Ask A Genius 1416: Quantum Hollywood, AI Job Displacement, and the Risks of Nuclear Innovation
Author(s): Rick Rosner and Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Ask A Genius
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/06/07
Rick Rosner is an accomplished television writer with credits on shows like Jimmy Kimmel Live!, Crank Yankers, and The Man Show. Over his career, he has earned multiple Writers Guild Award nominations—winning one—and an Emmy nomination. Rosner holds a broad academic background, graduating with the equivalent of eight majors. Based in Los Angeles, he continues to write and develop ideas while spending time with his wife, daughter, and two dogs.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen is the publisher of In-Sight Publishing (ISBN: 978-1-0692343) and Editor-in-Chief of In-Sight: Interviews (ISSN: 2369-6885). He writes for The Good Men Project, International Policy Digest (ISSN: 2332–9416), The Humanist (Print: ISSN 0018-7399; Online: ISSN 2163-3576), Basic Income Earth Network (UK Registered Charity 1177066), A Further Inquiry, and other media. He is a member in good standing of numerous media organizations.
Rick Rosner and Scott Douglas Jacobsen discuss their upcoming podcast Quantum Hollywood, blending AI and entertainment. The conversation spans job displacement projections from automation, advanced nuclear reactor designs supported by Gates and Zuckerberg, and the dangers of radiological weapons. Rosner explains nuclear fission mechanics and the risks of spent fuel in plain terms.
Rick Rosner: JD and I are currently in the early stages of launching a podcast that explores the intersection of artificial intelligence and the entertainment industry. I have begun drafting a theme song. So far, I have come up with the following lines:
“Here comes AI. We are all going to die.
I, I, I… or maybe we will live forever.
Nobody knows.”
When set to music, it has a surprisingly sophisticated tone. I joke that I am a regular Hank Williams. JD’s vision is that the podcast should reflect the profound interconnectedness of everyone today. That is the central idea. We are calling it Quantum Hollywood.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Is it a more elegant way of expressing the concept behind Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon?
Rosner: That is an insightful analogy. I also wrote a clever tweet today. Elon Musk has recently criticized a major taxpayer-supported bill, referring to it as a “disgusting abomination.” The phrase started trending. In response, I tweeted:
“‘Disgusting Abomination’ was my stripper name.”
Jacobsen: That would work better as a wrestler’s name. Imagine something like The Undertaker, but instead, it is The Disgusting Abomination.
Rosner: That contrast is the whole point—it is a name no one would want as a stripper.
Jacobsen: Ah, I see—the irony. The joke did not land for me at first, but it was clever.
Rosner: It may not resonate with everyone, but it is still a good one. What else is on your mind?
Jacobsen: I have been exploring projections about AI and employment. Some reports, such as one from the McKinsey Global Institute, estimate that between 400 million and 800 million jobs could be displaced globally by 2030 to 2035 due to automation and artificial intelligence. That is a staggering figure. On a related note, I recently read that Mark Zuckerberg, through Meta, is interested in building a small modular nuclear reactor to power data centers.
Rosner: Yes, I have heard about that. If we can construct safe nuclear power plants—and theoretically, we can—the technology has significantly improved in recent years. Of course, implementation remains highly complex.
Jacobsen: Bill Gates has been investing in advanced reactor designs, like the Natrium reactor. Some of these use molten salt as a coolant. They are considered safer, more efficient, and, in some cases, capable of consuming nuclear waste as fuel.
Rosner: To explain it briefly, a fission reactor relies on fissile materials such as uranium-235 or plutonium-239. When these atoms undergo fission, they release energy and neutrons. The neutrons then trigger further fission in nearby atoms, resulting in a self-sustaining chain reaction.
If you bring together enough fissile material—roughly 10 to 15 kilograms—and compress it sufficiently, you reach a critical mass capable of producing a nuclear explosion. That is the basis of atomic weaponry.
However, reactors operate below that threshold. The fuel is structured in rods and placed within a moderator, like water or graphite, to slow neutrons. Control rods made of neutron-absorbing materials such as boron or cadmium regulate the reaction by absorbing excess neutrons. The heat generated from fission is used to convert water into steam, which then drives turbines to produce electricity.
To shut down or cool the reactor, the control rods are inserted fully to absorb neutrons and stop the reaction. If the heat exceeds safe levels and the fuel melts, a core meltdown occurs, producing a radioactive hazard, as seen in incidents such as Chornobyl and Fukushima.
Fortunately, the newer designs are far more resilient and inherently safer than older reactor models. Moreover, like Chornobyl — the plant itself was not inherently unsafe. They were conducting safety tests to determine what would happen under specific failure conditions — such as locking down certain systems. Moreover, they made critical errors. It was a case of human error, potentially compounded by human error.
The basic mechanism is straightforward: you have control rods that you insert into the reactor core — the “pile” — to absorb neutrons. This prevents those neutrons from continuing the chain reaction by splitting more atoms.
However, again, the system functions by placing fissile material close enough together to sustain fission. There should be multiple, redundant, foolproof ways to physically separate that material in an emergency so that it does not melt down.
Then you have the issue of spent nuclear fuel. Once the fuel is no longer efficient for generating power, it is still highly radioactive — and potentially dangerous, especially if someone were to steal it.
You need secure storage. If the material cannot be reused, it must be disposed of in a way that prevents environmental contamination and theft. Because even “spent” fuel can still be weaponized — not for a nuclear chain reaction, but as part of a dirty bomb.
You do not need a reactor or an atomic detonation. All it takes is, say, 50 pounds of C-4 and 10 kilos of moderately radioactive uranium. You blow it into dust.
With that amount of C-4, you could contaminate several city blocks and cause mass panic. There was no actual nuclear explosion but radiological terror. It would be psychological and environmental damage — not Hiroshima, but still catastrophic in its way.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
In-Sight Publishing 