Hey hey hey now, don't go tarring all misanthropes with the same brush! I for one am very keen to see us stop damaging the environment and would love nothing more than to see balance restored to the various systems we're presently disrupting. My own misanthropy stems from the seemingly-inherent and disturbingly widespread belief that Humanity is the greatest product of the Earth and we can do whatever we damn well please, thank you very much.
Earth is a beautiful planet filled with a wondrous diversity of life and we hairless apes have so far proven to be very poor custodians.
Science is supposed to be objective, not political. But the AGW issue has become about 99% about politics.
How could it not become political? We're talking about having to move off fossil fuels and fairly seriously re-think the way we are manufacturing, producing electricity, transporting ourselves and our products, managing the inevitable waste, constructing new buildings and projects..
If we're serious about this it means a shake-up for many of the biggest industries in the world. It's hard to imagine a conversation on the topic that can in any way ignore the politics. Sad but true.
You'd know if you read the articles, listened to the experts discussing the matter or happened to notice any one of the hundreds of debates on the topic here on Slashdot and a myriad of other forums.
Such understand may however interfere with your posting of fucking stupid comments posing fucking stupid questions, so think hard.
I agree and I'm surprised you were modded 'flamebait'. Yours is the only logical response to comments originating from the currently-popular position of wilful ignorance and comfortable smugness. Any idiot can block their ears to yell "LA LA LA" and many choose to.
That's fine and dandy for them but I'm not about to roll over so they can further pollute intelligent discussion with their idiocy.
Sorry but while I absolutely agree that we should take climate change seriously and do what we can to minimize the effect what you say is clearly not even vaguely correct. The Earth has been through natural climate change cycles in the past and all the species now on the planet have survived such changes.
If the ocean dies, everything dies. That's not hyperbole, it's reality.
Your original post that I replied to appears to contradict you here, which was the basis for my reply.
That said I agree with most of what you say. We can't do good materials research without consistent funding, for example. I also agree with your comments regarding Tokamak designs; ideally we'd be pursuing and fully-funding many different approaches at a government level. At least we have several independent commercial projects on the go.
You'd think the potential to eliminate CO2 from power production and simultaneously pave the way for ditching fossil fuels in transport would make a good platform for a political party.
Your Moon Shot example is a good point because I think there are many who feel that commercial fusion power is up there with (or even more important than) the Apollo program. I understand the technological off-shoots of the program were considerable, but in terms of actually useful results, planting the US flag on the moon did nothing constructive.
Don't get me wrong, Apollo was important, but the results of a successful fusion design will affect our day-to-day lives much more profoundly. In addition, fusion will bring a slew of its own tech spin-offs just as Apollo did.
I think I heard something about that too - not sure if it's the same project but I know a small fission bomb was detonated inside a salt canyon to investigate the feasibility of the idea. Made some pretty colours on the walls of the cavern.:)
I think you're safe. The public persona that we all saw of Dubya was stupid enough to convince anyone that the above post could never have been his work.
There are those who claim he was actually very clever. If so, his 'dumb cowboy' routine that got him elected might actually border on genius. What a discomforting thought.
Unfortunately, somebody could also skip making the hole and just set it off in a city.
Honest question, I think I'm missing something - wouldn't that require the construction of a NIF-level facility at the target site or a similarly-powerful orbital platform aiming its lasers at whatever hohlraum-equivalent you've dropped on the city?
Thanks Rei! Google of course makes it easy to research stuff (if you know what you're looking for) so I find comments like yours very helpful for steering further research in addition to the intrinsic educational value of your posts.
You might not be quite so pessimistic about the topic if the research had been properly funded, rather than being repeatedly cut back to the point where fusion is always n years away. I do appreciate the sentiment though and I'm frustrated that we collectively achieve so little on important stuff like this.
However, given the progress to date and the many different approaches that are being explored, to say we'll never develop the technology suggests that you either have some deep and unique insight into the problem the rest of the world hasn't woken up to yet, or you just know that you are correct because feelings.
It is painful that the idiots who carry around signs like "you can't hug a child with nuclear arms" and want to save the planet from nuclear power are the same idiots who are forcing industry to use Coal power
Indeed. Where would we be now in terms of CO2 emissions if the goddamn 'green' movement hadn't shat all over nuclear energy?
