this post was submitted on 25 Dec 2025

127 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

4939 readers

1090 users here now

Which posts fit here?

Anything that is at least tangentially connected to the technology, social media platforms, informational technologies and tech policy.

Post guidelines

[Opinion] prefix

Opinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title.

Rules

1. English only

Title and associated content has to be in English.

2. Use original link

Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.

3. Respectful communication

All communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.

4. Inclusivity

Everyone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.

5. Ad hominem attacks

Any kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.

6. Off-topic tangents

Stay on topic. Keep it relevant.

7. Instance rules may apply

If something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.

Companion communities

!globalnews@lemmy.zip
!interestingshare@lemmy.zip

Icon attribution | Banner attribution

If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @brikox@lemmy.zip.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

BrikoX@lemmy.zip

127

AI data centers may soon be powered by retired US Navy nuclear reactors from aircraft carriers and submarines (www.tomshardware.com)

submitted 1 day ago by BrikoX@lemmy.zip to c/technology@lemmy.zip

35 comments fedilink hide all child comments

This is a much cheaper and faster way to get nuclear power.

top 35 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Zer0_F0x@lemmy.world 40 points 1 day ago (1 children)

So I got a job at this company back in the day that did phone and email customer service for other companies.

I was one of the last people they ever hired. Me and 7 other people were shown to our cubicles that had brand new Dell sff computers and peripherals in their boxes.

We were told the IT guys were off or on sick leave and I offered to try and set the machines up at least to save time. With the help of the others we plugged everything in and then kinda sat there all day doing nothing.

Next day we all show up for work and we see people carrying boxes out of the building. Turns out the owner was neck deep in debt and just dissappeared, people were told they shouldn't be expecting any more paychecks or bother suing.

Basically the manager told everyone to just sort of take whatever they want home and everyone just took their work PC home. Me and 7 other people basically got a free PC for half a day's work, others got shafted though...

All I'm trying to say here is maybe DON'T SELL NUCLEAR AIRCRAFT CARRIER REACTORS to private companies that are 100% going to go tits up soon when yet another tech bubble bursts and those reactors end up being sold on AliExpress?

[–] Eh_I@lemmy.world 5 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

No problem, got my eyes on a Trident missile.

[–] eleitl@lemmy.zip 3 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Make sure to get the PAL code for the nuke, too.

[–] Eh_I@lemmy.world 2 points 12 hours ago

I got an old NES GameGenie around here somewhere we can hack it with. We can hook it up to an AI! No... I can hook it up to an AI. Power over life and death feels like a toy. My toy.

[–] rafoix@lemmy.zip 30 points 1 day ago (3 children)

They should be forced to make their own clean power plants. No clean coal, no natural gas. Only renewable since it is a guarantee that they will leave 100% of the cost of the nuclear disposal to the taxpayers.

[–] punksnotdead@slrpnk.net 1 points 6 hours ago

Nuclear energy is a con
It's just a cover for making their bombs
And it sends people to an early grave
So we want the power of the wind and the waves

Harness the wind
Harness the waves
We don't need this filthy nuclear waste
Solar power - yet another alternative
Think of the boundless energy the sun has to give
Then there's hydro-electricity with turbines and dams
And we can cut our consumption with conservation programmes

Harness the wind
The sun the waves
We don't need this filthy nuclear waste
The civil atomic energy programmes is nothing but an elaborate cover-up for the real use of nuclear power namely the production of fissile materials for nuclear weapons
We call for an end to the nuclear power programmes and properly funded research into renewable sources of energy

Harness the wind
The sun the waves
We don't need this filthy nuclear waste

https://youtu.be/DjF6g51GHng

[+] halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world -11 points 1 day ago (3 children)

they will leave 100% of the cost of the nuclear disposal to the taxpayers.

As opposed to the military handling disposal of the reactor materials... which is paid by... the taxpayers.

You didn't think this comment through every much, or at all really, did you?

