Err... you're not wrong. My initial comment would have made more sense if this had been the post I was intending to reply to. Not sure how I managed to screw THAT up.
While clearly biased and theres some wording and cherrypicking of studies (that isn't very egregious, to be clear!) that I'd take issue with in a more formal setting, the content of the article thru to point two are really quite an alright summary of the issues and raises some very valid questions the industry has yet to answer.
However it throws itself off the credibility cliff riiiiiight around this point:
In any event, regulators are loosening safety and security requirements for SMRs in ways which could cancel out any safety benefits from passive features. For example, the NRC has approved rules and procedures in recent years that provide regulatory pathways for exempting new reactors, including SMRs, from many of the protective measures that it requires for operating plants, such as a physical containment structure, an offsite emergency evacuation plan, and an exclusion zone that separates the plant from densely populated areas. It is also considering further changes that could allow SMRs to reduce the numbers of armed security personnel to protect them from terrorist attacks and highly trained operators to run them. Reducing security at SMRs is particularly worrisome, because even the safest reactors could effectively become dangerous radiological weapons if they are sabotaged by skilled attackers. Even passive safety mechanisms could be deliberately disabled.
What in the fearmongering fuck is this? "Oh no, terrorists!" And it's debunked on the first page of one of its own sources. Regulators have NOT put any pathways in place to "exempt SMRs from many of the protective measures." If you read the sources, what they have done is put in place guidelines for the evaluation of the current measures, to judge if those measures merit being re-evaluated. Its a path for a path to judge if maybe we should have a path.
And fucking hell, yes of course they would have smaller security contingents, the installations are physically smaller! There's less to guard! Thats in no small part the point!
Look there are a lot of problems with SMRs and even more questions we just don't have answers for yet. Those questions need answers before any progress can be made with SMRs. The benefits of lower transmission losses, dedicated power generation for industrial complexes being at all beneficial, or remotely finalized designs for the reactor technology needed here are all MASSIVE outstanding issues that have yet to be solved.
But this shit? "we cant have this source of green energy because terrorists!!!"
Fuck off with that.
There are more than enough issues with SMRs to justify extreme skepticism, hell microsoft wanting a bunch is probably reason enough to abandon the whole concept. We dont need to stoop to disinformation and blatant lies, what the fuck. This is why "nuclear bros" (Which great idea, lets "other" the critics, that's not a red flag at all...) get so much traction, because they dont stoop to conspiracy theory tropes to support their arguments.
It's a satirical comment made to highlight using mild terms that the comment in question is highly suspect. The implication is that I myself am a member of the 'smokescreen', which is an implied but nonspecific organized group of people engaging with this topic in bad faith so as to shift the narrative in some unfair way, and that I am confessing that the above poster has figured out our secret motivations and because of that, foiled our evil scheme.
This is, of course, an absurd assertion on my part. I'm not a member of the shadow government. There is no shadow government. The regular government is plenty evil enough as-is. Trust me on that, I'm a member of it.
To dismiss an extremely effective and proven technology like that is fine, if you provide any evidence to support your position. But that comment is, to put it politely, "horseshit". To call out just one aspect that irked me, it embodies the extremely tired trope of making a claim while not demonstrating any evidence that said claim is true, then asserting their claim as an obvious and correct conclusion. The issue in specific is that they failed in any way to establish how advocating for an alternative source of power would somehow empower the petrochemical lobby.
Have you got anything to back that up with? Because the problems with nuclear power have been almost exclusively caused by conservative governments. The ludicrous licensure requirements are the largest factor in driving the cost of nuclear facilities so far out of the realm of feasibility, and those have been imposed almost exclusively by conservative governments (with a special shoutout to Al Gore Okay that's unfair, his legislation on nuclear power was largely based on anti-corruption ideals and not the ideals of the anti-nuclear movement)
I'm sorry, I think you may not be using 'baseload' correctly. We will absolutely always have to meet the requirements for baseload power generation, otherwise we aren't making enough power and we will have brownouts.
If what you meant was that a grid relying on solar and wind for primary generation and supplemented with battery facilities can make up the deficit at night/on calm days, then while that would be ideal it is extremely unlikely to happen in the next several decades. Battery technology is not anywhere near ready for this solution, and while ESS are making extremely impressive advances, they are such a new technology that it would be intellectually dishonest for me to list their shortcomings here. They are simply too new to know which problems are inherent to the concept, and which are due simply to flawed engineering of a new technology.