I suspect that we'd have a great deal more electricity to play with today and that the abundance may have been enough to spur interest in electric vehicles much earlier.
Pure speculation of course. One thing I'm sure of though: we'd be considering the CO2 problem from a much better position than we are now.
As someone that has had to fire people I can tell you it is awful, you are screwing up someone's livelihood. In my case there were quite a few documented cases and failed plans leading up to it but we did all we could.
Thank you. You collectively did what you could for them but sometimes people still need to be let go.
It's actually not that hard to give a tiny little shit about your staff. It also takes surprisingly little extra effort and minimal monetary cost to genuinely care for them.
Sweden's economy is based in manufacturing and export of those manufactured goods, rather than dependent on a single intrinsically valuable but eventually limited natural resource.
If Sweden wants a truly sustainable economy they need only find a way to turn a profit from all the rapists they've invited to live with them from other countries.
You don't even know what a market is. It's not some magic controlling beast, it is merely an avenue for trade - trade which you don't have to participate in.
But you really do have to participate.
Even growing your own veggies requires land and resources. Solar panels, water, wastewater, healthcare and Internet access, travel and so on - none of this is free. Even living as one estranged from society, it cannot be escaped that whatever land you walk or sleep upon is invariably owned publicly or privately and where there's ownership there are always 'terms of use', for want of a better phrase.
Death is no release either - cremation and burial both attract some rather large fees that must be paid in some fashion by somebody.
Slashdot Mirror
Hey hey hey now, don't go tarring all misanthropes with the same brush! I for one am very keen to see us stop damaging the environment and would love nothing more than to see balance restored to the various systems we're presently disrupting. My own misanthropy stems from the seemingly-inherent and disturbingly widespread belief that Humanity is the greatest product of the Earth and we can do whatever we damn well please, thank you very much.
Earth is a beautiful planet filled with a wondrous diversity of life and we hairless apes have so far proven to be very poor custodians.
Bullshit.
Brilliant post, thank you.
Science is supposed to be objective, not political. But the AGW issue has become about 99% about politics.
How could it not become political? We're talking about having to move off fossil fuels and fairly seriously re-think the way we are manufacturing, producing electricity, transporting ourselves and our products, managing the inevitable waste, constructing new buildings and projects..
If we're serious about this it means a shake-up for many of the biggest industries in the world. It's hard to imagine a conversation on the topic that can in any way ignore the politics. Sad but true.
You'd know if you read the articles, listened to the experts discussing the matter or happened to notice any one of the hundreds of debates on the topic here on Slashdot and a myriad of other forums.
Such understand may however interfere with your posting of fucking stupid comments posing fucking stupid questions, so think hard.
That's one Kickstarter campaign I'd definitely vote for with my wallet.
I agree and I'm surprised you were modded 'flamebait'. Yours is the only logical response to comments originating from the currently-popular position of wilful ignorance and comfortable smugness. Any idiot can block their ears to yell "LA LA LA" and many choose to.
That's fine and dandy for them but I'm not about to roll over so they can further pollute intelligent discussion with their idiocy.
Sorry but while I absolutely agree that we should take climate change seriously and do what we can to minimize the effect what you say is clearly not even vaguely correct. The Earth has been through natural climate change cycles in the past and all the species now on the planet have survived such changes.
If the ocean dies, everything dies. That's not hyperbole, it's reality.
Thanks for an interesting reply.
Of course nowhere near, doesn't mean never
Your original post that I replied to appears to contradict you here, which was the basis for my reply.
That said I agree with most of what you say. We can't do good materials research without consistent funding, for example. I also agree with your comments regarding Tokamak designs; ideally we'd be pursuing and fully-funding many different approaches at a government level. At least we have several independent commercial projects on the go.
You'd think the potential to eliminate CO2 from power production and simultaneously pave the way for ditching fossil fuels in transport would make a good platform for a political party.
Your Moon Shot example is a good point because I think there are many who feel that commercial fusion power is up there with (or even more important than) the Apollo program. I understand the technological off-shoots of the program were considerable, but in terms of actually useful results, planting the US flag on the moon did nothing constructive.
