this post was submitted on 30 Oct 2025
275 points (97.6% liked)

Not The Onion

18491 readers
1204 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://sh.itjust.works/post/48838029

Today, in things I'd read on a fading screen in a half destroyed building in a Fallout game...

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Chainweasel@lemmy.world 23 points 1 day ago (2 children)

ChatGPT is going to nuke my house for repeatedly asking it if there's a seahorse emoji.

In all seriousness though, I assume it's for nuclear power to satisfy the exponentially growing need for electricity, but if we're going to be building reactors they should be powering the grid and reducing our dependency on fossil fuels, not privately owned reactors for corporations.

[–] resipsaloquitur@lemmy.world 18 points 1 day ago (2 children)

You don’t need weapons-grade material for power.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Now I'm wondering if plants that are designed to run enriched uranium will have to be totally rejiggered or it's a relatively simple change.

[–] scathliath@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

It might require a great deal of rejiggering because the fission output of the materials are not one to one. Kinda the whole point of weapons grade, you can't achieve a neutron cascade for efficiency in a weapon if you don't already have a kinda unstable "rock". Granted some reactors are designed to work better with a doped mix already.

[–] ameancow@lemmy.world -2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I don't even have to read the article to know it's going to be absolutely overflowing with misinformation and exaggeration and outright lies for clicks.

Nobody knows how nuclear power or fission works, people broadly cannot fathom any of it, but it sure sells a headline.

[–] viking@infosec.pub 1 points 23 hours ago

It's actually quite well written and not as clickbaity as one might think.

[–] ameancow@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Maybe it's a start?

I know our future is probably going to be a war and famine torn hellscape of human suffering no matter what happens, but it's possible in the medium-term future this will be a good thing.

I mean, there's nothing we can do to stop this wacky combination of tech oligarchs without a shred of human sanity and a government run by toddlers and podcasters, but AT LEAST this may lead to the normalization of nuclear power.

I thought growing up on PBS that people everywhere would be embracing nuclear power by now, but it turns out that I might be part of the 0.00001% of the population who have even a trace of knowledge how it works, and people are largely still terrified of nuclear power plants. Fukushima didn't help with that.

Another way of looking at it, Sammy is gonna make absolutely sure that ChatGTP only spouts positive propaganda about nuclear power, which while he's doing it for his personal gain, if it makes people embrace it more, it will actually help us all.

Alternatively, just dirty bombs for the next century.