Womble

u/Womble@piefed.world
6 posts · 317 comments

Recent posts

Recent comments

But even taking that point of view, asking "should everyone be given free covid jabs so that you are less likely to catch it from them and die" seems like it would be an obvious yes.

Sadly for Americans covid got caught up in the omni-struggle over there.

Deleting (or editing) comments does not change what the hosting website has, it just updates what they display. so there will be lines in a database saying:

  • the original comment was "blah"
  • on the 6th of August 2024 it was changed to "blah2"
  • and the 20 of January the comment was deleted

There isnt a way for you to remove that unless there is some legal mechanism for you to force them to remove all data about you.

"net zero energy use" isn't a meaningful term. We can talk about net zero carbon as it is part of a cycle where carbon both has sources (burning fossil fuels, respiration of animals) and sinks (forests, oceans, wetlands, artificial carbon capture) so the two sides can balance to zero on net.

There is no "net" when it comes to energy usage, it is either used or it isn't. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with using energy, in harnessing energy is what allows increases of standard of living fundamentally. We need to stop the negative externalities of certain types of energy generation (primarily fossil fuels).

Starlink sats are of the order of 20-50kW, an AI focused rack in a data centre is on the order of 100kW, powering the things is definitely feasible.

Unlike:

  • cooling them
  • rad hardening them
  • replacing components as they fail
  • data up/downlink or interconnect

All of which are somewhere between horrible and impossible for data centres in space.

Power is pretty much the only part of space data centres that does make sense. You can put them in an orbit to get 24hr solar power and its stronger than on the ground as there's no atmosphere in the way. Large foldable solar panels are available, and unlike radiators you don't have to pump liquids through them.

Other than hype (which is by far the major driving force behind companies talking about them) access to that power without regulation is the reason you would want to put them in space.

As I said, drones arent projectiles in that sense.

A uranium (or tungsten, or even jacketed lead) dart hitting a target straight on with a sharp point while going multiple times the speed of sound is armour penetrating. Just putting a heavy metal in a subsonic aircraft carrying high explosive does nothing to help it penetrate armour and likely would impede it.

I dont think I'd trust some screenshot of some rando off twitter over wikipedia. Just at a glance nether Ed Miliband nor Miatta Fahnbulleh, nor Shabana Mahmoud are listed there.

Edit, neither is Andy Burnham! Kinda undercuts the whole thing.

The headline here seems like a massive reach given

We analysed serum bicarbonate (HCO3−), calcium (Ca) and phosphorus (P) levels from the U.S. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) from 1999 to 2020 as indirect proxies for atmospheric CO2 exposure

They took concentrations of three chemicals in the blood, took them as markers of CO2 concentration and then are extrapolating projected increases in CO2 concentration to increase those trends. That's some pretty nasty mangling of independent and dependent variables. The correlation is interesting and likely warrants further study, but "toxic atmosphere in 50 years" is total clickbait.

its not a bad one really, just wrong for this data. Its a diverging saturation gradient with different hues for above and below the middle, which is a standard type. But it should only be used when the middle point is a significant value (like height above sea level or temperature anomaly).

Its not happened yet, just the Westminster media bubble going into overdrive because they cant wait until Monday to report on who actually gets appointed. Appointing anyone but Milliband (or maybe Fatenbulleh) as chancellor would be a huge mistake from Burnham, showing that he cares more about appeasing the fanatically factional right wing of labour and the markets rather than driving through meaningful reform.