Don't get me wrong, Apollo was important, but the results of a successful fusion design will affect our day-to-day lives much more profoundly. In addition, fusion will bring a slew of its own tech spin-offs just as Apollo did.
Thanks. :)
Comic book guy was always my favourite character!
Assuming they'd be permitted to allocate the proper funding by their 'green' and NIMBY constituents.
Similar scenarios will continue to rule us until we mature as a species. Right now we're all a bunch of overgrown children and it shows.
I think I heard something about that too - not sure if it's the same project but I know a small fission bomb was detonated inside a salt canyon to investigate the feasibility of the idea. Made some pretty colours on the walls of the cavern. :)
Duh. I mistook the joke for conspiracy theory, that was stupid.
I just hope nobody equates me with Bush.
I think you're safe. The public persona that we all saw of Dubya was stupid enough to convince anyone that the above post could never have been his work.
There are those who claim he was actually very clever. If so, his 'dumb cowboy' routine that got him elected might actually border on genius. What a discomforting thought.
Unfortunately, somebody could also skip making the hole and just set it off in a city.
Honest question, I think I'm missing something - wouldn't that require the construction of a NIF-level facility at the target site or a similarly-powerful orbital platform aiming its lasers at whatever hohlraum-equivalent you've dropped on the city?
Thanks Rei! Google of course makes it easy to research stuff (if you know what you're looking for) so I find comments like yours very helpful for steering further research in addition to the intrinsic educational value of your posts.
see, fukushima
For what? An example of the damage that can occur when the magnetic containment system in a fusion reactor fails?
You might not be quite so pessimistic about the topic if the research had been properly funded, rather than being repeatedly cut back to the point where fusion is always n years away. I do appreciate the sentiment though and I'm frustrated that we collectively achieve so little on important stuff like this.
However, given the progress to date and the many different approaches that are being explored, to say we'll never develop the technology suggests that you either have some deep and unique insight into the problem the rest of the world hasn't woken up to yet, or you just know that you are correct because feelings.
Neither holds any water as far as I'm concerned.
Do you want to live near nuclear plant? I don't, no matter how new and shiny with latest "bug-free" design it is.
Well done, NIMBY. I hold you arseholes partially responsible for the fucking mess we're in today. Thanks so much for your efforts!
It is painful that the idiots who carry around signs like "you can't hug a child with nuclear arms" and want to save the planet from nuclear power are the same idiots who are forcing industry to use Coal power
Indeed. Where would we be now in terms of CO2 emissions if the goddamn 'green' movement hadn't shat all over nuclear energy?
I suspect that we'd have a great deal more electricity to play with today and that the abundance may have been enough to spur interest in electric vehicles much earlier.
Pure speculation of course. One thing I'm sure of though: we'd be considering the CO2 problem from a much better position than we are now.
Fusion? Seriously? Extraordinary claims and all that.
I second this, Michael Chiklis did a very compelling good job of Vic Mackey in The Shield TV series.
As someone that has had to fire people I can tell you it is awful, you are screwing up someone's livelihood. In my case there were quite a few documented cases and failed plans leading up to it but we did all we could.
Thank you. You collectively did what you could for them but sometimes people still need to be let go.
It's actually not that hard to give a tiny little shit about your staff. It also takes surprisingly little extra effort and minimal monetary cost to genuinely care for them.
Sweden's economy is based in manufacturing and export of those manufactured goods, rather than dependent on a single intrinsically valuable but eventually limited natural resource.
If Sweden wants a truly sustainable economy they need only find a way to turn a profit from all the rapists they've invited to live with them from other countries.
(yeah, I know, I'll pay for this comment in Hell)
You don't even know what a market is. It's not some magic controlling beast, it is merely an avenue for trade - trade which you don't have to participate in.
But you really do have to participate.
Even growing your own veggies requires land and resources. Solar panels, water, wastewater, healthcare and Internet access, travel and so on - none of this is free. Even living as one estranged from society, it cannot be escaped that whatever land you walk or sleep upon is invariably owned publicly or privately and where there's ownership there are always 'terms of use', for want of a better phrase.
Death is no release either - cremation and burial both attract some rather large fees that must be paid in some fashion by somebody.