• prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      I mean … the article is literally what it’s about.

      You’re being downvoted because you’re being a cynical contrarian.

        • prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          Saying nothing will ever work ever and nothing is ever good is not being skeptical.

          The article you’re commenting on is the citation, you’re being cynical and acting in bad faith.

          People disagree with you, I’d wager if you used a little more tact you might have more reasonable discussion.

            • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              I am not saying anying will never work

              “And it is almost a certainty not to be ever in the lifetime of man.”

              Let’s just sliiiiide those goalposts a few hundred more feet huh?

            • AbidanYre@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              9 months ago

              Not in our lifetime, nor the lifetime of our children or grandchildren. And it is almost a certainty not to be ever in the lifetime of man.

              Sure sounds like never.

            • kbotc@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              9 months ago

              Why will a tokamak never work, exactly? We’ve been running fusion experiments in them for 60 years and have a pretty good idea that we can make one big enough to produce power. We’re just baby stepping through the work so we don’t build a $30 billion dollar power plant that’s missing a design element.

              K-DEMO, JT-60, DEMO, CFETR, STEP, and the US DoE’s planned reactor suggest a high level of confidence that the science is already there. It’s just an engineering problem, much like the nuclear bomb in 1935.

                • kbotc@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  Oh ye master of nuclear material engineering, please share what you know so that multiple countries with teams of experts don’t spend billions of dollars for a complete failure. (I worked for an ITER subcontractor numbnuts)

            • seth@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              9 months ago

              This reads kind of like Derrida, or JB Peterson, where it almost seems like the goal is to deliberately avoid communicating in a way that is clear. To paraphrase, “You all misinterpret what I say, not because I’m bad at communication but because you all are.” If one person misunderstands or misinterprets, maybe that’s on them. If everyone does, it’s more likely that it’s on you.

    • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      That’s because your comment is on a post that is literally one of the sources you’d get. More efficiency, overcoming total input, making it a generator, etc are all ancillary.