No I did when I said to use nuclear energy. And sequestering atmospheric carbon allows heat to escape globally which offsets the waste heat. No, that ice will not melt because it being stored in a giant natural global freezer at the poles. The salt can actually be used to wall the frozen output giving layers of sea salt and dry ice with water slowly migrating to upper layers.
The electrical grid is already there but it is already buckling under demand, the infrastructure simply doesn't exist to handle the massive electrical load of everyone having and using an EV.
I've never really followed why we can't just heavily airate gel with atmospheric gas into a foam and store it at the poles. Use salt from desalinization plants and you'd have a great way to wall and divide chambers used to store it. The salt would dry out your frozen foam and return the water to the atmosphere leaving a frozen matrix of atmospheric gas and salts in a place that isn't particularly hospitable to life as it is. Yes, the freezing adds a little heat but reducing the greenhouse effect allows heat to escape globally.
No, a basic understanding of thermodynamics indicates it isn't net energy positive but since the point is to sequester CO2 not be energy positive it doesn't really matter.
"a portion of the solid byproduct of ocean electrolysis is a group of pure acids, which would likely find their way back into the ocean. "
The article did address this.
The ideal solution is probably to use nuclear and freeze the output water rather than putting back into the ocean. Just do the whole process at the poles.
It isn't about efficiency it's about the whole CO2 bit. We currently are estimated to require NEGATIVE emissions, not merely to be more carbon friendly.
It isn't all about cost. Are we forgetting our economic system, globally, is entirely based on money we pull out of air and regulate purely on subjective valuations. If we are talking about planet saving technology we tell the independent banking system creating the money to fuck itself and declare the effort free.
I think you are seriously overstating the problem... we already have a network of fueling stations everywhere that can distribute hydrogen instead of or in addition to gasoline.
Water vapor neither cools nor heats the air but it increases the thermal capacity of air. Try going somewhere where swamp cooling actually works, now step out of the sun and into the shade, note the massive temperature change. Wait till night, note the dramatic and rapid cooling. Now go somewhere that is already a swamp like Florida. Step into the shade... note how the sun stopped beating on your but the air is just as hot.
You aren't wasting energy, you are using it remove CO2 from the air... you know, the thing we've crossed the threshold and have to do above and beyond stopping putting CO2 into the air.
Because we've reached the point where we need NEGATIVE carbon emissions, even if we stop putting CO2 into the air we are screwed, we actually need to take it out.
I would agree with the Nukes but we should be smart about it and build them as deep ocean or arctic installations. Things can and will eventually go wrong, most likely because of someone being cheap or lazy.
Actually it is bad and uses rare earth elements. Luckily graphene superchargers are advancing at a rapid pace and will soon replace battery tech for these applications. Then our issue will be supplying energy quickly enough to enable the recharge.
We aren't neccesarily talking about a home security system there are likely cameras and microphones on a dozen or more devices in your home and dozens of other smart devices that could definitely be exploited to provide insight into movement and activity in the home. An intelligent individual could fingerprint and monitor known activities and usages throughout the home with nothing more than smart monitoring of power usage.
Privacy violation along with most things can certainly be used as a tool of abuse. It is important to remember that your right to privacy doesn't prempt your partners rights and is mostly waived by the commitments you've made to them and your acceptance of the benefits you gain in turn. Like any contract, social or otherwise, you are bound by the terms and have waived any of your rights necessary to meet the terms and relationships have an out clause. If you have waived any rights that would prevent the other party from determining if you violate the terms or enforce the agreed and/or implied consequences. Relationships are about balance and balance is usually found both parties doing their best to get over personal boundaries, sensitivities, feelings, hangups, especially any that get in the way of understanding and working in harmony with your partner. If you are actually married you don't even have rights your partner isn't allowed to waive on your behalf to a third party, why would you think you have any right to hide something from them short of a divorce?
