/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.3130681]

liquid-fluoride reactors are the future. why don't we have any?

[Inurdaes !V1sPhobos. No.3130682]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2011/feb/16/china-nuclear-thorium

[Anonymous No.3130689]

>>3130682
Wow, that pic. You hate your government, don't you?

Anyway, just how would you get China to give that many fucks about you? Wouldn't it be easier to use those resources to be on good terms with Australia?

[Inurdaes !V1sPhobos. No.3130691]

>>3130689
>You hate your government, don't you?
They're ineffective and restrictive. And I am sure that they'll chuck a shit over SW Tassie. It is only logical for them to do so.

[Inurdaes !V1sPhobos. No.3130700]

>>3130689
>Anyway, just how would you get China to give that many fucks about you? Wouldn't it be easier to use those resources to be on good terms with Australia?
Oh the China raping Australia bit is just 'cause many people joke about how China would immediately annex Australia for our minerals.

[Anonymous No.3130702]

>>3130682

Ausfag here. That pic just about sums it up. We have become fucking hostage to the mining industry. They hold disproportionate influence over the government and any mention of keeping the wealth they make in the country is met with replacement of the prime minister (of a left-wing party no less) from inside the ranks of his own party.

When will the idiots realise that we cant keep mining forever, and we'd better see the returns for the use of our fucking country.

[Anonymous No.3130708]

>>3130700
Ah.

Speaking of technological utopias and Australia, have you read Manna?
http://www.marshallbrain.com/manna1.htm

[Inurdaes !V1sPhobos. No.3130716]

>>3130708
The Technocratic Republic was 99% inspired by Marshall Brain's 'Manna.'
I mean nearly everything would be copied, including the 1000 credit system

[Anonymous No.3130724]

>>3130716
Do you feel that the lack of privacy is required? Actually, that's just part of the next question:

And even more importantly, what system is the best alternative when you haven't got benevolent strong AI yet? I just don't want you to fall in the stupid-hole that Zeitgeist does on this point.

[Anonymous No.3130729]

>why don't we have any?

Because we have only had the capability to build them for a couple decades, and nuclear power is a tightly regulated industry. Relax, it will happen eventually. Government and big business are involved and they are slow.

[Anonymous No.3130737]

liquid salt nuclear reactors are the next planned gen of reactors, and are expensive as fuck but dont have the same heat dissipation problems like water cooling gives you.

reasons why we dont have then yet? fukushima

[Anonymous No.3130762]

>>3130737
We could have had them decades ago.

The answer in that case was that we needed to create nuclear weapons.

[Inurdaes !V1sPhobos. No.3130771]

>>3130724
>Do you feel that the lack of privacy is required?
I can't honestly say that privacy is being violated if unobtrusive video cameras are in all streets/public buildings where any data or video recorded can only be accessed for police investigations into murders/serious crimes and not at all otherwise. Use the data to help people, not screw them over.

>And even more importantly, what system is the best alternative when you haven't got benevolent strong AI yet? I just don't want you to fall in the stupid-hole that Zeitgeist does on this point.

WELL I THINK WE SHOULD ALL WORK DEMOCRATICALLY AND USE A SPECIAL ENGINEERING LANGUAGE TO MAKE A PLACE OF ABUNDANCE-

Yeah I don't agree with Jacque's view on a governmental system like that. if you're working with a whole world then stuff like the global resource management system is fantastic. For SW Tassie and later on hopefully Mars/Jovian satellites a nationwide database of how much of each material is stored where with statistics such as reproduction of item/mineral time and so forth are kept in a database keeping prices low and steady for price in resource credits. As for the governmental system, I have been thinking of a potential technocratic/democratic hybrid. it works like this. You have officials elected to power by people who's professions/expertise pertain to that members position (Minister of Health would have doctors, neurosurgeons, molecular biologists) comprising 75% of the vote. The other 25% is by other members of government to vote on. Similar for laws, however now the balance is 50% and 50%.

That is the rough outline. It will be a 'big' government with practically no unneeded laws. We don't take in tax, but we look after a large portion of the manufacturing base which would allow us to provide our citizens with exquisitely high living standards and the ability to have super projects (I'm talking full-on colonization of the solar system, star ships, underwater cities etc)

[Anonymous No.3130791]

>>3130771
One factor I think that should be preserved is the distributed calculation of "what humans want" through free trade influencing price. Without this, you lose a vital mechanism for calculating what people want - nothing can adequately replace it. You can cut out all kinds of institutions that are normally considered part of western capitalism, but this distributed calculation of "what matters to humans" seems far too useful to give up.

Does it have a place in your current revision of the system? Perhaps the mechanism can be adopted somehow.

[Inurdaes !V1sPhobos. No.3130806]

>>3130791
I've been thinking about that. It's just that I'm worried that two hundred years later the TRS will have devolved almost into modern America due to the people who have vested interests in the monetary system gaining a lot of power to influence the fruits of the TRS to go to them.

But there will definitely be something like that.

