418
throwaway5752 wrote: post #399

As the article itself states: In the words of my colleague Jon Amos: "Fusion is not a solution to get us to 2050 net zero. This is a solution to power society in the second half of this century."

Sorry for being like this but what I like most about that remark is the joyful optimism that there will be a society to power in the first place, and secondly one that can (still) build and operate such technology. Edit: maybe I’m needlessly pessimistic but I feel societies are much more fragile than they seem. We had it unreasonably good in ‘the west’ for the last 77 years but that time span is so short in the grand…

It seems highly improbable we won't have society in 2050. We're currently in 2022, we've existed alongside nuclear weaponry for 75 years, I doubt the next 28 will see annihilation but I do dread the small chance (maybe 5-10%)?

So other than nuclear apocalypse, I fail to see what could remove society by 2050? Climate Change's worst effects will not be seen by 2050, they'll be very bad but they won't destroy society in all places, just hamper its economy and lower societal living standards.

Re: Major breakthrough on nuclear fusion energy

#455

Post by ambrozk »

worik wrote: post #421
ambrozk wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? He dedicates huge amounts of money to worldwide public health, and is giving away the vast majority of his fortune over the course of his life. Why shouldn't I hold such a person in high regard?

> Why? He dedicates huge amounts of money to worldwide public health, and is giving away the vast majority of his fortune over the course of his life. Why shouldn't I hold such a person in high regard? We are talking about Bill Gates who because he was better at red in tooth and claw business than technology he held computing back by at least a decade. In 1995 I was using stable 32-bit personal computer software comp…

Okay. Hold your grudge from the 90s. No one can stop you. It's pretty weird not to care about his enormous efforts in philanthropy, though.

Re: Major breakthrough on nuclear fusion energy

#456

Post by dang »

soperj wrote: post #265

Quoted post unavailable.

"Eschew flamebait. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30272413.

(No, we're not trying to defend lizard people, great resets, population control, 5G, or whatever else comes up in this context. We're just trying to have an internet forum that doesn't suck. Repeating the same flamewar topics over and over again sucks, and this one is especially completely off topic in this thread.)

Re: Major breakthrough on nuclear fusion energy

#457

Post by soperj »

steve_adams_86 wrote: post #335
soperj wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry, but if the Queen can disavow her own kid for his affiliation with Jeffery Epstein, and Bill's wife can do the same, we can disavow Bill Gates. Just because he has money doesn't mean a damn thing w/r to whether we have to hold him to any regard. He's proven over decades to not be a good person. There's a reason Paul Allen ended his relationship with Bill Gates.

I didn't know about Paul Allen, but after searching it seems the top result is about how they managed to regain some friendship: https://www.geekwire.com/2019/bill-gates-patched-things-paul... I know very little about Gates but can only find information indicating Epstein wanted to do business with him under the guise of it being a great benefit to charity, which in the end turned out to be a ruse of some sort. Perha…

When Paul Allen found out his cancer was terminal, Bill phoned him a number of times and Paul refused to take those calls. So much for friendship.

Do you actually believe Melinda Gates divorced him because he wanted to do business with Jeffrey Epstein in a philanthropic fashion?

Re: Major breakthrough on nuclear fusion energy

#458

Post by TrevorJ »

Can someone explain something about fusion for me? To make a fusion reactor that's useful you have to solve two problems: First you have to build a working fusion reactor. Second, you have to capture that energy to do useful work.

Given that, wouldn't it make more sense to focus on technology to capture energy from the giant, already working fusion reactor in the sky?

Re: Major breakthrough on nuclear fusion energy

#459

Post by soperj »

bostonsre wrote: post #373
soperj wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry, but if the Queen can disavow her own kid for his affiliation with Jeffery Epstein, and Bill's wife can do the same, we can disavow Bill Gates. Just because he has money doesn't mean a damn thing w/r to whether we have to hold him to any regard. He's proven over decades to not be a good person. There's a reason Paul Allen ended his relationship with Bill Gates.

So are you suggesting he be completely shunned from society? Why not let him try to atone for his sins and try to do good in the world by giving away a large portion of his wealth to noble causes?

I'm suggesting not to hold him or his money in high regard. He's not worth mentioning.
Post reply on HN