This is what happens whenthere is no headphone port people are selfish pricks

FTFY

My interpretation of the post was less about the quality of phone speakers and more about disturbing the peace of public spaces

It is also a very large data set it has to go through the average English speaker knows 40kish words and it has to pull from a large data set and attempt to predict what’s the most likely word to come next and do that a hundred or so times per response. Then most people want the result in a very short period of time and with very high accuracy (smaller tolerances on the convergence and divergence criteria) so sure there is some hardware optimization that can be done but it will always be at least somewhat taxing.

It covers shared experiences decently well. Like obviously there is overlap but in the U.S. as a whole most millennials were kids who have a memory of a pre 9/11 world. Most zoomers grew up with WiFi being common in their houses. Most Gen Xers have memories of being a child near the end of the Cold War and were in the work force before Internet was common. Most boomers either served in the Vietnam war or have a memory of someone close to them going off to fight in an unpopular war.

A lot of those experiences have lasting effects in how those generations behave. It doesn’t mean everyone is the same but instead that you can follow trends that are more true for each generation

Then there is also the advantage of tracking a groups shared experiences like for example many millennials were relatively unaffected by the dotcom bubble but for the 2008 recession they were hit much harder

It’s both, weight starts to become a bigger deal when you factor in that you have to keep it in the air for thousands of km. If airlines could charge people by weight they would in a heartbeat

People do end up living out of the capsule hotels, it’s not common but it’s a step above being homeless

I usually flash my high beams first as a more gentle “look up” and then do the horn if they don’t notice that one

Except there is also inflation that in the U.S. for the past 75 years has been 3.8% so the cost of $66 per MWh would be the equivalent purchasing power cost of about $4.85 by the end of the plant life. The long lifecycle is good for environmental purposes as well as you don’t need to do constant construction and constantly dispose of rare earth metals and concrete

You would need all the companies to work together which is unlikely since they are all individually financially motivated. Then public companies also need to report their revenue and profits and if a bunch of companies started showing losses people would take money out of the stock market causing a recession

China has been doing them in around 7 years from groundbreaking to grid connection and is trying to get that down to 5 years with their bailong power plant as they are developing an experienced work force and actually have experience making the parts

According to the link you listed an AP1000 costs $66/MWh where as from the ember report that’s linked in this article solar plus storage for 97% uptime cost $104/MWh in a sunny city. In Washington DC it would cost $124 and only be able to maintain 81%. I still stand by even with the higher cost that solar + storage is a better option in places like Arizona, Nevada, Southern California ,etc. but nuclear is not as much of the high cost boogeyman as you are making it out to be

https://ember-energy.org/latest-insights/solar-electricity-every-hour-of-every-day-is-here-and-it-changes-everything/

Next two? After you mentioned it I tried googling and can’t find anything about current projections for new AP1000s at vogtle.

Yes, what I am saying is that cost is being shown for nuclear and not shown for solar due to using an intentionally small window of time. It’s like comparing an ICE to an EV and talking about the refueling costs of gas and treating electricity like it’s free.

Batteries and panels degrade over time. So if you are trying to maintain a specific amount of power you would need to keep investing in order to maintain the same amount of power generation

They had to switch halfway through which is what added the cost that’s not a realistic cost per reactor

Vogtle’s numbers are incredibly biased considering they made an entire design and then had to redo it halfway through that’s not a realistic cost that can be expected for future projects. We also have vogtles design be approved now so that new plants can be built for a fraction of the cost. Also where did you see they did amortization of solar?

My understanding of that graph is how do you flatten peak energy demands, Birmingham is flat and throughout the year because you have some parts of the year where you need very little battery capacity and other parts where you need a lot. Las Vegas basically always needs a lot because of how hot it gets they end up with huge amounts of peak energy usage

That is the main criticism of nuclear, it should hopefully get better with Westinghouse’s AP1000 receiving full approval and being built all across China so as long as we continue to use the same design it can start to be mass produced instead of making all the parts as one offs that are much more expensive and time consuming

We call it AI now but machine learning algorithms have been around for 70 years now and basically run the world

As others have said this is for Las Vegas which receives wayyy more sun than the average place. But the other misleading part is they looked at 20 years which is close to the life cycle for solar/batteries and not even half the life of nuclear