[Anonymous No.3130822]

>>3130806
What is the source of instability? Is it wealth hoarding? If everyone has a fixed income cap from the system, which is lost if not spent, hoarding of physical goods is encouraged (at least among the materialist-minded).

The other power is political. Who controls the system? Zeitgeist pulls a complete cop-out and says that the AI will take care of everyone, and that no one will tamper with it. Which is incredibly naive.

[Inurdaes !V1sPhobos. No.3130845]

>>3130822
>Who controls the system?
That's still being worked on. I would nominate myself to be benevolent largely uninterfering dictator because I can't be corrupted (I know it sounds so shit and self-serving) but obviously the problem lies with me being a dictator for many people and dictators don't exactly have a great rap sheet.
System is controlled by the government that was elected as said above from people who have been nominated for prizes or academic excellence in their field and/or people who have had a great record with their subject. Still being modified.

[Anonymous No.3130864]

>>3130845
I would also be fine with a provably benevolent dictator. It's just that I'm not aware of any such people. Any AI given the reigns would also have to be provable benevolent.

Hard as it is to say, I think that representative democracy is the best we've got. I think the *cultural* differences can produce a populace that won't tolerate many of the abuses of such systems: like lobbying by corporations. There *are* no corporations, if I understand.

The challenge then becomes ensuring efficiency in meeting the desires of consumers. Can you still have competition between different methods in a given industry sector, even if it's just managed exploration of the space of possible methods?

[Anonymous No.3130881]

>why don't we have any?

http://www.thoriumenergyalliance.com/downloads/American_Scientist_Hargraves.pdf

[Inurdaes !V1sPhobos. No.3130894]

>>3130864
Because of the price differential between things in say, Australia today and the TRS then, rather different things like larger vehicles would be produced. Perhaps these require much fuel, or maintenance by 'bots. Perhaps it has many rare element components. Companies formed in the TRS would have a vested interest in getting the design to use less of these 'expensive' items. Less platinum used, which means that this company can charge less and make more of a profit. However I do not think this is anything meaningful, so I am still thinking of a way to induce aggressive competition. I just don't want any of it to interfere with the TRS' path of post-scarcity or at least as close as we can get.

[Anonymous No.3130926]

inb4 Nuka-Cola

[Anonymous No.3130931]

>>3130894
Ah, well, as long as the TRS is in trade with the outside world, then you're hooked into a free trade system that will demand efficiency. I just hope there's an internal mechanism to keep the same drive to excellence going.

[Inurdaes !V1sPhobos. No.3130932]

>>3130926

[Inurdaes !V1sPhobos. No.3130954]

>>3130931
>I just hope there's an internal mechanism to keep the same drive to excellence going.

Hmmm...

How about this:
Let's say you have a iron screw. It uses one screwworth of iron. Someone comes along an invents a screw that is just as good at screwing by is worth 0.8 screwworths of iron. Let's say 100 screwworths of iron = 1 credit. Now because less iron is required per screw, efficiency and material availablity has gone up due to him, so 10% of the difference between the old and new screw in credits is put into this person's account. Perhaps a fuckton of these screws are made in a week, giving him double of the standard 1k credit limit.

Similar rewards for one that invents an entirely new invention.

[Inurdaes !V1sPhobos. No.3130974]

>>3130954
*but
I will be heading off to bed after your next response.

[Anonymous No.3130993]

>>3130932

I was talking about the tripfag

[Inurdaes !V1sPhobos. No.3130999]

>>3130993
I know.

[Anonymous No.3131003]

>>3130974
>>3130954
Bounties on efficiency increases? Not a bad idea. The prestige and sense of contributing that would be part of it also seem like good ideas.

Sounds good so far. Anyway, I'll let you get to bed. What time zone are you in anyway? Australia is big.

[Inurdaes !V1sPhobos. No.3131011]

>>3131003
Adelaideish

[Anonymous No.3131236]

People who have only heard about one advanced nuclear reactor design seriously need to read moar.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_IV_reactor

[Anonymous No.3131281]

> liquid-fluoride reactors are the future. why don't we have any?

Because it's not the future yet.

Serious answer: both the reactor and the fuel cycle are a lot more complex than conventional reactors, and no-one has built a full-scale one yet. Not only does the complexity make them substantially more expensive, both the complexity and their "untested" nature mean that investors will want a significantly higher return-on-investment, which makes the total cost even higher.

Also, there aren't many rich deposits of thorium. It may be more abundant than uranium, but it's a lot more thinly spread out.

[Anonymous No.3134099]

LFTR bump

[Anonymous No.3134125]

>>3131281
It is highly unlikely that LFTRs will turn out to be more expensive. Theres fairly massive savings in fuel fabrication involved. Unfortunately thats how a lot of companies make their money from nuclear power.

Rare earths are also highly spread out. Doesn't stop us from getting them. Does mean that china is more likely to start messing with thorium before other countries.

[Adeist No.3134147]

>>3131281
>anon's shit is all retarded and he talks like a fag