It would be interesting to find out why. There was never a point in history when there weren't superior solutions for anything aol made, including aim. AOL was never anything more or less than a platform that exploited ignorance of what the internet was to create the impression that its solution was the internet. We shouldn't forget the lessons learned when we overcome predators who attempt to cultivate ignorance and exploit it for control and profit but we've seriously broken something if we look back on them with nostalgia.
"These systems are so vulnerable that they practically invite snooping. If someone can get into your camera just by googling the stuff written on it, the odds go way up that they will. This is actually true of malicious actors as well as the bored and curious; a notable portion of them are incompetent."
I don't deny that at all. But this isn't about third parties gaining unauthorized access, this is about painting a spouse as an abuser if they access these devices in their own home.
Yup. Slashdot has obviously been taken over and since people who actually understand technology don't use Apple solutions... lets just say it may be time to move on.
Yes, there is someone out there making their partner a veritable slave in their home. But we've taken this so extreme you won't actually ever encounter it in life situation and act like it is everywhere and are conflating the idea with hundreds of things that aren't that to create the illusion it is everywhere and women terrified.
All spouses of all genders have suspicious and paranoid moments and everyone tries to startle others and laughs when they jump sometimes. You and your spouse ARE both entitled to not be perfect. Try to be careful not to fall into arguments based on the slippery slope fallacy that have been pushed by others with an agenda which is served by your judgement being clouded by emotion and over sensitization. 999 times out of a thousand this is harmless and just call your spouse out on it if something like this is bothering you because while you want to have a sense of privacy you aren't actually entitled to it from your partner. It is your partner who ultimately is choosing to respect your privacy on the assumption there is nothing to find and it is on you to make sure that is actually true.
A slap or a punch might do objective physical harm and under rare or exceptional circumstances could be part of an accident causing serious damage but generally speaking they aren't that big a deal which is why society accepted them as means to address extremely unacceptable and/harmful behavior when an individual refused to correct themselves. Getting rid of these options as we have means also taking on the obligation to never "lose your shit", betray your spouse, embrace an irrational philosophy which allows you to pretend emotions justify irrational behavior. The very existence of tinder shows just how good a job we are doing.
"There's only one thing to do with the clueless masses: Manipulate them. Good people do it for the greater good, bad people do it for their own self interest. Only a tiny fraction of the human population is interesting in precise, objective information. Their weight is insignificant compared to the masses. They don't matter."
You are very close. That tiny fraction is tiny because of manipulation. Everyone manipulates people for the greater good and has convinced themselves that it is in their own self-interest and vice-versa.
For that matter Cocaine isn't even an innately illicit or banned substance. Last I heard it is still used on a frequent basis in certain areas of medical practice.
Are we really suggesting that the random list of substances we've banned are going to have some sort of magical property vs all the other substances we pass on in our wastewater? This particular species may be in some way impacted by this particular substance but given that there are dozens of commonly prescribed medications that are objectively more dangerous to living things than the list we've banned because they cause "euphoria" I fail to see the point of this particular research.
That is pretending jobs lost to automation is a like a big light switch that is one day true and the previous day false. Jobs are being lost to automation at a steady rate, the existence of other unrelated jobs.
"But many of the people losing their children are not coming here simply for work. They are facing being murdered in their home country."
That is the story we are being told anyway. Just like you were told that the most solidly left and consistent candidate with a history of actually fighting during the civil rights movement and staunch defender of the women and social issues Bernie Sanders wasn't a real democrat and all his supporters were uneducated white men.
I don't like Trump, I agree this is not good. But don't pretend that this would be okay if somebody else were making the decision and they have been, at will, since 2008. The idea that the only option was to cave and fund a literal wall or allow this is false. Congress could have passed a bill to repeal these policies which give presidents the authority to separate children and allow people into our nation without verification within an hour. There is no requirement for a bill to actually be thousands of pages of obfuscation for unrelated matters you know and it is damning that while there hasn't been zero tolerance this power has been applied thousands of times since 2008 without one peep to people.
