Do you have faith that humanity will use it for good (curing disease, fusion, etc) or will we destroy ourselves with it?
The Steross Market and Investing Thread
- Thread starter jobob85
- Start date
Do you have faith that humanity will use it for good (curing disease, fusion, etc) or will we destroy ourselves with it?
Right now, I lean toward the latter.
But the encryption breaking is just theoretical right now. If it wasn't, it would already be being used by the military (ours or another countries).
mugatu
Ranger
I see infinite AI images and videos and inability to distinguish truth from fake... and cat memes, lots of cat memes. Haha
We never use technology for good initially, it's always something dumb or self destructive.
mugatu
Ranger
Ran across this discussion on energy requirements.
Are quantum computers really energy efficient? - Nature Computational Science
Proponents often tout quantum computing as a more energy efficient alternative to classical computing methods. However, the extent to which it can reduce energy usage remains unclear, as experts have not yet agreed on metrics to determine its energy consumption.
www.nature.com
I can't imagine what it is capable of in the financial sector.
I've posted about this in other threads. Data centers are driving electrical load growth. They are THE driver. The example I gave is I know of one proposed data center north of DFW that will require as much dedicated generation as the entire OG&E service area. It's a step change in demand.Ran across this discussion on energy requirements.
Are quantum computers really energy efficient? - Nature Computational Science
Proponents often tout quantum computing as a more energy efficient alternative to classical computing methods. However, the extent to which it can reduce energy usage remains unclear, as experts have not yet agreed on metrics to determine its energy consumption.
Last edited:
mugatu
Ranger
Yes, that's why I was bringing up energy usage with quantum vs traditional computing. If usage is significantly different that could have a big impact on energy needs in the future.
You could realistically be looking at 25-30% of all energy consumed in the US being data centers in the next 15-20 years. 5 years ago it was an irrelevant amount. An old job we had to have emergency operation centers that met certain criteria.....redundant back up power, proper security not a fat guy at a desk you get the idea.....well we leased space from AT&T at one of their data centers for wireless use. It had 1.8 MW load. A small data center for applications such as this is in the hundreds of MW many are Gigawatts of demand. We will need Terawatts of power nation wide for this and they will be powered by fossil fuels or at least have fossil fuel back up onsite that is used frequently not just if a hurricane hits. I'm very excited about nuclear exploration related to this. It could be the trigger that finally brings about wide spread use of nuclear resources.
mugatu
Ranger
So you can see that even a 10% change in power requirement in transitioning to quantum computing could have massive impacts on grid demand.
Completely agree. We HAVE to get more nuclear (and I think small reactors) up and running. People hate having more large transmission lines running and they can have a big impact on property, so small reactors placed closer to demand could help that and reduce time and cost to get integrated.
You are still going to have to have major transmission upgrades due to the voltage and frequency swings associated with such large loads. Really short answer is there are only a few folks that make the equipment needed on the power side for this. Computing is going to outrun the ability of the support to keep up. Ex. You could by high voltage breakers.....think greater than 15Kv not the 220 for the dryer for a couple hundred thousand and get one in a 3-6 months. It's now 1.5 M and you get them in 3 years if your lucky most orders are closer to 5 years. And if you think that is slow start trying to change nuclear regulations. I'm about as anti govt as anyone here but there is a tremendous amount of value to phasing in nuclear very very carefully.
Nuclear power is the future. And the markets are dictating it as such. Check out the stock charts for NUSCALE and Vistra, a couple of the companies working on modular reactors. Investors are piling in.
Not at all.
If we thought micro transactions are bad now…………..
New Retirees Should Plan to Spend Less Than 4% a Year. Why the Stock Market Rally Is to Blame.
Recent retirees may need to lower their spending expectations, according to a new Morningstar report. Counterintuitively, the stock market’s huge 2024 rally gets a big part of the blame.
For years, the financial planning industry has followed the so-called 4% rule. It’s a guideline that suggests new retirees can plan to spend about 4% of their retirement portfolios each year for 30 years without facing much risk they will run out of money. The rule is based on your retirement balance at the start of the 30-year period and assumes you will increase your withdrawal amount each year to keep up with inflation.
This year, new retirees should count on spending just 3.7% of their balances a year, according to a new Morningstar report. The finding, based on the latest assumptions for stock and bond market returns, is down from Morningstar’s previous 4% forecast made in 2023—a figure that was in line with the long-standing rule of thumb.
Thanks for forwarding this article. I had not seen it and read a lot about Bill Bengen’s 4% theory. As someone who is a “new retiree”, reading an article that gives an example of a portfolio of 50/50 stocks/bonds for a new retiree makes me pause. That may make sense for an older retirees, but for those under 60 —- that is way too low in stocks..IMO.
I will read the entire Morningstar report because I do not agree with the last paragraph of the article at all…
“One simple approach for achieving a higher withdrawal rate is to build a ladder of Treasury Inflation Protected Securities,” the report stated. “Doing so provided a 4.4% withdrawal rate, with a 100% probability of success”
It says "100% probability of success at the time of this publication." But, as I understand it, that "success" is a 4.4% withdrawal rate and 2% and change yield so that it is drained over the time period you put in.
That isn't how I plan to do it. I plan to stay majority invested in stocks. I will have enough cushion to handle any bear market which typically is in the 1-2 year range. I hope when I am done to still have significant funds to give to kids/donate. Obviously the market will determine that but odds are pretty good it will be more than those rates over a multi-decade period.
Here is a site that goes into florid detail on issues around the 4% rule:
The Safe Withdrawal Rate Series - Early Retirement Now
One of the most important topics in financial planning is how to transform an initial portfolio into a safe and sustainable retirement income stream. I’ve put a lot of thought into this topic and published 50+ posts on my blog. To make my research more accessible, I created this “landing page”...
earlyretirementnow.com
I also attached an article from AAII regarding a 100% stock plan for retirement instead of bonds. It is getting a little dated but the idea should be the same.
inappropriate.name
New member
I came across this a while back when looking for a quick easy way for someone to set an investment account. Some pretty simple solutions to what some have made overly complex.It says "100% probability of success at the time of this publication." But, as I understand it, that "success" is a 4.4% withdrawal rate and 2% and change yield so that it is drained over the time period you put in.
That isn't how I plan to do it. I plan to stay majority invested in stocks. I will have enough cushion to handle any bear market which typically is in the 1-2 year range. I hope when I am done to still have significant funds to give to kids/donate. Obviously the market will determine that but odds are pretty good it will be more than those rates over a multi-decade period.
Here is a site that goes into florid detail on issues around the 4% rule:
The Safe Withdrawal Rate Series - Early Retirement Now
One of the most important topics in financial planning is how to transform an initial portfolio into a safe and sustainable retirement income stream. I’ve put a lot of thought into this topic and published 50+ posts on my blog. To make my research more accessible, I created this “landing page”...
I also attached an article from AAII regarding a 100% stock plan for retirement instead of bonds. It is getting a little dated but the idea should be the same.
Lazy Portfolios and ETF composition
Follow the best Lazy Portfolios and build them with ETFs. Check yearly returns, asset allocations and choose the portfolio that best fits your needs.
www.lazyportfolioetf.com
