I have a hard time buying into this.

What's the lifespan of an solar farm with equal output to a nuclear plant? We're about to approve nukes for 80 year life spans.

Nuclear has super low operating cost and a long lifespan. The only real economic downside is how flipping expense they are to build and a major reason for that is we don't have much experience building them (because they've lasted so many decades).

You're also assuming that solar/wind will be faster when we don't have any real solutions for using those sources as a baseload. Storage and distribution is nowhere near being able to handle such demand. The cost of revamping our grid once those technologies do reach maturity is going to be staggering aswell.

Solar and wind are promising but they are still a __long__ way from being proven enough to gamble an entire energy plan on.

Are you arguing that a solar/wind grid can't be done, or just that it's going to be challenging?

It seems to me like he argues that scaling nuclear is mostly known (but expensive) problem.

And that scaling renewables is largely unexplored, and very likely similarly expensive problem.

WSL and now Tex. Some real embracing happening as of late.

The MacBook Air being ridiculously noncompetitive and the recent hike in price for the MacBook and the MacBook Pro totally changed the college laptop market.

For the last 10 years+ almost everyone in CS had a Mac from the start or bought one along the way. I'm starting to think this trend will end due to the price hike.

That means that a bunch of new students will use WSL instead of doing their Linux based homework using MacOS *NIX utilities. Adding native LaTeX support in word further makes the platform very attractive for that kind of demographic.

When looking at SV, I see most startups and devs working with Macs. This makes sense as it was probably on Macs that the earliest version of their product was developed. Often the Mac version is the first class version of the app and the windows port often an afterthought. Just look at Node.js that was originally a Mac/Linux exclusive. I think Microsoft want to change that.

>p[A/S] <= p[B/S]

This doesn't follow. Just because mental disorders are correlated with sugar doesn't mean that most sugar eaters have mental disorders.

Seems like a pretty worthless study that indicates almost nothing. Lazy journalists, who are honestly worse than worthless, pick these lame correlation studies up and propegate weird misconceptions about increasing "risk factors". It's intellectually dishonest to even call the correlation increased "risk" when the cause of the link cannot be feasibly confirmed.

The sane assumption from this study is that depression or addiction prone people are more likely to look for satisfaction in glutany. Unfortunately that doesn't generate as much fear/ad rev.

I think you worded it a bit strongly, but I tend to agree with you.

Science: Aspartame consumption is correlated with weight gain.

Journalists: Does aspartame cause weight gain?

Readers: Aspartame causes weight gain.

I know it's up to the readers to draw the correct conclusions, but it feels a little bit dishonest for journalists to "let the cards fall where they may" so to speak.

You're right my comment was a bit brusque. By "worse than worthless" I meant actively detrimental to the public's knowledge.

Personaly I'm just getting a bit tired of sloppy journalism causing me to waste time with these bait pieces. IMO journalists are the ones who are supposed to be wading through the crap to find me the valuable information instead of shoveling the crap onto me.