Slashdot Mirror
No I did when I said to use nuclear energy. And sequestering atmospheric carbon allows heat to escape globally which offsets the waste heat. No, that ice will not melt because it being stored in a giant natural global freezer at the poles. The salt can actually be used to wall the frozen output giving layers of sea salt and dry ice with water slowly migrating to upper layers.
The electrical grid is already there but it is already buckling under demand, the infrastructure simply doesn't exist to handle the massive electrical load of everyone having and using an EV.
I've never really followed why we can't just heavily airate gel with atmospheric gas into a foam and store it at the poles. Use salt from desalinization plants and you'd have a great way to wall and divide chambers used to store it. The salt would dry out your frozen foam and return the water to the atmosphere leaving a frozen matrix of atmospheric gas and salts in a place that isn't particularly hospitable to life as it is. Yes, the freezing adds a little heat but reducing the greenhouse effect allows heat to escape globally.
No, a basic understanding of thermodynamics indicates it isn't net energy positive but since the point is to sequester CO2 not be energy positive it doesn't really matter.
"a portion of the solid byproduct of ocean electrolysis is a group of pure acids, which would likely find their way back into the ocean. "
The article did address this.
The ideal solution is probably to use nuclear and freeze the output water rather than putting back into the ocean. Just do the whole process at the poles.
We can't just stop emitting, we also need to sequester at this point.
It isn't about efficiency it's about the whole CO2 bit. We currently are estimated to require NEGATIVE emissions, not merely to be more carbon friendly.
It isn't all about cost. Are we forgetting our economic system, globally, is entirely based on money we pull out of air and regulate purely on subjective valuations. If we are talking about planet saving technology we tell the independent banking system creating the money to fuck itself and declare the effort free.
I think you are seriously overstating the problem... we already have a network of fueling stations everywhere that can distribute hydrogen instead of or in addition to gasoline.
Water vapor neither cools nor heats the air but it increases the thermal capacity of air. Try going somewhere where swamp cooling actually works, now step out of the sun and into the shade, note the massive temperature change. Wait till night, note the dramatic and rapid cooling. Now go somewhere that is already a swamp like Florida. Step into the shade... note how the sun stopped beating on your but the air is just as hot.
You aren't wasting energy, you are using it remove CO2 from the air... you know, the thing we've crossed the threshold and have to do above and beyond stopping putting CO2 into the air.
Because we've reached the point where we need NEGATIVE carbon emissions, even if we stop putting CO2 into the air we are screwed, we actually need to take it out.
I would agree with the Nukes but we should be smart about it and build them as deep ocean or arctic installations. Things can and will eventually go wrong, most likely because of someone being cheap or lazy.
Actually it is bad and uses rare earth elements. Luckily graphene superchargers are advancing at a rapid pace and will soon replace battery tech for these applications. Then our issue will be supplying energy quickly enough to enable the recharge.
Tesla is actually in the process of switching to supercaps. Thanks to graphene batteries will be a thing of the past for this type of application.
"could be" doesn't indicate something is unlikely... at least not without inflection in the speakers tone.
We aren't neccesarily talking about a home security system there are likely cameras and microphones on a dozen or more devices in your home and dozens of other smart devices that could definitely be exploited to provide insight into movement and activity in the home. An intelligent individual could fingerprint and monitor known activities and usages throughout the home with nothing more than smart monitoring of power usage.
Privacy violation along with most things can certainly be used as a tool of abuse. It is important to remember that your right to privacy doesn't prempt your partners rights and is mostly waived by the commitments you've made to them and your acceptance of the benefits you gain in turn. Like any contract, social or otherwise, you are bound by the terms and have waived any of your rights necessary to meet the terms and relationships have an out clause. If you have waived any rights that would prevent the other party from determining if you violate the terms or enforce the agreed and/or implied consequences. Relationships are about balance and balance is usually found both parties doing their best to get over personal boundaries, sensitivities, feelings, hangups, especially any that get in the way of understanding and working in harmony with your partner. If you are actually married you don't even have rights your partner isn't allowed to waive on your behalf to a third party, why would you think you have any right to hide something from them short of a divorce?
