'Atoms for Algorithms:' The Trump Administration's Top Nuclear Scientists Think AI Can Replace Humans in Power Plants

[highplainsdem]

Source: 404 Media

During a presentation at the International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) International Symposium on Artificial Intelligence on December 3, a US Department of Energy scientist laid out a grand vision of the future where nuclear energy powers artificial intelligence and artificial intelligence shapes nuclear energy in “a virtuous cycle of peaceful nuclear deployment.”

-snip-

His presentation and others during the symposium, held in Vienna, Austria, described a world where nuclear powered AI designs, builds, and even runs the nuclear power plants they’ll need to sustain them. But experts find these claims, made by one of the top nuclear scientists working for the Trump administration, to be concerning and potentially dangerous.

-snip-

One of the slides Bahran showed during the presentation attempted to quantify the amount of human involvement these new AI-controlled power plants would have. He estimated less than five percent “human intervention during normal operations.”

-snip-

One of the slides Bahran showed during the presentation attempted to quantify the amount of human involvement these new AI-controlled power plants would have. He estimated less than five percent “human intervention during normal operations.”

Read more: https://www.404media.co/nuclear-rian-bahran-iaea-international-symposium-on-artificial-intelligence/

[twodogsbarking]

1. Pretend intelligence is what Trump has.

[Jerry2144]

4. I would classify it as Genuine Stupidity

[speak easy]

2. What could possibly go wrong?

[Ray Bruns]

6. This.

[electric_blue68]

3. Oh. Suuuuure...

...what could possibly go wrong.
😑😑😑

At the very least let's have AI vastly improve first, like... NO hallucinating, before you even think about thinking about letting AI do all that!

[sakabatou]

5. Riiiiight, and RMBK reactors always worked

[ananda]

7. "Top nuclear scientists" are 4-year olds with visor hats and clilpboards...

playing scientists.

[eringer]

8. This is Utter Nonsense

A nuclear reactor is not a kitchen oven where you bake brownies. Human oversight will always be required. Maybe 50 years from now, the answer would change. That presupposes breakthroughs in fusion technology.
If you really want AI to run something, give it diesel generators to operate. This administration loves oil as it demonstrated at its president’s inauguration where the convicted felon said that the USA will “drill baby drill.”

[Blackjackdavey]

9. people must spend more time talking about AI

than using it. Because holy moly, it isn't what they say it is. It's merely a gigantic echo chamber and anything you didn't already tell it, t makes up. Just that simple. I'm sure an onsite server or AI engine could process larger quantities of data, but the current public iterations seem completely unable to process a simple spreadsheet of more than 100 rows. It's terrifying to think that people believe this can replace therapy or doctors let alone something with catastrophic possibilities.

[Nigrum Cattus]

10. Really ?

Fukushima & Chernobyl will disagree

[SergeStorms]

11. No.

Just freaking NO!

[xocetaceans]

12. Video of Dr. Bahran's presentation is found on the IAEA website . . .

. . . here and approximately starts at video time stamp 11:08:44 with an introduction and ends at video time stamp 11:26:23:

https://livestreaming.iaea.org/meeting/7d57b21e-0c4b-4459-6473-08de30e800da/view

[eppur_se_muova]

13. Self-steering cars and AI are two products that were released PRIOR TO passing any reasonable safety tests.

Corps don't just want to make big bucks, they want to make big bucks as soon and as quickly as possible. No time for safety certifications ! Perpetual beta (if not alpha) is the new normal ! Public release is the new testing arena ! (Too bad about the occasional casualties, but we've got profits to make !) When will they ever be forced to face any kind of rigorous vetting ?

Microsoft shares much of the blame for this, with their steady pressure for the "perpetual beta" model in which nothing is ever really fixed. Apple didn't take long to go down the same path, and even Linux distros that used to offer LTS (long term support) releases as one option seem to be dropping them (at least in my admittedly limited sampling).

(OT: I'm running into more and more problems with old apps/utilities that can't be used because they've never been ported to versions compatible with new OS's, compilers, debuggers etc. or are rejected by the OS as unregistered etc.

I'm NOT going to "catch up" with Windows or OSX, ever. Too much effort and expense -- I have multiple working computers that can't run the latest OSs other than Linux, so I'm increasingly avoiding Apple to the same extent that I've always tried to avoid Windows. The continued "progress" of the software industry takes place outside of my world, and if they're not careful, they may find themselves outside a lot of other people's worlds.

I'm starting to turn more attention to reviving old hardware and OSs so I don't lose access to stuff I did years ago -- docs and programs. My programs are very simple, should be easy to recompile, but rely on some libraries I can't upgrade or replace because (a) the original author is dead, and (b) later versions may now be propietary.)