Thorny_Thicket @ Thorny_Thicket @sopuli.xyz

Exploring diverse perspectives on contentious subjects.

---

Read more

Posts

23

Comments

919

Joined

2 yr. ago

Moderating

---

No, I'm not on social media anymore.

You're not piloting a bone mech, you are it.

It feels like you're behind your face looking out into the world but once you pay close attention and look for what's looking you'll discover there's nothing there. There's no "you" in a sense that there's someone behind the wheel. There's just consciousness. It feels like something to be. A subjective experience.

Well hey - atleast I provided some statistics to back me up. That's not the case with the people refuting those stats.

At least 20 coal-fired power plants nationwide are being resurrected or extended past their closing dates to ensure Germany has enough energy to get through the winter.

Source

While this all isn't necessarily directly linked to the phasing out of nuclear energy and is more related to the war in Ukraine it still shows that Germany is continuing to use coal plants it didn't intend to anymore.

Germany is firing up old coal plants, sparking fears climate goals will go up in smoke

Germany to reactivate coal power plants as Russia curbs gas flow

Energy crisis fuels coal comeback in Germany

Germany Reopens Coal Plants Because Of Reduced Russian Energy

We don't choose to build it more expensive than it needs to be. It's by nature always going to be more expensive to build one of something instead of what the cost per unit is going to be when you make many.

Wind and solar isn't going to solve the issue untill we come up with a way to store energy on large scale. When you plug in an appliance that electricity is not taken from a reserve but it's produced for you in real time. Wind doesn't blow and sun doesn't shine according to how much electricity is needed at each moment. Finland produces all its electricity basically by hydro, wind and nuclear power. When it's windy we have excess electricity and the prices drops to negative and we got to sell it abroad but when it's calm the opposite is true. This wouldn't be the case if we could somehow store that excess energy.

They're burning coal to produce the energy they otherwise would have done using nuclear so I don't think there's anything wrong about what I said. If you turn off a nuclear power plant you're going to need to produce that energy by some other means. They're not building new coal plants to replace nuclear but they're continuing to use/reopen coal plants that shouldn't have to be used anymore. Germany is the world's 4th biggest coal consumer.

What are these claims we're blindly trusting exaclty? Do you have any direct quotes?

The high cost is largely explained by the fact that there's no "standard model" for nuclear power plants but instead they're all designed and built from scratch which can make them really expensive. Olkiluoto 3 nuclear power plant in Finland is the world's 8th most expensive building at whopping 12 billion dollar cost to build. The original price estimate was 3 billion. Many of the buildings on that list ahead of Olkiluoto 3 are also nuclear power plants.

This however isn't some inherent probem about nuclear power itself but rather the way we do it. It doesn't need to be that expensive.

Tesla on FSD could easily pass the driving test that's required for humans. That's a nonsensical standard. Most people with fresh license are horribly incompetent drivers.

Well you didn't google any of that.

Nuclear power plants are expensive to build but the cost of running one especially when adjusted to the amount of electricity it produces is not significantly more than running any other power plant. Also uranium is not considered to be a gobally scarce resource.

Out of necessity probably. In Germany for example they're turning off nuclear power plants and replacing them with coal because nuclear is dangerous apparently. However you still need to produce the power somehow to run the country. Not even the most hardcore climate activists want to sit in a dark, cold apartment with no power.

I think the issue here is that you like many other people seem to imagine that because a system is called "full self driving" it literally means that. As if it's either fully human controlled or fully AI controlled and there's no inbetween. No, this is just overly simplified black and white thinking that misses all the nuances about the subject.

Is the company legally liable for the actions of the self driving car? If no, then they don’t trust the vehicles.

This is utter nonsense. These companies aren't not-liable for the accidents they cause. Ofcourse they don't want to be and would rather swipe these incidents under the rug but that's just not going to happen. There howerer just isn't a precedent. This is brand new technology that no one has seen before. What the liability of these companies is going to be the end is still under debate. It's just a blatant lie at this point to claim they have no liability as if that's something that's been settled.

Humans get into accidents all the time. Is that not unacceptable for you?

I feel like people apply standards to self driving cars that they don't to human driven ones. It's unreasonable to expect a self driving system never to fail. It's unreasonable to imagine you can just let it practice in simulation untill it's perfect. This is what happens when you just narrowly focus on one aspect of self driving cars (individual accidents) - you miss the big picture.

These companies are the only ones with access to those stats. Nobody else has it. The alternative here is to not cite stats at all. If you think the stats are wrong you can go find alternative source and post it here.

Aivan, eli siis ongelmaksi muodostuu juurikin kytkentähetkellä muodostuva valokaari eikä niinkään ajastimen tehonkesto. Mitenköhän tuollainen varaaja toimii. Jos siinä olisi edes puolen sekunnin viive virran kytkemisestä ennen kuin laittaa vastuksen päälle, niin tuota ongelmaa ei varmaan olisi

What do you think was powering it untill this point?

For an autonomous vehicle without radars or LiDAR they do still drive pretty darn well. AI DRIVR makes really good videos about FSD on YouTube and love it or hate it, it's quite impressive how well it does despite the the lack of these sensors.

If I as an adult still had my mom telling me that's enough internet for today, and taking away my laptop, I'd hate it but it would objectively be good for me. This is kind of a similar thing. I don't like that these companies fuck up services I like but there's no denying that me leaving reddit for example was overall quite positive thing to happen.

There's several court cases ongoing about this stuff and I'd be surprised if these companies didn't have any liability

With Tesla the complaint is that the statistics are almost all highway miles so it doesn't represent the most challenging conditions which is driving in the city. Cruise then exclusively drives in a city and yet this isn't good enough either. The AV-sceptics are really hard to please..

You'll always be able to find individual incidents where these systems fail. They're never going to be foolproof and the more of them that are out there the more news like this you're going to see. If we reported about human-caused crashes with the same enthusiasm that would be all the news you're hearing from then on and letting humans drive would seem like the most scandalous thing imaginable.