It would be interesting to find out why. There was never a point in history when there weren't superior solutions for anything aol made, including aim. AOL was never anything more or less than a platform that exploited ignorance of what the internet was to create the impression that its solution was the internet. We shouldn't forget the lessons learned when we overcome predators who attempt to cultivate ignorance and exploit it for control and profit but we've seriously broken something if we look back on them with nostalgia.
"These systems are so vulnerable that they practically invite snooping. If someone can get into your camera just by googling the stuff written on it, the odds go way up that they will. This is actually true of malicious actors as well as the bored and curious; a notable portion of them are incompetent."
I don't deny that at all. But this isn't about third parties gaining unauthorized access, this is about painting a spouse as an abuser if they access these devices in their own home.
Yup. Slashdot has obviously been taken over and since people who actually understand technology don't use Apple solutions... lets just say it may be time to move on.
Yes, there is someone out there making their partner a veritable slave in their home. But we've taken this so extreme you won't actually ever encounter it in life situation and act like it is everywhere and are conflating the idea with hundreds of things that aren't that to create the illusion it is everywhere and women terrified.
All spouses of all genders have suspicious and paranoid moments and everyone tries to startle others and laughs when they jump sometimes. You and your spouse ARE both entitled to not be perfect. Try to be careful not to fall into arguments based on the slippery slope fallacy that have been pushed by others with an agenda which is served by your judgement being clouded by emotion and over sensitization. 999 times out of a thousand this is harmless and just call your spouse out on it if something like this is bothering you because while you want to have a sense of privacy you aren't actually entitled to it from your partner. It is your partner who ultimately is choosing to respect your privacy on the assumption there is nothing to find and it is on you to make sure that is actually true.
A slap or a punch might do objective physical harm and under rare or exceptional circumstances could be part of an accident causing serious damage but generally speaking they aren't that big a deal which is why society accepted them as means to address extremely unacceptable and/harmful behavior when an individual refused to correct themselves. Getting rid of these options as we have means also taking on the obligation to never "lose your shit", betray your spouse, embrace an irrational philosophy which allows you to pretend emotions justify irrational behavior. The very existence of tinder shows just how good a job we are doing.
"There's only one thing to do with the clueless masses: Manipulate them. Good people do it for the greater good, bad people do it for their own self interest. Only a tiny fraction of the human population is interesting in precise, objective information. Their weight is insignificant compared to the masses. They don't matter."
You are very close. That tiny fraction is tiny because of manipulation. Everyone manipulates people for the greater good and has convinced themselves that it is in their own self-interest and vice-versa.
For that matter Cocaine isn't even an innately illicit or banned substance. Last I heard it is still used on a frequent basis in certain areas of medical practice.
Are we really suggesting that the random list of substances we've banned are going to have some sort of magical property vs all the other substances we pass on in our wastewater? This particular species may be in some way impacted by this particular substance but given that there are dozens of commonly prescribed medications that are objectively more dangerous to living things than the list we've banned because they cause "euphoria" I fail to see the point of this particular research.
That is pretending jobs lost to automation is a like a big light switch that is one day true and the previous day false. Jobs are being lost to automation at a steady rate, the existence of other unrelated jobs.
"But many of the people losing their children are not coming here simply for work. They are facing being murdered in their home country."
That is the story we are being told anyway. Just like you were told that the most solidly left and consistent candidate with a history of actually fighting during the civil rights movement and staunch defender of the women and social issues Bernie Sanders wasn't a real democrat and all his supporters were uneducated white men.
I don't like Trump, I agree this is not good. But don't pretend that this would be okay if somebody else were making the decision and they have been, at will, since 2008. The idea that the only option was to cave and fund a literal wall or allow this is false. Congress could have passed a bill to repeal these policies which give presidents the authority to separate children and allow people into our nation without verification within an hour. There is no requirement for a bill to actually be thousands of pages of obfuscation for unrelated matters you know and it is damning that while there hasn't been zero tolerance this power has been applied thousands of times since 2008 without one peep to people.