Carbon reduction is a global challenge, hence reengineered power generation is too. Normalizing nuclear means deploying plants in potentially under-developed or faltering societies around the world. While "London-sized" mistakes are increasingly less likely with newer technologies, the potential dirty-bomb weaponization of the fuel remains troubling.
The unforeseen consequences of nuke plants in places like Syria, Somalia, Lebanon, et al seem pretty bad.
(disclosure: I am a proponent of nuclear power overall)
I'm certainly not an expert, but these errors remind me of Moiré patterns. The meaning applied to them are more a function of how we see the errors than intrinsic properties of the system producing them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moir%C3%A9_pattern
TL;DR - probably best to scrap rating people's posts and comments altogether. At very least change the name.
I'm not fond of the label "Karma". It suggests universal and hermetic moral judgement when in the context of this blog it's just, you know, people's impulsive opinion in the moment. It also suggests persistence - as Karma supposedly spills over into the next iteration.
My very first comment on LW garnered a -36 Karma score. It was thoughtful and carefully argued - and, yes, a bit spicy. But regardless, the community decided to just shun me with a click without actually engaging in the ideas I proposed. I feel ganged up upon and not taken seriously.
I still trudge ahead though with other comments but regrettably I feel compelled to adopt a "me versus you all" stance. Its saddening and anti-intellectual (and a direct violation of the LW ethic of "A community blog devoted to refining the art of rationality.")
Viewpoint diversity is vitally important for deep learning. I suggest dropping Karma altogether, or at least use simple up-down voting to shift comments to the bottom. But even that doesn't really feel right. What you have now is a Milgram machine.