My kids stopped saying “six seven” about a year ago. I still have no clue what that was about.

I think it might be like, a praise of inanity.

> sites are extremely pushy about replacing your perfectly good password with a passkey

Your password was never “perfectly good” because it is easily phished. Even with TOTP or a push notification app as MFA.

Phishing is an huge risk even for “expert” technical users, and such phishing is the cause of a huge number of breaches and supply-chain attacks.

> most systems have the same username and passwords (customers never change the defaults)

That is horrifying and 100% on your dev team. You should not ship default credentials, instead require unique creds to be set at install. Ship an update which required default creds to be changed.

Who do you think you are, Cisco?

Entra External ID does not allow export of password hashes.

It actually doesn’t allow a whole shitload of stuff that should be there by now.

For example, it supports passkeys, but has no UI for adding or managing passkeys. You have to build that yourself. In a separate app, on a separate domain.

USB Ethernet dongles generally suck. Even “name brand” dongles are cheap crap from contract manufacturers.

He’s a Florida Man. Do not underestimate his capacity to defile himself.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_Man

Current nuclear-powered ships are run by the world’s premier naval powers and protected by their own stealth or a huge array of armed escort ships.

Have these guys factored in the cost of a task force of protective missile frigates, subs, and destroyers at each site?

Forget security (which worries me less), the legalities of this are notoriously tricky (especially if the ship might ever leave the waters of one nation), and the economics are even worse.

I wouldn’t touch civil maritime nuclear with a barge pole, and if I did, the clear win is decarbonizing big cargo ships.

Agreed, the largest container ships put out some serious pollution, going nuclear (a decades old proven technology for shipping) would be a massive improvement

But the people championing nuclear data centers are not trying to solve climate change

Nuclear submarines often operate without any escort. Russian nuclear icebreakers and floating SMRs also do not have heavy military escorts.

> Nuclear submarines often operate without any escort.

Correct. That's where the GPs comment regarding stealth comes into play.

Attempt a hostile takeover and see how long the response takes. It doesn't matter how far away the assets are if they can either make it to your position before you accomplish your goal or else credibly hunt you down after the fact. I don't think "theft of nuclear material from a russian naval icebreaker" is a realistic possibility.

I doubt Russian nuclear ice breakers have naval escort. Until recently they operated within the coverage of on-shore long range SAM systems (but most of these SAM systems were moved elsewhere recently e.g. to protect oil refineries so Northern Sea Route is no longer protected).

I don’t think that anyone would want to steal an icebreaker, but a datacenter full of valuable equipment and interesting information is a more likely target.

Would a marine raid by ship be lower risk than a smash and grab by panel-van on land?

I imagine land is a lower bar to entry, accessible to a much larger criminal base, but security response times and road surveillance is tough.

I'm too much of a land-lubber to know how easy it is vanish from a coastal crime scene by ship. The sea... nowhere to hide but very big. Can satellites track you these days? If wanting to nab a container or two that's a big ship. Not much you could put in a minisub or sub-surface thing. A James Bond villain could cut the supports and drag the whole thing to the hollowed out mountain of their island lair.

I need Michael Mann to make "Heat but on a boat" to educate me.

Proliferation resistant reactors should probably be used.

Like.... LFTR

Basically, the normal operation of the reactor doesn't allow the production of weapons-useful nuclear isotopes.

You'll probably also need a smaller footprint reactor

Like.... LFTR

And you'll want something that can be turned on, shut off, and has natural anti-meltdown abilities in case hurricanes or other disasters threaten the ractor

Like ... LFTR

LFTRs make readily-available (liquid-form) weapons-grade Uranium-233 during protactinium separation. They're the least proliferation resistant reactor known to man.

LFTR has a far larger core than a PWR. Neutron diffusion length in water is 5 cm. In LFTR graphite moderator it's 16.

Many reactors including modern SMR LWRs can cool themselves passively without backup power. Especially when floating in seawater.

Highly recommend doing PWRs for this application.

Disclaimer: I'm trying to do this with PWRs.

U-233: is this inaccurate?

https://www.quora.com/Why-do-so-many-people-claim-thorium-br...

I'm no expert on U enrichment, but if there's even just a little U-232 that mixes in with the U-233 then the gamma rays get pretty hard to handle? I guess the breeding process might produce a lot of pure U-233, but again to the point of the quora response... not a lot of U-233 was used in "real" weapons.

I've never heard of MSRs being "large". The ORNL one fit in a closet, but that wasn't a breeder from thorium AFAIK. The penetration doesn't matter much if you have a blanket of Thorium to intercept neutrons.

Why would a carrier battle group be a prerequisite for this? Capital ships will have escorts anyways, the propulsion system doesn't matter.

of course they did not calculate it! it will come later when they want to calculate real costs, they will release it after investor update

Don't be a killjoy, the bloom of harebrained ideas around AI should be celebrated!

That's a problem for the future, no need to worry investors with these silly questions.

Hey if you can externalize that cost, more money left for you and the investors !!!

It’s a rehash of a conflict from abut 3000 BCE onwards. Who really is the “historical people” of the land that is now Palestine/Israel has been the subject of bloody conflict for 5000 years.

So this is strange, it popped up on Cloudflare’s RSS feed so I thought it was new. I’m guessing they edited the article but haven’t been able find a a diff against the original 2022 version.

The Indiana variant of this phrase was “tighter than two coats of paint” which meant a person who was tight with money (cheap).