[–] rafoix@lemmy.zip 9 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

I trust the military doing it to spec a million times more than any company executives. It’ll probably be left to pollute the area they hide it for decades before taxpayers have to pay for it.

[–] teft@piefed.social 1 points 15 hours ago

The military probably will do better than a private company but also remember that the military has had numerous toxic waste problems. Camp Lejeune’s cancers and all the firefighting PFAs contaminating water supplies are just two i can think of off the top of my head but i’m sure theres many more.

[–] BussyCat@lemmy.world 3 points 22 hours ago

The DOE doing it is already financially accounted for and there is a professional staff that are trained on how to do it

[–] punksnotdead@slrpnk.net 1 points 6 hours ago

I think this song epitomises what rafoix replied with

Safety rules - corners cut
Just to keep the profits up
Money saved - profits rise
But consequence is someone dies

Victim of a chemical spillage

Safety regulations breached
Critical concentrations reached
Money is saved but a live is lost
Loved ones left to count the cost

Tanker crashing the village
Death could from the spillage
No escape from the fumes
Peoples' homes become their tombs

In the face of corporate greed
Ecodefence is what we need
Read and act upon this text
Or you become the next victim of a chemical spillage

https://youtu.be/Q3sHdN4f_TI

[–] potatopotato@sh.itjust.works 25 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Ah yes, let's give rich people weapons grade uranium (what these compact reactors run on)

[–] BussyCat@lemmy.world 4 points 22 hours ago

Weapons grade uranium is so expensive and energy intensive to make that I can’t imagine they would ever pay for it and the fuel is at end of life so would need refueling soon.

The navy likely puts a safety margin on the fuel so there is probably some life left in the fuel but I would be very surprised if it lasted more than a year or two which is where I am confused on how this would work

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

Oh good. I was hoping we’d find a way for AI to consume more water.

[–] Rambomst@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

It's a Christmas miracle!

[–] sem@piefed.blahaj.zone 2 points 14 hours ago

What if we put the AI in the ocean

[–] Bakkoda@sh.itjust.works 16 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Fallout is actually gonna happen before we get HL3

[–] P00ptart@lemmy.world 3 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

Definitely before we get fallout 5.

[–] invertedspear@lemmy.zip 2 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Has MS done anything with all the IPs they bought over the last 10v or so years? I haven’t seen anything new in an old IP that’s excited me in the gaming world.

[–] P00ptart@lemmy.world 1 points 11 hours ago

I honestly couldn't tell you, they've bought so many...

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 14 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

I'm just a former Navy Nuke, but I see a major issue with this. Namely, by the time we retire ship-board nuclear reactors, they have been absorbing neutrons and radiation for 30 years, so the steel is weak enough that you could put a ball-peen hammer through it.

[–] RubberElectrons@lemmy.world 9 points 11 hours ago

The wiki on radiation embrittlement is pretty good reading for any mechanical engineers out there: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron_embrittlement

[–] reddig33@lemmy.world 12 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

And who will pay for the disposal and storage of the waste produced?

[–] ulterno@programming.dev 1 points 16 hours ago

Us of course. With the small 's'.

[–] eleitl@lemmy.zip 7 points 12 hours ago

What could possibly go wrong?

[–] p03locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 10 hours ago

This is a much cheaper and faster way to get nuclear power.

Is this "journalist" an industry plant?

[–] altphoto@lemmy.today 3 points 22 hours ago

And all the brave men and women of the various branches of the armed forces can just dance and juggle for the mighty king! Yey!

[–] Devworker@lemmy.world 2 points 8 hours ago

Do the people that think this a good idea just not see how fast they are trying to prop up new AI datacenters?

Corners are being cut everywhere to get these things built so quickly

I honestly wouldn't even trust them with to make their own power safely even with things like hydro, wind or geothermal

But fucking nuclear of all things?

They know it would take decades to build the actual nuclear power plants to run everything so they decid to instead try buying nuclear power generators that are already several decades old