“some” higher operation costs? Most heavy labor on freighters is by 3rd world workers who make less than our minimum wage. They are treated like dogs because consequences outside the ship with diesel engines are minimal.
Reactors need far more qualified, far more expensive and far more rested personnel to be on duty at all times. The ancillary systems needed for a reactor have similar breakdown rates as diesel except the consequences of a breakdown are catastrophic That is why they must be constantly cleaned and worked on like white-glove boutique items. AND every system is multiplied for redundancy so it further multiplies the already expensive labor. You can’t get away with faulty work or temporary measures in a reactor like you can with diesel.
Just because you can’t build a fission device with the nuclear fuel, doesn’t mean you cant make a dirty bomb or force the reactor to meltdown once it is near a target. Not only do you need security for outside pirates but also intense watch for inside sobatuers. Plenty of medicated suicidal wackos out there are willing to kill as many people as they can. We dont even leave pilots alone in the cockpit these days and meltdown in a major port city would be many magnitudes worse.
“The ancillary systems needed for a reactor have similar breakdown rates as diesel except the consequences of a breakdown are catastrophic.”
Those are ancillary systems as you admit - ancillary, and thus their breakdown rate it not likely to be higher. And our military navies have already years of experience on how such ancillary system breakdowns are handled, safely, on our nuclear powered fleets - for which quite obviously there is not a history of “catastrophic” disasters.
I have agreed there is more one time costs for the nuclear unit, as well as higher paid human resources, but without doing any math that still includes the possibility that those costs, over the long term, may be collectively higher than the ever and ongoing constant refueling costs of the diesel powered ship.
As far as the pirates, I know what our military thinks (and has plans for) in such an instance, and how adaptable those plans are in a commercial case, but on the knowledge that loose lips sink ships, I’ll let you do your own research to find there are solutions to your concern.
“You cannot turn off Windows 10 updates completely or permanently. “
Yes you can. Just read what I said. I have been denying Win 10 to run any updates for nearly a year now. Yes, it is not “disabling” anything. It just forces windows to ask if it is OK to run the update (because you have your Internet connection set to metered). No it does not stop Win 10 from asking, again and again (as often as i explained it will), but each time you just decline the update. It does work, no matter what Micrsosoft says, and my un-updated Win 10 machines has no problems getting to and using the Internet. That’s a fairy tale that Microsoft can monitor who is reaching the Internet with a Win 10 machine that has not been updated, and stop it’s Internet access.
“You cannot turn off Windows 10 updates completely or permanently. “
Yes you can. Just read what I said. I have been denying Win 10 to run any updates for nearly a year now. Yes, it is not “disabling” anything. It just forces windows to ask if it is OK to run the update (because you have your Internet connection set to metered). No it does not stop Win 10 from asking, again and again (as often as i explained it will), but each time you just decline the update. It does work, no matter what Micrsosoft says, and my un-updated Win 10 machines has no problems getting to and using the Internet. That’s a fairy tale that Microsoft can monitor who is reaching the Internet with a Win 10 machine that has not been updated, and stop it’s Internet access.