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

What's slowing down the AI buildout

worksinprogress.news

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 237 posts

Re: What's slowing down the AI buildout

#211

Post by michaelmrose »

mixmastamyk wrote: post #210
michaelmrose wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's doable for single family detached housing for users with a modest daily drive and relatively flat usage patterns so long as they can afford to pay a premium on the car and replace it in a timely fashion when the battery gets sufficiently old that its capacity continues to match peaks in usage with the understanding that failure to keep up means you don't get to work on time or can't get home. Which is exactly wh…

Nope, our 1970s apartment garage has 120V outlets and light fixtures, some have been tapped, and the rest could cheaply.

Most apartments especially in cities where most people live are unsuitable for charging of any kind

Re: What's slowing down the AI buildout

#212

Post by kulahan »

alightsoul wrote: post #205
kulahan wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do people create this false narrative that renewables and nuclear somehow aren’t the same thing? Why do people pretend that nuclear is not a solution to our energy needs? Why do they seem addicted to pretending the absolute worst alternatives, like solar and wind, are going to be the solution? The only forms of power generation worth a shit are hydro, geothermal, and nuclear. Geothermal and hydro are geographical…

Why are we convinced base load power is the only option? Plenty of countries are successfully running grid scale energy storage with batteries

Because our battery tech sucks shit. The entire solar industry is predicated on the idea that we will invent a magical battery MANY MANY times better than what currently exists, without being dirtier than everything north of coal.

Come on, I’m begging you to come up with an actual argument rather than one answered millions of times already.

Re: What's slowing down the AI buildout

#213

Post by kulahan »

itsmek wrote: post #203
sensanaty wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think anyone reasonable is saying we should only do nuclear. The actual position is that we need a mix of both nuclear and renewables while ramping down non-renewable sources as fast as possible, because you need both intermittent cheap generation and reliable baseload that doesn't care if the wind stops blowing or clouds roll over the panels. The pricing story remains unconvincing to me. LCOE comparisons mea…

>Why do so many otherwise seemingly rational people pretend that nuclear is the answer to our energy needs? >I don't think anyone reasonable is saying we should only do nuclear. I didn't interpret the other post to imply only nuclear. I interpreted to mean "why do so many people think nuclear is better than battery". My understanding is that LCOS+LCOE for batt+solar is quite close to nuclear cost and will only go dow…

How could you possibly know the cost and pollution levels of batteries not-yet invented? The pollution from a nuclear power plant is one 55-gallon barrel of waste per reactor per year, and ZERO batteries are that clean. Like, what are you even thinking here?

Re: What's slowing down the AI buildout

#214

Post by mixmastamyk »

michaelmrose wrote: post #211
mixmastamyk wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope, our 1970s apartment garage has 120V outlets and light fixtures, some have been tapped, and the rest could cheaply.

Most apartments especially in cities where most people live are unsuitable for charging of any kind

False, just mentioned our apartment.

For the ones that need upgrades, we’re talking extension-cord-level technology.

Re: What's slowing down the AI buildout

#215

Post by fragmede »

Micrococonut wrote: post #153
fragmede wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If someone evil has access to the water supply, is radioactive material the worst they could do? that'll, what, give some people cancer which is really bad but it'll take a while to get them. If people wanted to be shitheads, they could already dump arsenic or LSD into the water supply, or any number of others things. that are already available to them right now! Have you personally tested your taps chlorine or flour…

Except most people don’t have industrial levels of arsenic, LSD, or other highly toxic substances stockpiled in their homes. Nor do they have a way to obtain it without triggering a visit from a swat team. Which is exactly what this comment chain is discussing. The potential for harm when you don’t have to go anywhere but your own basement/a few neighbors to obtain enough enriched uranium to create a superfund site.

I do, however, thanks to Taco Bell, have a lovely fauna of microbes in my toilet that, were they to be introduced to the water supply, would cause problems, and so do you. If someone was looking to fuck up the water supply, access to nuclear material isn't what's stopping them.

