YouTube already does that, though? In fact your premium sub helps creators much more than a non-premium viewer does. Of course the multiplier proposition would be new/different.
Not trying to shill for YouTube but that’s one of the main reasons I have a subscription is to support creators I like.
Factor 1: Not quite accurate. Yes there are categories of waste; the names change depending on the regulator. The lower level wastes are already disposed of in the US (there are already four such facilities). The politically charged problem is always the spent nuclear fuel itself.
Factor 2: Senator Reed (D-NV) was a former Senate majority leader. He extracted the defending of Yucca Mountain from the Obama administration as a concession to pass Obamacare. It’s still technically viable and not disposing of waste costs enormous amounts of money. The federal government is legally obligated to take spent fuel off the hands of operators. Obviously they have not, so the government is sued (and loses). This has cost the government roughly $20b for their inaction see here..
Factor 3: You can recycle spent fuel but there’s no concept as spent fuel with zero radioactivity.
Two largest problems in the US: Inability to manage waste and inability to execute on large scale construction required for nuclear.
I’m not really convinced that a GPU backend is needed. Was there ever a comparison of the different CLIP model variants? Or a graph optimized / quantized ONNX version?
I think the proposed solution makes a lot of sense for the task at hand if it were integrated on the pic-rs end, but it would be worth investigating further improvements if it were on the lemmy server end.
Reprocessing already exists and it’s been done for decades. I can’t imagine reprocessing fuel for recycling the usable components is that compelling in the US and it would be more geared to waste reduction. 99% of spent fuel by mass could be reused or otherwise treated differently for disposal as it’s radioactivity is much much smaller than the portion that has been transmuted during power production.
This is really only one facet and not even the main driver in cost. MIT did a study a few years ago looking at this (https://news.mit.edu/2020/reasons-nuclear-overruns-1118). Turns out it’s complicated.
In short, in the US, lacked of skilled labor and large scale project management are big drivers also, not just regulations.
That’s a limitation of the secondary power conversion side and is true for any power generation methodology that relies on steam generation. That said, there’s alternatives to the traditional Rankine cycle that could be deployed without modifying the nuclear side of the plant.
I would agree with this, I use Nvidia cards for professional work on Linux and I’ve never had a problem. Yeah there’s some upfront work configuring the drivers, but I’ve never had it take more than an hour to setup.