Skip Navigation

Posts
0
Comments
371
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Every previous adoption of technology has taken - what, 50 years? - between having the technology and being set up to make use of it. Gasoline did not immediately have car engines to put into, nor kerosine a whole city's worth of lamps set up to receive them, etc.

    Though at first, if fusion could power up the existing electrical grid then it could e.g. make electrical cars more efficient in the net/overall sense, even if vehicles operating directly on fusion power themselves would take many more years. So fusion really might be different than those that came before, if we are anticipating and more ready for it than previous technical advances?

    Though yeah, it will have its own challenges e.g. the radioactive wastes, so fusion would not begin to replace greener energy approaches such as solar, wind, and geothermal, only perhaps supplement them.

  • it’s a fundamental inefficiency that must be worked around with additional effort and resources

    In the OP the use of the word "problem" rather than something like "challenge", and referring to the problem being the pricing structure (negative) makes it seem like we've switched topics slightly, but if you are just referring to the foundational inefficiency of energy distribution then yeah I agree it is definitely a challenge. However, that challenge need not be so overwhelming (even perhaps solely wrt pricing) that it negates the benefits of having that form of technology available altogether. e.g. if the power company itself, or each recipient building individually, had its own battery (if let's say those were cheap & sustainable) then that could work, without the users needing to care much. I forget which city but one example in Germany iirc pumps water up a mountain during the day, then at night or on a cloudy day that potential energy falling back down generates electricity again. So yes a "challenge" for sure but not necessarily an insurmountable one!:-)

    Also, there are "problems"/"challenges" wrt use of fossil fuels as well, which have implications for climate change, and therefore even purely from a profit perspective there's government laws & subsidies and public perception that can affect it, which could push the overall net towards being beneficial to store that energy for later.

  • You just mentioned a number of ways that capitalism could be "fettered" to work more for the benefit of all. But the person you responded to said "unfettered capitalism" (unless they changed it later). :-)

  • You gotta recharge your phone battery sometime though - and if electricity had a different cost for nighttime vs. daytime, you can bet that people would choose the day option whenever possible.

    (I chose a mobile device here bc it doesn't need any "extra" battery or technology beyond what would already normally be at hand.)

  • Nikola Tesla was a radical anarchist then, I guess? :-P

  • And if you happen to die in the meantime, well then in that case you cannot sue :-P.

  • B/c he knows that he does not mean it, and his base knows that he does not mean it, but it still manages to communicate something regardless - "they bad".

    Humanity today is genetically identical to those in ancient Greece, and many of us have spent less time schooling ourselves about how to e.g. avoid frauds than many of them did back then. ergo, "argument by authority" still works for us, as perhaps it did for them back then as well.

    Your presupposition seems to be that humanity should somehow get better over time? At least it seems to relate to a common humanist theme, but if we want to get better, it is going to require effort on our part to make that happen. (apparently, having access to the entire repository of human knowledge at our fingertips is not sufficient, for those who cannot be bothered to learn from it - either by reading or just sitting passively as videos with pwetty graphics do all the work of spelling it all out for us, yet still that is less fun & engaging to people who would rather watch shiny motor vehicles with ads on them drive round & round in circles)

  • Your words were all spelled correctly. Try again? :-P

  • POV: your project manager went in an "cleaned" it all up by removing them - your (sic) welcome! 😜

  • To anyone wondering, that is 69.3 degrees Fahrenheit (°F). So if it started from freezing it would make it "very hot", while if it were to start from lets say a perfect 70°F it would rise to ~140°F. And if it happened in the summertime when it was already 100, it would rise to 170°F - and how many people would even survive that? Maybe, if we had advanced warning and it were to only last a few hours - but what about things like crops & wildlife?

    According to a recent poll, the number of Americans who outright deny climate change is down to just 15% of the population, but whether they "believe" in it or not may be indistinguishable from not believing - e.g. as this article discusses - since just like how they are "Pro-Life", the walk does not quite seem to match the talk.

    To anyone feeling overwhelmed by all this: please don't be - there's only so much that any one person can do. Do what you can, and try to remain "aware", but this is bigger than all of us, and we will need to face it together, so you are not alone.:-)

  • (Translation: Klingon/pIqaD: Qapla'!)

  • Open source software may be a good model to look at. People contribute bc they want to, regardless of any monetary remuneration.

    But it's hard, and a for-profit corporation can often move forward more quickly to develop an objectively better project. Except even though they *could", they (usually) don't, and really they have zero reason to, bc their goal is to make a profit, not a product. Reddit vs. Lemmy/Kbin/Mbin/etc. is one such example.

    But it gets complicated bc of all the counterexamples, like at one time Google really was awesome, and free, so most of the open source projects did not push hard to replace it, bc it worked so well for so many. Similar to Lemmy I suppose - before the Rexit it had existed for many years, but it wasn't until that shakeup that it was propelled forward extremely quickly by the influx of developers, e.g. who made the front end apps. Before that, the Reddit experience was fairly good even if not great, so not as many people bothered.

    Necessity is the mother of invention.

  • I doubt you can simply listen to someone online - maybe, but there's no accountability here and that seems like a hindrance. So maybe try to find an actual irl counselor? If you are part of any clubs like a religion then that often offers streamlined access.

    I will offer one piece of direct advice though, not from myself as a good source but from someone who I have come to trust: maybe pause the dating scene. So many people try to rush into that, but if you haven't gotten yourself put together, then how are you going to offer to share your life with someone else? Depending on the circumstances ofc, like if someone was super awesome then they could help you, but it's a lot to put onto someone else, and isn't that a bit unfair to them? It seems kinder to both yourself to narrow your focus to getting your own life put together, and to others as well. If you are currently dating someone, note that I am not saying that you should immediately break up with them, it's just something to consider and make your own determination about what to do.

  • I wonder if somebody shot the guy?

  • It is the way we do it! :-P

  • That strongly depends on whether you are allowed to copy and paste:-)

  • You define your own meaning of life. Whether you are Atheist, Christian, Muslim, Jew, or whatever, that is still true. If you want to be high literally all the time, go nuts and have fun with it - but please note, it sounds like you don't, not really?

    Consider possibly joining a support group, to help you through working that all out, by hearing stories of others who are further ahead on that path than you? Plus you may be surprised that you could be further ahead along it than you thought.

    And yeah the world really does seem fucked, but so what? Don't use that as an excuse to give up, if you would rather have more fun standing up on your own two feet. The world may burn (and freeze, and more likely alternate rapidly between both extremes), but you still get to decide what you want to do about it!:-P

    Maybe watch the movie Braveheart, as William Wallace (Mel Gibson) gets eviscerated at the end, knowing full well that he could have chosen to avoid it, but instead choosing to value his pride... and freedom. We all die, every single person who has ever lived has died up until now (barring weird freak events like someone time-traveling from the past beyond us into the future:-P), but you get to choose how you want to LIVE.

  • Better than "rejected - git gud"? :-P

  • I want to be able to say it is copium, where they want to do well but are just hiding the truth from themselves how predatory the game would be.

    But I cannot, bc some people in the world really truly are like that. Sometimes they make games and sometimes they merely play them.

  • These marketing gimmicks are fairly uh... "broadly inclusive" in their definitions of terms (whatever makes them the most money).

    But you are right, that choice was unforgivable. My image seems to have caused you... pain?

    Thus, mission failed spectacularly! :-)