For matters of logistics, a few large generating sources linked together are much more desirable than a distributed network. In fact the issue with economies of scale in power generation is one of the arguments against SMRs made by the above linked article's author. One of the biggest concerns with truly distributed power generation is safety - namely, how can you safely work on a downed line when every single house has the independent capacity to energize the lines? But those large power generating stations run into the same issue that SMRs are in vogue to solve; what do we do about crypto miners besides grinding them all up into dog food, which gets my vote. Their drain, and those of industry and data centers and so on, on local power infrastructure remains despite the source of the power in the system.
I'm of the opinion that a technology should be evaluated on it's own merits, otherwise people start to point out that the field of modern engineering as a whole is the product of the military industrial complex and it gets all reddit-comment-thread-y. I'm not about to argue that there's no astroturfing or outright propaganda in the energy industry (because I don't like looking like a fool or losing arguments because I'm clearly wrong...) though. I wholly agree that it's a hugely manipulated issue, and the mountains of evidence supporting that idea are so large that they threaten to bury you and I and the rest of this comment thread in an avalanche of carefully documented conspiracy and related rat bastardry.
However, I do take issue with painting all proponents of a particular thing as being some kind of fake 'smoke screen'. While I'm sure some percentage of commenters are serving any number of nefarious agendas, they can take their attempt to de-legitimize an entire opposing perspective by painting them all as "shills" and kindly fuck right off. That's trump-supporter shit, and furthers absolutely nothing except to divide voters on an incredibly important topic. That style of wedge-driving is the kind of thing you find in The Foundations of Geopolitics and is what the 'smokescreen' people actually do use to drive potential allies to infighting instead of coordinating an effective campaign for energy reform.
(Not that I think the above poster actually is some nefarious shill, but it's a somewhat amusing juxtaposition)
Yes, exactly! Err, but I'm not sure where the 'actually' comes in. It looks like we're agreeing. Am I misunderstanding? I can try to be a little bit more belligerent if that would help! This is internet commenting, we're supposed to be at each other's throats by this point in the comment chain....
While battery technology is making grand strides, it's my understanding that we're not to a point where we can even speculate on how to renovate our entire grid with them for a vast host of reasons. Using them to cover while switching to other higher-capacity ESSs seems to be the role they are best suited for, and outside of a few experimental exceptions that looks like the role they're stepping into in the current industry. I have high hopes for the future, but we still have a long way to go, especially in longevity. I'm not advocating for SMRs nor expansion of nuclear, solar or wind, just that we should not limit ourselves to considering a subset of our options because of ideological beliefs.
(And I'm sorry, but I have no idea what induced geothermal is. Sounds potentially volcano-y though, so that's always a plus in my book.)
(I don't really see any possible downsides to giving IBM a small nuclear reactor. They seem so nice.)
It's more your characterization that only conservatives are advocating for nuclear (and by extension that nuclear advocacy is only to serve the interests of fossil fuel companies) that I'm taking issue with, since it's overly reductive, regressive, an opinion which can be trivially shown to be incorrect and is a direct insult to me, personally. You're coming across like an asshole that spouts blatant conspiracy theories when I seriously doubt you'd give that impression IRL.
The Justice Department has determined that Boeing violated a settlement that allowed the company to avoid criminal prosecution after two deadly crashes involving its 737 Max aircraft, prosecutors told a federal judge on Tuesday. ...
Donald Trump's former White House aide is under fire after a video showed him claiming to distribute fake money to homeless people so that they will be arrested when they spend it....
That's a very interesting question you're asking. Does the guilt lie with the police for the murder, or with the person that put him in the path of the cops? If you set a dog on children, and they get horribly mauled, is it the dogs fault? Does the guilt lie with the person pulling the switch, or with the lunatic that tied them to the trolley tracks in the first place?
I understand why the op here would reframe that question, as it could quite reasonably be interpreted as shifting responsibility for their actions away from the (quite guilty) cops. It's still a good question to ask though, especially in the current context of someone intentionally trying to dangle vulnerable people in front of the cops like a steak to a guard dog.
(Personally I think guilt lies with everyone, but that calculating the exact degree of EDIT (for clarity): I mean calculating each individual person's guilt, as in all of society. Just to clarify that the cops are absolutely guilty. But calculating the guilt of everyone in society is impossible.)
(I was taking a bit of a jab at cops by implying they aren't capable of free agency, which could have been more clear.)
I'm not sure if you understood my point. An absolutist approach isn't representative of the real world, which is fine because representations don't have to be perfect (by definition, I think). The question isn't where do you draw the line, as with all trolley problem questions it's why do you draw the line. Did the person who called the cops get him killed? Well, in an absolutist view, yes they did. They put him in the situation to get him killed. The cops are also guilty of killing him, as is the person who made the hypothetical counterfiet money.
