sartalon

joined 1 year ago
[–] sartalon@futurology.today 7 points 1 year ago (6 children)

This article reads like a terrible puff piece. Wired has really fallen low with a headline and article like this.

No real info, just statements from highly paid execs.

No way Chinese cars would be sold in U.S. or Japan, no idea about EU though. So no, not remotely a threat.

Seriously, this article is garbage.

[–] sartalon@futurology.today 22 points 1 year ago

Yeah, I got pinged twice, in one visit because I moved shit around, trying to organize.

Way more false positives, in my opinions.

[–] sartalon@futurology.today 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

But I would still rate Michaelangelo's David as the best sculpture today.

Edit... Winged Victory though... looking up at it from the base of the stairs...

[–] sartalon@futurology.today 21 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The solution is obvious. Hire an auditing firm to audit the auditing firms.

Bonus points if the auditing firm, hired to audit, subcontracts the auditing to the firm they are supposed to audit.

[–] sartalon@futurology.today 3 points 1 year ago

China's subsurface capabilities are laughable at best.

They are decades behind even Russia and pose no real threat to anyone but the same small Asian neighbors they have been bullying for years.

[–] sartalon@futurology.today 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Copy paste that for every continent outside of Europe.

[–] sartalon@futurology.today 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You are quoting "The majority of studies..." but I am not sure where you are pulling that from.

I have an issue with that quote since it is absolutely wrong about shipping and air trasport.

Edit:

And furthermore, you can't just abandon a significant sector and expect to pick it up later on.

There is tremendous momentum in each sector and to just focus on one, at the behest of others, is a TERRIBLE idea. Each sector does not exist in a vacuum. They all have supporting industries that also need to be developed and planned out. To put everything into renewables, is irresponsible at best. If we don't subsidize it all all. Then it will be a stillborn process that will never see anything outside an office.

Great, we now have 100% renewables, but we've had elevated CO2 for decades and now we have to spin up carbon capture from scratch because someone had the great idea to drop everything else. So add another 20 years for that to work up. We don't have that luxury.

[–] sartalon@futurology.today 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Not as it exists now. There are zero viable solutions for shipping or air travel, for example.

Achievable yes, but not in any near time frame, so we HAVE to look at other mitigating options as well.

Putting all your eggs in one basket is a very poor strategy.

Building more nuclear WOULD help. Yes, it has a huge capital front cost, and it takes a while to earn that back, but then it keeps paying.

The whole point of allowing these localized monopolies on power, is because power benefits from economy of scale and nuclear, right now, is the pinnacle of that. Large up front cost but also a solid, continual return that doesn't rely on outside factors.

view more: next ›