Re: What's slowing down the AI buildout

#216

Post by s1artibartfast »

AngryData wrote: post #202
s1artibartfast wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

mostly because the state has made it illegal or costly to build housing. The only reason the state would do better is if they can ignore either costs or their own regulation. e

Part of the problem is also the margins to support the top heavy capital class (and the restrictions and permits also favor the capital class). The same reason auto manufacturers put more effort into making expensive luxury cars instead of cheap commuter cars. Why would someone build cheap houses that would net them the same profit in 10 years as building luxury houses that would in 5 years? Especially if the people…

If people could build houses, lots of people would build luxury units until there was no profit in it. Then cheap units would be the most profitable option TO build.

If you only get allowed to build 1 house, of course you will target the best demographic.

You cant lower prices without flooding the market with competing goods.

Re: What's slowing down the AI buildout

#217

Post by michaelmrose »

mixmastamyk wrote: post #214
michaelmrose wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most apartments especially in cities where most people live are unsuitable for charging of any kind

False, just mentioned our apartment. For the ones that need upgrades, we’re talking extension-cord-level technology.

Suburbia has sprawling lots where nobody is near a receptacle and cities have concrete pads which aren't wired save for lighting. In the minority of cases in which there are any outlets at all nearby any assigned parking spot they are locked to prevent homeless camping their charging their stuff.

When any spots exist the electrical system would never tolerate more than a few people plugging in at once.

For instance if you picked 3 50 unit complexes you would would find that 3 cars were situated to charge out of the 200 to 300 owned.

At present like 2% of cars owned not sold are electric to get to a much higher penetration that is desirable we need better charging.

You don't live in a statistically valid sample of homes our current attachment only works now because 49 out of 50 cars run on gas.

Re: What's slowing down the AI buildout

#219

Post by _aavaa_ »

kulahan wrote: post #213
itsmek wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Why do so many otherwise seemingly rational people pretend that nuclear is the answer to our energy needs? >I don't think anyone reasonable is saying we should only do nuclear. I didn't interpret the other post to imply only nuclear. I interpreted to mean "why do so many people think nuclear is better than battery". My understanding is that LCOS+LCOE for batt+solar is quite close to nuclear cost and will only go dow…

How could you possibly know the cost and pollution levels of batteries not-yet invented? The pollution from a nuclear power plant is one 55-gallon barrel of waste per reactor per year, and ZERO batteries are that clean. Like, what are you even thinking here?

This ignores the pollution to make that fuel and the pollution to build the plan (both of which you are already counting on the battery side). Plus the pollution of all the backup generators that they require and must test regularly.

Re: What's slowing down the AI buildout

#220

Post by _aavaa_ »

sensanaty wrote: post #185
fnordian_slip wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do so many otherwise seemingly rational people pretend that nuclear is the answer to our energy needs? It doesn't make sense economically, it's just wishful thinking. The only cheap nuclear energy is from plants that have already been built, because it won't help if we tear them down. But as soon as you factor in the costs of building, insurance and storage of materials, it's always more expensive than renewables…

I don't think anyone reasonable is saying we should only do nuclear. The actual position is that we need a mix of both nuclear and renewables while ramping down non-renewable sources as fast as possible, because you need both intermittent cheap generation and reliable baseload that doesn't care if the wind stops blowing or clouds roll over the panels. The pricing story remains unconvincing to me. LCOE comparisons mea…

To say that paid off nuclear is profitable without subsidies and then mention France is deeply funny.

Putting aside the actual subsidies, there’s the uncomfortable truth that nuclear operators are not on the hook for long tail risks and costs. The government (read us, the taxpayers) in most countries will foot the bill for decomisioning if the company goes under, and it will foot the bill for accidents.

To talk about them not getting subsidies once they are paid off is to ignore the fact that no reactor would ever get built without the government providing them a guaranteed backstop.

Post reply on HN