But since we do not live in a truly accurate representation nor too a strict absolutist one, where do we draw that line? Its not a question of where in the legal code do we draw that line, or if their behavior was excusable or inexcusable, it's a question about how we determine the answer to those questions.
You are taking this a great deal more literally than I intended for it to be taken. This is a hypothetical question that asks how we decided that it is legal, ethical moral etc. to call the cops. It's not a question about the specifics of this case except where they serve to exemplify the concepts.
... I could have been more explicit about that, I realize.
That line is taken completely out of context. The full quote, pasted elsewhere in this thread, is about how people can pay these price hikes, technically, but it's rage inducing that they keep having to, and we need to address this kind of corporate greed.
I am so lost as to your message here, I'm sorry. Best guess response:
I'm well aware of the rising cost of food, and that people increasingly can't afford it. But desperate people do desperate things, and food insecurity is about as desperate as humans can get. People find the money, usually by reprioritizing other critical needs. This is, of course, fucking insane that they have to do that. But because they are able to do that desperate reprioritizing they can continue to be bled dry by the corporations setting the prices. I'm not disagreeing about the cause or half measures, just that that quote is being used so out of context it's straying into the territory of intentional deception.
China has successfully developed its first 100-kilogram class vehicle-mounted liquid hydrogen system, marking a new breakthrough in the country's transportation sector, according to its developer China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation (CASC).
"With a capacity to carry up to 100kg of hydrogen"
about 7L / 1.8 gallons, if anyone was curious. Also known as a "fucking terrifying amount of hydrogen" assuming this AI-written article with absolutely no content isn't BS.
I'm going to convert my computer chair from pneumatic to static. I'm currently using plastic clasps that are held on with jubilee clips, but they're not great and need replaced (I'm a heavy lad). A sturdy metal version would be better....
Clamshell clamps or Truss Clamps aren't exactly what youre looking for, but they'll work. Clamshell clamps are used in automotive and plumbing applications, truss clamps are used for mounting lights and speakers to stage trusses. You can get them cheap on amazon, and stacking several of them up works great for spacing shafts.
"Stroke Limiting Shaft Collars" are exactly what you're looking for, since they're designed to do exactly what you're attempting here but for industrial pneumatic or hydraulic equipment. Unfortunately since they're for industrial equipment, they can be stupid expensive and a royal PITA to find. But they do have a very silly name, even for hydrualic equipment (which is a field whose jargon is entirely made up of double entendre), which is a point in their favor. Also, many of them work very well as bearing surfaces!
PLEASE be careful messing with the cylinders in office chairs though. It doesnt sound like youre planning to, but just a blanket warning. Much like garage door springs, those cylinders store WAY more energy than you would believe, and fucking up trying to take apart a damaged cylinder can send the piston an impressive distance through your chest.
No problem, I'm just glad all that time I spent memorizing the McMaster-Carr catalog finally came in handy!
The cylinders are sealed units, so they're safe to handle even after beating the crap out of them. The danger happens when people decide to repair a failing seal or leak and try to open the cylinder itself to get at the piston head - usually with a hacksaw....
I just... this? This is what we're supposed to care about? Not the bunker fuel burning shipping industry? Not the US hitting all-time oil production records last year? No, it's "Big Tech" and their diesel burning servers! Turns out "Mac" meant Mac trucks this whole time?
Yeah, which is a solid goal! I don't know if you know this though, but most data centers run on renewables. They're way cheaper. Thats why there's so many data centers in regions with hydroelectric power stations.
This reads as pretty blatant oil industry propaganda trying to shift focus away from them and onto the current thing trump has made it trendy to hate. Down with big tech, those polluters with their... entirely electric infrastructure? If you want to get pissed about this, go after crypto miners. AI actually does something, and sometimes its even something overall positive for humanity! Crypto are just leeches.
That's actually really cool. At least in the US, there's few places that have public ambulance services, which you need because there are no private crisis response units in the country. There's not even a framework to certify them. So what winds up happening is that you call an ambulance, the paramedics arrive and are neither trained nor equipped to handle a serious mental health crisis, they call the police and then we're back to square one.
But I'm glad you live somewhere that both has crisis response units and funds them enough that they are actually capable of doing anything.
So you're not qualified to give advice on these situations, but you advise not calling the cops...?
Look it's not that I don't enjoy the debate equivalent of shooting fish in a barrel, but my point is that you don't have any idea what people should do instead. Nobody does, because there isn't another option. So why not stop being such a smug little prick, stop using other people's tragic deaths as an (attempted) mic-dropping soapbox, and start thinking about what you say before you comment.
