WalrusDragonOnABike

Are you a fan of ratchet and clank btw? Are 3rd person platformers the only good genre and are games since PS2 all trash?

9 million is total user accounts. Not monthly active user accounts. Facebook has 3 billion monthly active user accounts. The chart is showing active monthly user accounts.

https://fediverse.observer/stats
Probably using the monthly active users.

13mil seems to be total users.

Why would the first be a problem? The powered hub doesn’t get the power from the power hungry device from the unpowered up, does it?

Even when conversion camp stuff is illegal, people still try it. Even if just DIY abuse (which is also illegal and still common). Simply not having the tech may be preferable to having the tech/knowledge, making it illegal to use it, and then people use it illegally anyways. If child abuse in general was something that could have just not been invented, not inventing it would be far superior to inventing it and then making it illegal.

Probably something along the lines of “not negative or positive, but in the middle”. Basically a synonym for net zero except net zero may account for other GHGs while carbon neutral may only refer explicitly to carbon. If the process releases CO2 at some points and absorbs the same amount of CO2 elsewhere, then it would be net zero or carbon neutral. But if you release carbon that was stored for 100s of millions of years and would have continued to be stored otherwise and then just store that same amount of carbon for 1-5 years, then you aren’t really offsetting and aren’t really carbon neutral. Given none of the offset programs seem to have presented concrete evidence for long-term storage, they’re worthless in this context. I suppose you could fund short-term storage indefinitely, but how could Apple prove that they’re going to be able to fund carbon offsets for a watched purchased today in 75 years? If funding a lumber farm program that harvests trees after 15 years, I suppose you could just fund it every 15 years after an item is manufactured indefinitely? But how would a company demonstrate they’re going to continue doing that in 75 years?

If we have the tech to change people’s brains in such a way, what else will it gets used on? Ethically, there’s differences between pedophilia and other sexual preferences but I don’t know if there’s any biological differences. Given conversion camps are already a problem despite not working, I can’t see how they wouldn’t become a bigger problem if they did actually do what they claimed…

Are they just using “conservative” as a synonym for something like “political”?

A pipeline through Celeste?

Also he decided to run for re-election and the current main opponent has been touting themselves as the pro-autoworker person and Biden has been partly trying to present as the most pro-union president ever.

I’ve just seen complaints about the new stuff period, even in things that were made after the new stuff was the norm.

The IO chip is separate in some of their tablets (apparently there’s an old ipad air with a14 that has a separate IO chip to support 3.0), but I think for phones apple typically groups them together.

Kinda sad apple continued using lightning with usb 2.0 just to maintain their proprietary interface and didn’t even both upgrading it.

Those aren’t contradictory. DP is via connection to GPU using the high speed lanes and the 2.0 USB is from the A16 chip, which was designed with USB2.0 over lightning in mind from my understanding.

I feel like I still see people complain about modern refrigerants being less good because environmentalists banning the old ones on rare occasions.

Wind tends to be higher at night (at least here in Texas), so solar and wind are good complements. The biggest issue here is in the summer right after the sun sets, but that just means having enough battery storage for a couple hours for temps to start dropping. But wind/solar are still cheaper after including storage for that amount of time by far compared to new nuclear or new fossil fuels. Only existing facilities have a comparable per kWh cost when compared to new solar/wind + storage. Even if you quadrupled the storage, it would still be cheaper than new nuclear and comparable to existing nuclear iirc. Granted cost of storage partly depends on what storage options are viable locally for small grids.

Is PV common at commercial scale solar?

Ironically, I seen the claim that the original reason was because the US grid was outdated and Texas wanted to do better. Probably back when people who called themselves “conservatives” actually cared at little bit about conserving the environment (at least in some self-interested ways). Of course it didn’t work out that way.

No clue why the rest of the US is divided into two grids.

The article itself said it’s still counting in future tech advances. Just because the alpha test is done at full size is different than being commercial scale imo. But we shouldn’t even be judging power plants success on how well they can make profits, so whether it’s commercial scale or not should not be relevant. Unfortunately it is, but the article gives no indication that it is commercially viable with current tech. Just that it physically exists.

Nuclear has more location issues than renewable. Do you think people want a nuclear plant in their backyard?

It’s the same issues of will, money, and location that limit both. Why waste all of those on nuclear in 20 years when the grid is unstable today?

Unfortunately simply using renewables alone is t enough to decentralize them. Lately Texas has been having near energy shortages and part of the problem is a few unexpected central outages at fossil fuel plants, but another is the vast majority of wind turbines are built in one sunset of the state, so if wind is low there it can (and has) cause massive decreased in available energy, far larger than a couple traditional large scale nuclear plants when other parts of the state are under fire warnings because of high wind and dry conditions. Of course this isn’t an issue with the technology itself, but rather a problem with implementation. The issue isn’t with what was built, but the lack of building more across the state (or joining one of the two larger grids to further decentralize power production over a broader area)

Anyways, another issue with security is centralized power production make a good target for disruption. And if you have the side effect of causing a meltdown…

This is the exact same for renewables, worse, arguably, since wind farms have to be off shore to be efficient

From the charts I’ve seen lately, offshore is much more expensive than onshore per kwhr for wind by a large margin. If that’s the case, is offshore even valuable anymore?