Money is wealth, i.e. something that you might be able to trade for something else.
Money is not wealth, because it has no value outside the debt that it represents. Take $1 million to a deserted island, and you'll find that the money is worthless.
Of course if everyone has money and nothing is available to trade for it, the money becomes worthless
That's not going to happen, because there's always something to trade for it. People need things, and other people/businesses provide those things.
If it is useful, then of course it should be used in areas where it will benefit all. If it only benefits a select few is where I believe it will do the most harm
If it benefits a select few, then the select few will implement it.
Money as debt is a more accurate description. It's a standardized IOU that can be traded. It's not a store of value, but a proof that someone owes you something. Energy is just a resource that can be traded for money.
And that's what's wrong with AI, robots, bitcoin...they all require an external energy input to keep them going
They aren't motivated to make things different, to make them better. Mere excellent mediocrity. Human skills and knowledge will be lost.
Until we can make AI that's motivated to make things better, a simple solution is to make a synergy between a human and a machine. The human sets the broad goals, and the machine fills in all the details.
The technology uses toxic materials by the boatload. Nothing leaves the environment unless it's shot into space.
They only use a small amount of toxic materials, relative to total weight of the panels. And the worst of the materials, cadmium, is tightly bound to tellurium, making it less toxic than the ore that we originally got it from. Also, the tellurium is very valuable, so there's a big incentive to recycle it.
So you ignore the conservation laws, basic common sense, handwave away the article with ad hominem.
No, I just read the article, and saw it was bullshit.
That we cannot see it... maybe it's a small black hole?
It's really far away, and brightness drops with 4th power of distance, so even a regular planet-sized object would be very hard to see. It's not that massive either, only estimated to have the mass of Mars, so that's a relatively small planet.
It's adding to the problem of small electronics many times over because the non-recyclable parts in a cell phone is small compared to the rest but with a solar panel the non-recyclable portion is large.
If we can extract lead and cadmium from rocks, then why not from old solar panels ?
"300 kg of nuclear fuel can be used to generated 300 GW of electricity over 25 years, but 300 kg of solar panels can only be used to generate 1 GW of electricity over 25 years."
It still equates 1 kg of nuclear waste with 1 kg of solar panel waste in terms of environmental impact. That's crazy, since most of the solar panel waste is from the glass front panel and the frame, which are harmless materials.
Most of the Nike shoes I've bought were between $50 and $100 per pair. A custom made leather shoe would cost $250, plus additional cost for having it re-soled after a few years, plus extra time/money spent to get your foot measured and pick up the shoes. Total cost per year is comparable, but the trainer is much more comfortable. I can even run in it, if I find myself late for the train.
Our neighborhood is going to charge 6 euros for each time they have to empty the grey waste bins. Plastic/metal/cardboard/paper/organic waste is picked up separately and is free of charge. For us, that's a big incentive to separate out all the plastic.
With focus, some investment, and a bit of tolerance of risk humanity could have already had a base on the Moon to serve as a test bed and launchpad to reach further out into the solar system.
We have sent probes further out into the solar system. Doing that from the Moon would make it a million times more expensive.
Trainers have a reputation of falling apart within months
I've had several pairs of Nike trainers last me between 2-4 years. That's good enough for me. Typical point of failure is just the sole wearing down too far.
I know it was a trendy topic of authors in the 1970s ("Future Shock" etc) but it was already well out of date by then.
It's a trendy topic right now that fertility goes down over time, and will stay low. That will be out of date in a few generations, as evolutionary pressures start taking over. Couples who choose not to have any children are extinct in one generation, and couples with 4 children will replace them.
According to the nature infographics, most of the bulk weight in plastics consists of big pieces. As you go down to sub-millimeter size, the total amount of plastic goes down. This means that smaller pieces are disappearing.
If CD's were available in the flavors of "As intended by the artist" or "Post-processed by the record company", which do you think people would prefer?
Depends. If they just read the text, and never listened to the actual music they may pick the first one. If they didn't read the text, and just listened to the music, they would prefer the second. That's how the loudness war started, people bought more music when the loudness was increased.
Of course, a smaller group of people prefer the original music. But if that's the main selling point, a music company could just sell digital music in two versions, original and with loudness. Apparently, they don't think the extra sales are worth their trouble.
People want recordings that aren't compressed to the point where the music itself becomes mostly noise and vinyl is pretty much the only way to get those recordings.
Actually, most people prefer compressed music. That's why they are selling it.
Slashdot Mirror
Money is wealth, i.e. something that you might be able to trade for something else.
Money is not wealth, because it has no value outside the debt that it represents. Take $1 million to a deserted island, and you'll find that the money is worthless.
Of course if everyone has money and nothing is available to trade for it, the money becomes worthless
That's not going to happen, because there's always something to trade for it. People need things, and other people/businesses provide those things.
That's when the battlebots come in.