No you're Just Asking Questions, right? Why should you have to provide a justification to where you get off victim blaming on these issues?
Ignoring that Win called the cops on himself (isn't it depressing how reliable a method of suicide that's become...) because that's a whole different issue, what you're telling people to do is that they should just... cope? Maybe there's a homeopathic cure for mania! I sure haven't found one, but if someone's got a clue they can stick it up their ass, fuck homeopaths please let me know, because I'd love a cure for my manic episodes.
I've had the cops called on me, and I can't blame my family for doing it. They weren't, and aren't, equipped to deal with that. I hope you're never in the position to find out exactly how scary it can be when someone you love is having a "severe mental health crisis" (in most cases, that's a cringy euphemism for "being a terrifyingly unhinged, violent lunatic"). I also work in forensic mental health management (that's what "trying to do what I can" actually looks like, btw) so I can professionally say that calling the cops on family is never: someone's first choice, an easy choice, a choice that in a similar situation you wouldn't also make.
You're not equipped to deal with this kind of disaster, nobody is. That's a big part of why it falls on the police, because at least they've got the tools to maybe stop it without killing someone. It's like the godzilla threshold - the situation is so bad that maybe calling in godzilla as backup will do slightly more good than harm. It's going to be a disaster either way, but maybe it will be a smaller one. This isn't the way it should be, and my god do I hope the few attempts to fix this we're only now able to implement might prove to start working, but it is the way it is right now.
I know this isn't going to change your mind, I've talked to enough people like you to know that you're not going to be predisposed to introspection, but I just sincerely hope you never get put in a situation that makes you realize what an ignorant tool you sound like when you talk about this issue.
Yeah, but you're offering advice while at the same time talking about how you're taking the intellectually righteous option by not offering your lay advice. You can just state your opinion. But you're trying to come in and present your opinion as absolute fact on an issue where you're unequivocally wrong. Not about the fact that the system is broken or the cops aren't by and large evil bastards, but in implying there's another option people can choose, which I fucking wish was the case.
Listen. All I'm hoping to have happen here is that you'll recognize that nobody, not one single person, calls the cops on a family member because that's the easy option, or because they think it's even slightly a good option. They call them because their kid is having a manic episode but this time he somehow found a gun and is taking his cousin hostage so they can go get taco bell. Or because they're screaming that if someone tries to stop them cutting themselves they'll kill them - and they're already down to the bone on their thighs.
Those aren't made up examples, those are real mental health calls from the last month that we had to address. The first one, the police were called and managed to talk him down. I hate that I assume he wasn't shot because he's white, but that's absolutely the reason. He might get help in the next three months. Until then he's in jail. The second one, the paramedics were called. They tried to talk her down, deescalate like any sane person wants them to do, but it didn't work. So, they called the police & eventually between two cops and two medics they managed to restrain and sedate her. She'll live, somehow, but before they called for help she'd stabbed her mom and now she's being prosecuted for battery. Which is just... awful.
I'm pissed off at you because you're oversimplifying the most unpredictable situation anyone might have to experience in their lives with a patronizing, moralizing quip that is so detached from the reality of the situations people are put in that it's actually kind of stunning. People have one life-line, and it's the cops. They never, ever, ever choose that option lightly, and they are absolutely aware of the potential consequences. But sometimes people need fucking help, and it's the old "lesser of two evils" choice. It fucking sucks. Maybe it'll get better, but I think we both know it won't.
(Seriously, if you ever want to get absolutely beyond pissed off at how broken the system really is, dm me. I have shitloads of stories on how this system is much more fucked up than you think. Like, even if you think it's fucked up, it's so much worse than you'd believe. Ask about how many jails there are, that's a classic!)
(Also, give me that asshole. I will blow you up like a Sonic OC and carry you around like a balloon on a string.)
Ah, the old "taking your ball and going home" approach. Sometimes it really does work to get a rise out of the other person. Hopefully that's not what you're going for, though. It's kinda sad if you pin that much self worth to getting the last word in an internet argument you claim to be too busy to read... not that I'd know anything about that. Really selling your argument here though friendo. I do recommend reading that wall of text though, it might actually be useful to you. You know. If you're not too busy being so cool and uninvested.
Are you using hardware acceleration? I frequently watch livestreams while gaming and have never had this issue except for when hardware acceleration was disabled.
