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

Microsoft Bets That Fusion Power Is Closer Than Many Think

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 86 posts

Re: Microsoft Bets That Fusion Power Is Closer Than Many Think

#31

Post by DennisP »

dotBen wrote: post #14
mensetmanusman wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disruption outside of the government eye is common, I wouldn’t be surprised. Those organizations focus on nuclear weapons tech.

DOE also covers domestic nuclear power generation https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_...

And the NRC regulates civilian nuclear reactors. Recently, the NRC commissioners unanimously decided to regulate fusion reactors like particle accelerators rather than like fission reactors, which is very favorable to rapidly building out fusion reactors once they become available.

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/04/20/nuclear-fusion-will-not-be-r...

Re: Microsoft Bets That Fusion Power Is Closer Than Many Think

#32

Post by darksaints »

sylens wrote: post #19
aaronblohowiak wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are most fusion reactor designs a national security concern? I am not a nuclear physicist but from my rudimentary understanding of most modern approaches I don’t see how they would help with bad stuff (other than creating material for a dirty bomb through waste perhaps)

Energy independence would upend a lot of international trade markets and therefore geopolitical stability in some areas. If you don't need Saudi Arabia for oil, why do you care what happens there?

It is in the interest of global stability that we absolutely decimate Saudi Arabia, as well as Russia. Other oil producing nations suck too, but they mostly suck internally, whereas KSA and Russia are oil-funded international terrorist regimes.

Re: Microsoft Bets That Fusion Power Is Closer Than Many Think

#33

Post by asdfman123 »

avalys wrote: post #5

Given that Helios hasn’t demonstrated production of any amount of energy from fusion, this is probably just bullshit, like the United “order” for supersonic jets from Boom a few months ago. Similarly, Boom has not even flown a prototype yet.

Helion gets to survive 5 more years, Microsoft risks nothing, they both get good PR for associating themselves with one another.

Re: Microsoft Bets That Fusion Power Is Closer Than Many Think

#34

Post by asdfman123 »

emaginniss wrote: post #20
avalys wrote: post #5

Given that Helios hasn’t demonstrated production of any amount of energy from fusion, this is probably just bullshit, like the United “order” for supersonic jets from Boom a few months ago. Similarly, Boom has not even flown a prototype yet.

I'm not sure why you're so negative on a business model that has worked for tech startups for decades now. Many businesses have started by promising to fix a problem experienced by a larger entity. Along with product guidance, the startup often gets capital in the form of investment. The larger company gets a low-risk attempt to solve their problem with the possibility of upside in the case of a larger than expected…

Putting gas into my car is a good idea, but putting gas into my dog isn’t quite so reasonable.

Re: Microsoft Bets That Fusion Power Is Closer Than Many Think

#35

Post by asdfman123 »

burkaman wrote: post #10

Do they really believe that, or are they just trying to look greener and make their carbon negative commitment look more real? > “We wouldn’t enter into this agreement if we were not optimistic that engineering advances are gaining momentum,” said Microsoft President Brad Smith. Why not? What's the downside for Microsoft, even if they think this probably won't happen by 2028? They even get paid "penalties" if Helion…

> are they just trying to look greener

Absolutely not! They’re also trying to look cutting edge.

Re: Microsoft Bets That Fusion Power Is Closer Than Many Think

#36

Post by lillecarl »

maeln wrote: post #26
deadeye wrote: post #3

Worth watching about Helion: https://youtu.be/_bDXXWQxK38

The response by Improbable Matter is also interesting in its own right https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vUPhsFoniw

Thunderf00t, YouTubes own cynic also made a video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3VGDCa9fZg

We know we can achieve fusion, but as far as I'm informed we still don't know that we can take more energy out than we put in.

Re: Microsoft Bets That Fusion Power Is Closer Than Many Think

#38

Post by nordsieck »

DennisP wrote: post #29
dotBen wrote: post #6

Given the implications of this technology I wonder how much development is actually being done "in the open". And therefore how close to a breakthrough we are, whether a breakthrough has already occured and we are being fed delayed findings, and ultimately how a private organization like Microsoft would truly be able to access matured tech. Whether by incentive or by coercion, it feels like the DOD and the DOE would…

Given climate change, if Helion works then it would be in the interest of the US for it to spread worldwide as quickly as possible. Especially since it uses a mostly-aneutronic reaction.

> Given climate change, if Helion works then it would be in the interest of the US for it to spread worldwide as quickly as possible. Especially since it uses a mostly-aneutronic reaction.

The US may want cheap energy to spread world wide. That doesn't necessarily mean the US wants fusion tech to spread world wide.

Re: Microsoft Bets That Fusion Power Is Closer Than Many Think

#39

Post by throwuwu »

markus_zhang wrote: post #16

If we get fusion power and ai and longevity up in next 10-20 years it's going to be nightmare for ordinary people. Yeah, nightmare, not paradise.

Wide adoption of longevity tech is necessary to prevent population collapse. AI also doesn’t seem like it’s going to stay cooped up for long, there’s a solid chance that open source projects beat OpenAI to the punch as well if scaling is no longer productive beyond this point

Re: Microsoft Bets That Fusion Power Is Closer Than Many Think

#40

Post by markus_zhang »

partiallypro wrote: post #28
markus_zhang wrote: post #16

If we get fusion power and ai and longevity up in next 10-20 years it's going to be nightmare for ordinary people. Yeah, nightmare, not paradise.

I don't see the fusion argument, but I can see the AI argument at least temporarily making lives worse. What is the argument that fusion power would? It would definitely destabilize countries like Saudi Arabia, but otherwise seems like a win. Even still you have to have petroleum products for most anything and everything.

In my model I don't segment people by countries. I segment them by classes -- peasants and aristocrats. So actually, I wouldn't worry about Saudian aristocrats because I'm sure they will prosper as long as they plan accordingly.
Post reply on HN