Tobberone @ Tobberone @lemm.ee

帖子

0

评论

279

加入于

2 yr. ago

Inflation is defined as the increase of prices over a set period of time. It is in itself nothing, doesn't do anything and its singular purpose is to be able to say how much something costs today compared to yesteryear. If the price difference depends on a supply chock (something that affects the ability to produce, like a shortage), or a demand chock (suddenly everbody rejects Tesla) is all the same, it results in a price change and can therefore be compared using the measure inflation.

The internet as we know it is dead, we just need a few more years to realise it. And I'm afraid that telecommunications will be going the same way, when no-one can trust that anyone is who they say anymore.

As you have described the situation my question is if it would be similar to copyright Donald duck, despite not having drawn all possible poses and situations?

Exactly. Grok repeatedly generate a set of numbers, which, when keyed against its own list of words, spells out that Musk is spreading misinformation.

It just happens to be frequently...

I've wanted something like that thumb keyboard since I had my Xperia mini pro in 2010!

I think the IEA chart looks into where the energy began, not what it was used for. The 50% number rings true to me, at least for the heating in cold winters. As for summers, cooling is a heat issue as well, so that's where much of the energy is spent.

On a personal level, its price, but to enact a national strategy takes more, struggles with supply is one such thing. But the way to the strategy will work is through subsidies, like we've seen before.

I think Toms give Nvidia to much cred. There is nothing to suggest that day zero isn't 20/1-25 for both lines, nor does it exclude the RTX 5000 series workstation cards (which is also Ada) from either graph, as "desktop" is as much a formfactor as anything else.

Which has yet to be realised. Of it is that fast and easy to set up I'm we will see loads of them going up in notime. Specially now in the US, given how the mindset of the current administration.

Not to mention China which invests heavily in anything able to produce a watt.

Nothing to hinder advancing nuclear in the world's 2 biggest economies! Problem solved.

And nuclear cant possibly be built in time, so I guess we are screwed. Don't let perfect stand in the way of good. Doing nothing is not an option.

Oh, by all means. Build nuclear to your heart's delight, but in the meantime we need to build wind, solar and water as well.

The part that annoys me the most are the ones that think that it is either or. It's not. It's as much as possible as fast as possible to replace as much fossil in total volume as possible.

Because the correct answer to his question is: "First day on the job, huh?"

Or we skip to the obvious conclusion:

Tio little, too late.

It will take too long to implement and will not solve the energy need when it is done. And it will cost more than anyone wants to pay.

Pushing nuclear, is just a strategy to obfuscate the discussion and prolong the life of oil infrastructure.

Yeah, and in a city with no greenery for kids to play in and afraid to let the kids out of their sight for 1 minute.

Given how successful the designs Keller has been on are, this kind of news adds expectations. In 3-5 years time, of course, but even so.

So, because stuff happens which doesn't require cars we should design our lifes around cars? I'm sorry, but I don't manage to follow your reasoning here?

Absolutely, I'm not US and I have no experience with megacities, but I am trying to find ways to build cities that better match our needs going forward. I don't know if the American car dependent suburbia is what is needed either.

As for parks in dense cityscapes, I've listened to clever architects who've discovered statistical regression claim that parks are more valuable per square meter the smaller they are... And while true in and of itself, it asks the question, how small is the minimum for them to be usable? Humans that experience greenery (even arranged) daily are healthier both mentally and physically. Where is the cut off?

Ouch. And how many of those are children?

Edit: What? Has nobody reflected on the fact that urban environments are for grown ups only?

We have the excess electricity already, but I'm not yet at the legally required amount of solar panels.

At work we are investing in energy storage, both batteries and heat storage and looking for more solutions.

I'm looking at hydrogen, because it's known tech and I dream of finding a way to use it in a more stable chemical form for storage.

This is very interesting! And that fuel could be used either to make electricity, heat or a combination!

Yes you do and you are still doing it. It is two different arguments, both are true, regardless of if one of them tracks with you or not. One is an argument about the need to act (climate change only care about absolute numbers) and the other is an argument about how to act (we need to focus on those individuals that emit the most). Both are true and a part of the bigger picture.

On a side note, it is also important to be inclusive. Consumption isn't the only way to address emissions. An even bigger possibility lies in those able to make decisions on the means of production. They are fewer, spend a lot more money, but are harder to find. Most of them works at corporations, though.