I agree that nuclear is an option that ought to be considered as part of the mix.

I’m not convinced that it’s right for Australia given our unique circumstances.

I disagree on cost. We’ve never built nuclear. We not only need a reactor, buy need to buy all the relevant skills and build all the supports to create an industry. I genuinely believe that the cost per kWh would be far greater than our other options.

The many hundreds of billions is better put to renewables, storage, and hydrogen cracking.

There are some next gen reactors being built in different places. Smaller output, less waste, salt cooled. We should let others bear the cost of development and see how it pans out.

building nuclear power plants isn’t just like putting a leg of lamb in the oven though.

it would take a gargantuan investment of money, skills, labour, et cetera. All of which ought to be directed to building out renewable facilities.

Honestly this sounds great.

China has been getting a bit creepy with their Lithium mine acquisitions. It would be nice to be less dependent on them.

Although you’re probably aware, there are geo political implications as well.

Over the last decade China has taken control of the Lithium industry.

Anything we can do to avoid being forced to buy their stuff, honestly.

I’m having a bad day.

Can someone reassure me that idiots using copilot aren’t suddenly going to become more effective and productive than me?

Did you not bother to read the 3rd and 4th sentence of my comment?

The question is open ended. It’s subjective, dependent on the definition of “die”. It’s not answerable with merely yes or no.

Dude. The 4th sentence of the page you linked says it doesn’t apply to this type of open ended question.

The only possible answer to this (admittedly silly) headline is, “it depends what you mean by die”. An answer yes or no could easily be rebutted.

I have an e-ink notebook. The low refresh rate is intolerable for doing anything like menus or text input.

I like the idea of a minimal phone but I think e-ink is a deal breaker for me, and I suspect most others.

this is pure speculation.

Of course it is.

That said, do you think it’s unrealistic to suppose that marketing might improve revenue? I do not.

Firstly, that’s not a scaling problem, you’re talking about poor uptake.

Secondly, the reason so few users donate to open source projects is because these projects are so poorly marketed to potential supporters. That’s why a sophisticated organisation like Mozilla is so well placed to sell the stories behind some of these projects.

Thirdly, the percentage of users that click on ads and shopping is also very low. Particularly amongst more technical users.

Fourthly, this plan would actually drive users to Firefox. If Firefox is promoting donations for say, LibreOffice, then they would naturally have an interest in promoting Firefox.

With the advent of enshittification, free-as-in-beer tech is dead. I think people are realising that things need to be paid for. It’s very defeatist to just say “no one contributes to open source”. Why not try to find the format within which people might contribute?

Why wouldn’t it scale?

Become a donation gateway for other opens ourselves projects.

Tell me about some cool opensource project on my new tab page, optional 1 click donation. Skim a few percent.

This way everyone else will promote firefox.

Microplastics are tiny pieces of plastic debris measuring less than 0.2 inches (5 millimeters) long,

That can’t be right. There sure ain’t 5mm pieces of plastic in my drinking water. 0.05mm would be hard to believe.

They say filter out the calcium

I assumed that when you said “it’s just an API” you were saying you’re paying $60m for an API as opposed to scraping for free.

Is all what information in the training contract?

No, it’s really not.

Firstly, while the data may be public, it’s not “free”. Scraping reddit and using it to train an AI would likely contravene their terms of use, you’d end up facing similar copyright issues that the current generation of bots has.

Secondly, scraped data would be incomplete, you wouldn’t get anything edited or “deleted”, which would surely be available if you paid them. The edits and deletes would be very valuable for AI training.

Thirdly, you would get the meta that reddit has. Geolocation, user agent, alt accounts, browsing habits, et cetera.

Fourthly, you wouldn’t get exclusivity. Locking out a competitor is worth something.

Maybe, but with people are saying reddit’s main value proposition is access to AI training data, and that reddit is worth n billion dollars, $60m seems like a pittance.

$60m doesn’t seem like that much in an era where twitter could (have been) sold for $40b.