Strategy Stuff - Tumblr Posts

First of all, thank you for the great example of a topic that has been highlighted here on reblog from several sides.

One thing we all know is that start-ups often don't really have a business model because they are sometimes ahead of their time. But often they become subscription models where the user has to pay a monthly fee to use them which is really nothing new. In all the different areas in which they operate, whether it's just AI, streaming services, social platforms and so on, it's a tough battle for market share in order to satisfy their shareholders and generate new capital for new projects and products once they are listed on the stock exchange.

What does not appear in the equations at all or is deliberately not made visible to users is that all this technology generates a gigantic demand for energy and this will increase exponentially in the future.

Every time a teenager somewhere uses a social platform for hours, writes to an AI platform to generate a picture or answer another request, immense computing power is required. And this is just a tiny list of the demands on global computing power.

Yes, all these technologies will change our future and have changed our past, but the gigantic usage only shows that these technologies will and have a mega impact on the environment.

There is no such thing as green IT, it's just a marketing ploy to greenwash the issue.

We currently have a climate change and we don't want to discuss it here, it is happening, every glacier shows us every day.

So what do we do when such a gigantic wave of future energy demand comes our way?

Mankind is beginning to turn old concepts into new ones.

Nuclear energy is what we are all being told, but why are we ignoring what was. Nuclear energy has proven to be cost effective for the consumer, not that the risk of this technology can be managed.

Small power plants are the solution says a very old and conservative industry whose only interest is their continued existence. Even though they have generated immense costs for taxpayers all over the world.

No, it is not the solution to our energy needs. To make the model of no power plant profitable they have to be mass produced. Such a series would only be profitable from a quantity of 3600 per lsnd.

The major pioneering project for this has just been scrapped in the USA due to the exponential increase in costs without any real progress on the project.

SMR technologies in the USA are suffering setbacks. A study advises against further investment. Small modular reactors (SMRs) are a beacon of hope for the nuclear power plant industry, whose share of global electricity generation has been declining for years. The idea is that the mini-reactors are prefabricated centrally due to their modular design and only need to be assembled at the respective site. The hope is that this could significantly reduce construction costs. However, a flagship SMR project in the USA has now been buried - that of the Nuscale Power Corporation. Six of the new nuclear power plant modules, each with an output of 77 megawatts (MW), were actually to be built in the state of Idaho in the north-west of the USA. However, the developer Nuscale and the electricity company Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems (Uamps) have now announced that they are terminating the jointly planned “Carbon Free Power Project”. This is due to significant cost increases from an estimated 5.3 to 9.3 billion US dollars and financing problems. The companies had planned to build the small reactors in series by 2029/2030 and use them to take over the power generation that was previously provided by coal-fired power plants in the region. This will now apparently come to nothing due to the high electricity prices calculated for the SMRs. According to the US think tank Ieefa, it has risen from the 5.8 US cents per kilowatt hour still targeted for 2021 to 8.9 US cents per kilowatt hour, despite tax subsidies on nuclear power being included.

Several dozen different types of small nuclear power plants are currently being developed around the world, with some of the concepts going back to reactor designs from the 1950s.

Wow concerts in 1950 and of course the same risks. What a privilege to save an antenna technology or its revival. Old school lobbying, nothing to say against it but is this really the concept to solve our future energy needs?

Many countries are active

Most of this is financed at state level: In addition to the USA, Canada is also one of the most active countries, according to the Federal Office for the Safety of Nuclear Waste Management. Pilot projects are also underway in China, South Korea and Argentina.

And then always the pre-financing by the state somehow socialist or your free market preacher.

All other technologies such as solar energy and wind power are ultimately not really green because they require raw materials that cause immense environmental damage during extraction.

So what can we do?

Everyone here will not like to hear it, but we can't go on like this. We don't have enough raw materials, water and food to meet all our needs. If all the citizens of this world really do use all this technology every day, farewell and good night Marie!

Now it's getting nasty:

for 150 years, capitalism was sold as a solution for a better world. And yes, it really has improved people's quality of life, but it has also proven that it has created the worst crises in human history. Which is ultimately proof enough that it doesn't work, and not for the good of mankind but only for the good of a few. We do not condemn him much of us live really well in him in the first world.

But is it really forward-looking or even sustainable for solving all the challenges that humanity is facing?

We say no it is not it needs to be transformed but into what?

Let's take a look at all the utopias that have been set against capitalism have failed because of the human factor. We will not go into this in detail - history has revealed it.

So what is the question? Where is the utopia of the present that will inspire the next generation?

All utopia are dead why?

Where are the thinkers of the new world not in the technological sense there are enough who are driven by the motivation of fast money. Which we do not judge or condemn.

In the sense of new social models of social and economic coexistence geared to the challenges of the future.

Most people privatize in the first world retreat into the pleasant perception bubble or they expand into the unpleasant excitement culture without really wanting a big and whole solution approach for all.

You live in your tech bubble, your culture bubble, your social media bubble and you work to generate money to enjoy or master daily life.

But do we even take the responsibility we always preach about? Are we really responsible in the sense of the word? Well, really for ourselves and those we love, but for the world, isn't that too much for the individual?

No, we say, responsibility must be lived, must be learned, must be taken on.

So this is our call to take responsibility for creating a new utopia from the smallest to the largest. Live it in your tech start-ups, in your families, recognize the potential of the smallest cell.

Why does a company need a boss? When it can organize itself unit by unit, everyone does their part and takes responsibility.

The overestimation of management is omnipresent. Simply question how old caste systems can be broken down in order to meet new challenges with new approaches.

So let's develop and try out new utopias - it certainly won't be worse than capitalism.

Yes, we only needed your topic to build on the fact that technologies are not really the solution to our problems but only a substructure that must be used responsibly to avoid bringing even more inequality into this world.

If you are only interested in making money, have fun, hope you don't have children because their children's children would be really angry with their ancestors about the future state of the world.

no matter what you do, we all have to change in so many areas because continuing like this will only lead to the failure of the next generations.

mod

Whatever you believe or think, in a complex system everything is connected to everything else. If more and more parts disappear from such a system full of dependency, the system will unfortunately change in such a way that all biological organizations living in it will be affected.

And not to the benefit of biological organisms. The planet does not need us, but we need the ideal conditions that this planet offers us in order to live comfortably.

However, you technology believers, Mars is not an alternative. Who would move from a loft with everything to a basement room without water and light.

And this, friends, is why the AI boom may end following the path of the Metaverse boom and the NFT boom.