If it is useful, then of course it should be used in areas where it will benefit all. If it only benefits a select few is where I believe it will do the most harm
If it benefits a select few, then the select few will implement it.
Money as debt is a more accurate description. It's a standardized IOU that can be traded. It's not a store of value, but a proof that someone owes you something. Energy is just a resource that can be traded for money.
And that's what's wrong with AI, robots, bitcoin...they all require an external energy input to keep them going
So do people.
Only in cases where it isn't practical to trade things.
It's almost never practical to trade things.
They aren't motivated to make things different, to make them better. Mere excellent mediocrity. Human skills and knowledge will be lost.
Until we can make AI that's motivated to make things better, a simple solution is to make a synergy between a human and a machine. The human sets the broad goals, and the machine fills in all the details.
People still need things. And to trade things, you need money.
The technology uses toxic materials by the boatload. Nothing leaves the environment unless it's shot into space.
They only use a small amount of toxic materials, relative to total weight of the panels. And the worst of the materials, cadmium, is tightly bound to tellurium, making it less toxic than the ore that we originally got it from. Also, the tellurium is very valuable, so there's a big incentive to recycle it.
So you ignore the conservation laws, basic common sense, handwave away the article with ad hominem.
No, I just read the article, and saw it was bullshit.
That we cannot see it... maybe it's a small black hole?
It's really far away, and brightness drops with 4th power of distance, so even a regular planet-sized object would be very hard to see. It's not that massive either, only estimated to have the mass of Mars, so that's a relatively small planet.
It's adding to the problem of small electronics many times over because the non-recyclable parts in a cell phone is small compared to the rest but with a solar panel the non-recyclable portion is large.
If we can extract lead and cadmium from rocks, then why not from old solar panels ?
"300 kg of nuclear fuel can be used to generated 300 GW of electricity over 25 years, but 300 kg of solar panels can only be used to generate 1 GW of electricity over 25 years."
It still equates 1 kg of nuclear waste with 1 kg of solar panel waste in terms of environmental impact. That's crazy, since most of the solar panel waste is from the glass front panel and the frame, which are harmless materials.
You seem very eager to believe a bullshit article.
Most of the Nike shoes I've bought were between $50 and $100 per pair. A custom made leather shoe would cost $250, plus additional cost for having it re-soled after a few years, plus extra time/money spent to get your foot measured and pick up the shoes. Total cost per year is comparable, but the trainer is much more comfortable. I can even run in it, if I find myself late for the train.
No need. All we need to do to clean the oceans is to stop throwing stuff in there. Nature will quickly break down whatever's already in there.
Our neighborhood is going to charge 6 euros for each time they have to empty the grey waste bins. Plastic/metal/cardboard/paper/organic waste is picked up separately and is free of charge. For us, that's a big incentive to separate out all the plastic.
With focus, some investment, and a bit of tolerance of risk humanity could have already had a base on the Moon to serve as a test bed and launchpad to reach further out into the solar system.
We have sent probes further out into the solar system. Doing that from the Moon would make it a million times more expensive.
Trainers have a reputation of falling apart within months
I've had several pairs of Nike trainers last me between 2-4 years. That's good enough for me. Typical point of failure is just the sole wearing down too far.
I know it was a trendy topic of authors in the 1970s ("Future Shock" etc) but it was already well out of date by then.
It's a trendy topic right now that fertility goes down over time, and will stay low. That will be out of date in a few generations, as evolutionary pressures start taking over. Couples who choose not to have any children are extinct in one generation, and couples with 4 children will replace them.
According to the nature infographics, most of the bulk weight in plastics consists of big pieces. As you go down to sub-millimeter size, the total amount of plastic goes down. This means that smaller pieces are disappearing.
You haven't really explained why training shoes are worse than the "decent" shoes that people used to wear.
High heels are an abomination.
Training shoes don't have high heels.
How about you off yourself and your whole family? One person can make a difference! Let it begin with you.
That only increases the percentage of people who don't care about overpopulation, making the problem worse.
You have ethylene dust that eventually gets into the ocean
Ethylene is a gas, not dust. And ethylene is biologically active, so it does get turned into carbon again.
Why are training shoes not decent ?
If CD's were available in the flavors of "As intended by the artist" or "Post-processed by the record company", which do you think people would prefer?
Depends. If they just read the text, and never listened to the actual music they may pick the first one. If they didn't read the text, and just listened to the music, they would prefer the second. That's how the loudness war started, people bought more music when the loudness was increased.
Of course, a smaller group of people prefer the original music. But if that's the main selling point, a music company could just sell digital music in two versions, original and with loudness. Apparently, they don't think the extra sales are worth their trouble.
People want recordings that aren't compressed to the point where the music itself becomes mostly noise and vinyl is pretty much the only way to get those recordings.
Actually, most people prefer compressed music. That's why they are selling it.