Did something happen to prompt this that I missed? Seems pretty sudden that everyone is switching TOS all at once, but I havent been able to figure out what kicked off the trend.
well thats what the photos are of, I believe. But no idea if the listing is legit. You might be able to reverse image search the photos to get a better idea…
Legislation in Washington state known as the strippers’ bill of rights, which advocates say includes the most comprehensive statewide protections in the nation, was signed into law on Monday....
They’re almost all in the areas surrounding the huge military base in WA. “Lots of young guys in uniform with monitored internet connections looking for a little eye candy to start their day” according to my friend that works as one.
i think we need Cracked-style articles back. desperately. or like, a guy doing a weird thing and writing a piece on it. sites like those are declining faster than the glaciers.
Yeah, back when there was a small barrier of effort to get to the internet. It didn’t really keep anyone out, but it meant that if you were here it was because you wanted to be, not because it had been made as easy as possible to access in an attempt to lure you in and extract data through every pore of your being. Lemmy feels similar, in that you have to make an account on an instance and thats slightly harder than clicking a single button to sign in with FB or Google.
I miss being able to share the cool things I find IRL. I made the mistake of doing that once with a beautiful little grove in a state park. The post went viral on insta and within a week the spot had been trampled flat and the rangers had to put up chain link to keep people out. Just awful.
NYPD officer caught on video punching pro-Gaza protester during Brooklyn rally ( www.independent.co.uk )
Lots of times the restaurants won't even have milk ( lemmy.world )
How a Sand Battery Could Revolutionize Home Energy Storage - YouTube ( youtube.com )
Five Things the “Nuclear Bros” Don’t Want You to Know About Small Modular Reactors ( blog.ucsusa.org )
A realistic understanding of their costs and risks is critical....
I have to teach my daughter different things than my son ( lemmy.world )
Justice Department says Boeing violated deal that avoided prosecution after 737 Max crashes ( apnews.com )
The Justice Department has determined that Boeing violated a settlement that allowed the company to avoid criminal prosecution after two deadly crashes involving its 737 Max aircraft, prosecutors told a federal judge on Tuesday. ...
Secret Service notified as Trump aide brags about 'causing innocent people to be arrested' ( www.rawstory.com )
Donald Trump's former White House aide is under fire after a video showed him claiming to distribute fake money to homeless people so that they will be arrested when they spend it....
Democrats Ask Biden to Investigate Grocery Store Price-Fixing ( time.com )
China develops first 100 kg vehicle-mounted liquid hydrogen system ( english.news.cn )
China has successfully developed its first 100-kilogram class vehicle-mounted liquid hydrogen system, marking a new breakthrough in the country's transportation sector, according to its developer China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation (CASC).
More than a million adults have legal guardians. In seven states, they can't vote. ( www.motherjones.com )
Is there a name for this sort of object? I need something like this, but don't know what to type into the webs ( lemmy.world )
I'm going to convert my computer chair from pneumatic to static. I'm currently using plastic clasps that are held on with jubilee clips, but they're not great and need replaced (I'm a heavy lad). A sturdy metal version would be better....
How Bad Is A.I. for the Climate? Tech giants are building power-hungry data centers to run their artificial intelligence tools. The costs of that demand surge are becoming clearer. ( messaging-custom-newsletters.nytimes.com )
Title comes from the article version of this newsletter
Bodycam Videos Show Mom Begging ‘Please Don’t Shoot’ as Cops Shoot Son During Mental Health Crisis ( www.thedailybeast.com )
YouTube keeps serving this obnoxious ~5m ad
YouTube wants me to watch a 4m30s ad for middle-aged men who want to stay healthy. I won't watch it. Hence, it never goes away....
The environmental cost of China's addiction to cement ( www.bbc.com )
The use of concrete exploded to fuel China’s rise. Now the costs of this weighty material are being counted....
Marjorie Taylor Greene is an idiot. She is trying to wreck the GOP ( www.foxnews.com )
*** Technically this is news from a far right-wing source. In reality it’s priceless comedy. ***...
Shots fired ( lemmy.world )
Been getting a lot of these emails lately ( imgflip.com )
We only have that one peeing scene to go on, right? I think people made the wrong assumption. ( lemmynsfw.com )
It’s less sexy, isn’t it?
can someone tell me if this is real? ( iusearchlinux.fyi )
Strippers' bill of rights bill signed into law in Washington state ( apnews.com )
Legislation in Washington state known as the strippers’ bill of rights, which advocates say includes the most comprehensive statewide protections in the nation, was signed into law on Monday....
What do you miss from the old internet?
i think we need Cracked-style articles back. desperately. or like, a guy doing a weird thing and writing a piece on it. sites like those are declining faster than the glaciers.