Yes it’s some-controversy propaganda and it is a heck a lot better than a multi billion arms sale presser that amerikkka puts out in it’s media.

xi-lib-tears

      • Des [she/her, they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        14 days ago

        true. it will never be a money maker.

        the “profit” will be from delivering the world from fossil fuels and rare resources, empowering small nations to have complete energy freedom, and eventually setting humanity up on the path to true FALGSC

        • HexBroke [any, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          14 days ago

          empowering small nations to have complete energy freedom

          Sorry but there’s just no way a small country is going to be able to effectively develop a nuclear fusion industry, it is incredibly complex demonstrated by the fact that we don’t actually have fusion yet.

          Definitely good for FALGSC and other applications that aren’t addressed by big grids, big wins and solar and big storage pumps

          Although we do already have the right sort of fusion to rid the world of fossil fuels posadist-nuke

    • driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      14 days ago

      I don’t think that’s even a question if isn’t going to be profitable at the short, or long time, but that its success isn’t make other interests unprofitable, like in capitalist societies, so there’s no one with the power of the accumulated capital influencing tge government to cut it off. Imagine the green technologies we could have now, if wasn’t for the gas and oil industry sabotaging it for decades.

        • HexBroke [any, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          14 days ago

          Unlimited fusion energy doesn’t mean unlimited energy for free, unfortunately.

          Early commercial operation costs (2060-2090s) are pitched at 2x nuclear and 4x renewables current prices

        • waluigiblunts [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          14 days ago

          Why would it lead to immediate nuclear war? Are there any pieces from American/Russian think tanks advocating for the death of billions if nuclear fusion is achieved in a commercial setting that I’m not aware of?

          • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            17
            ·
            14 days ago

            Almost all global power is built around oil, gas and coal. No petrodollar means no US power worldwide.

            Are there any pieces from American/Russian think tanks advocating for the death of billions if nuclear fusion is achieved in a commercial setting that I’m not aware of?

            As soon as they believe the technology is real they will be. But it’ll be more subtle than that, they’re not going to outright say it’s because of fusion energy they’re going to say it’s because the chinese are sneaky evil orientals and communism must be stopped.

            • waluigiblunts [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              14 days ago

              While I think that war is possible as a last ditch attempt to stop a geopolitical dominance shift, it’s a huge leap to say that “immediate nuclear war” is incoming.

              • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                14 days ago

                Why? You acknowledge war is the last ditch they’d undertake and that means nuclear war if it’s between the US and China, which it would be.

                • waluigiblunts [he/him]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  14 days ago

                  There is literally nothing to be gained from nuclear holocaust. I think it is extremely unlikely that the US will launch nuclear first strikes in response to something so relatively trivial as losing global relevance. The USSR completely collapsed, and they didn’t set off any nukes either.

                  A conventional war (this is not necessarily a total war) does not automatically mean nuclear first strikes either. America does not respond to losing wars with nuclear first strikes. This is proven by historical example. They have been taking Ls left and right without setting off any nukes. The only time they have used nuclear weapons in an act of war was in Japan, and that was when they were winning.

    • Dolores [love/loves]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      14 days ago

      nah, workable fusion needs a very replicable, cheap distribution scheme before it’s a real threat, and they can manipulate the narrative, & trade of such technology. look at how long they delayed wind & solar without murdering everyone involved in it

  • Monk3brain3 [any, he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    13 days ago

    I hope China gets fusion. But I really hope they let the west collapse before selling it to the rest of the world. If the absolutely corrupt West gets a permanent lease on life I expect an Elysium (the movie, and terrible example but I can’t think of a better one right now) type situation for the world.

    • Owl [he/him]@hexbear.netM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      13 days ago

      The west is unlikely to use fusion power. The reason we don’t use fission is that the plants are so expensive and take so long to build that the person who decided on making them has left the company by the time they turn a profit. Fusion plants will most likely be more expensive and take longer to build.

  • Tankiedesantski [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    edit-2
    13 days ago

    Looking forward to the mental gymnastics cope Westoids will resort to to maintain the “Chinese can’t innovate, only copy” narrative.

    Edit: I got it. The cope will be “Chinese create cheap artificial knock off of the sun”.

    • CloutAtlas [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      13 days ago

      The infamous Chinese invention “block printing” is a knock off of writing things with ink and quill, in this essay I will conclude the CCP will collapse in 30 days because of this.

  • ZWQbpkzl [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    13 days ago

    I’m a little suspicious that they clearly show a bunch of westerners touring the place and looking credulous but they never quote them. If you’re not going to have them say “yeah I’m a nuclear physicist and this shit’s real” then it just looks like cheap b-reel. I’m not saying their actors, but they for sure ain’t physicists.

    Entire article quoted:

    China’s new-generation “artificial sun” project Huanliu-3 (HL-3) has achieved remarkable progress in controlling nuclear fusion by discovering and realizing a new advanced magnetic field structure for the first time in the world, according to the China National Nuclear Corporation, one of the country’s largest nuclear power operators.

    What is this? Propaganda for ants? Do better.