areyouevenreal

@[email protected]

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. View on remote instance

areyouevenreal ,

What fascists are you talking about? Ukraine is not the fascist party in this war. One of these sides is a dictatorship in all but name.

areyouevenreal ,

The one that pretends to have elections where political rivals mysteriously die.

areyouevenreal ,

Without hydrogen or battery storage how exactly do you want to store energy?

areyouevenreal ,

I agree with everything you said here except America having promise. America doesn't have promise, it's been holding the world back for a long time now, and bullying all the other nations. It would be best for it to crash and burn like all the other nations it made crash and burn.

areyouevenreal , (edited )

You were also decrying them spending money on battery storage. Yes there will be batteries needed if you want to implement large scale renewables, which it seems is happening even without subsidies. We need batteries for battery electric trains and cars too. Hydrogen isn't necessarily good enough for grid storage, though maybe it could be one day. It seems it might be an option for vehicles in the cases where batteries don't work such as in cold weather or for vehicles that need to travel great distances. Batteries also aren't an option for planes yet and hydrogen could help here too.

You also complain about them spending money on advanced nuclear reactors. You need nuclear until you have sufficient grid storage. That's an unfortunate fact.

I am against them using money on carbon capture from fossil fuel plants. Direct air carbon capture could actually be useful technology though. If not today then someday in the future. We won't know if we don't put money towards it.

areyouevenreal ,

Electrified rail is expensive and has safety issues. It's the best option for long distances for sure, but here in the UK we are still trying to electrify the main rail lines, the branch lines and city lines aren't even in the cards. Being able to recharge trains at stations with rapid charging is the best option for branch and commuter rail services not already on electrified rail (most of them). If we can do that using something other than lithium batteries that would be great. Sodium seems promising. Also I am in Europe you muppet. It also doesn't solve grid scale storage, which is something we need. I am hoping iron oxide batteries work out for the grid scale storage tbh.

areyouevenreal ,

Not relative to simply reducing the volume of carbon produced, by shifting the composition of the grid.

You understand that there are already too many greenhouse gases, right? By the time we do all of this there will be even more. It's not like the grid is the only (or even the majority) of greenhouse gases. How do you account for both all the past emmisions and all the future emissions plus emissions from other sources?

Given the abject failure of Westinghouse to produce a reliable mass production model, it's an enormous waste of investment.

If nothing else, we'd be better of someone buying existing designs from Areva. But we don't do that, because we insist on "Buy American" legislation that doesn't get us any actual product.

The main alternatives being French and Chinese reactor designs. I can understand why the USA doesn't want to use Chinese reactors, we in the UK made a similar decision and went with French designs instead if I am remembering correctly. I wouldn't be against the USA using French designs. The thing is though I can't see how more research could possibly be a bad thing, we have much work to do in both fission and fusion technologies. Putting all our bets in China or France might not be the best idea.

areyouevenreal ,

We need to be doing both. Once the grid is fixed or close to it then we will need carbon capture to reverse the damage. It's either that or massive reforestation or using algae or something (liquid trees anyone?).

Pure reactionary xenophobia. Chinese thorium reactors are cutting edge, and we're adding degree points to the global average by not adopting it ASAP.

If they own the plant they could theoretically sabotage it. Would they in practice? No idea but so long as the USA believes they might they won't use Chinese technology.

Neither the USA or China are good regimes. To be honest I want to see them both either broken or re-formed.

Westinghouse aren't the only people in the USA doing nuclear research afaik. I believe the DOE national laboratory does research on fusion for example. There are private companies like NuScale also working on fission designs in the USA.

areyouevenreal ,

I think the fact I am English has as much bearing on this opinion as being left-adjacent. My country helped form the United States, and many of us (not just leftists) are disturbed at what has happened since we were kicked out. I mean it's a common stereotype here that Americans are dumb, fat, and racist.

areyouevenreal ,

Yeah thatcher caused issue when ahe privatized rail operators. She didn't privatize network rail though, which are the guys responsible for building and maintaining the track including electrification projects. So I don't think you can pin this one on her. Electrification is prohibitively expensive and incomplete in pretty much every country with older rail networks including the USA, UK, and parts of the EU.

Also if you don't want to get insulted maybe stop assuming where I live and what I know about. It's insulting when people go "In Europe we do x", like brah I live in Europe and I know about x. X isn't always the solution to every problem. This is becoming a hammer nail thing.

areyouevenreal ,

Yeah the fact we are now only moderately better than the USA is disturbing. Hey at least we don't have fascists and right wing nut jobs trying to take over the government. Likewise you don't go broke from getting ill, even if the care isn't as good as it used to be.

areyouevenreal ,

Can you actually say I am wrong? America is known for modeling in foreign affairs, sponsoring coups and starting civil wars, and just straight up invading places. You're even worse than China, and China has a bad track record.

areyouevenreal ,

It's not a long shot though. We already know this technology works as it has been tested on small scales.

areyouevenreal ,

It only takes thinking outside the car box.

I don't even drive and even I know cars, lorries, tractors, and so on are all necessary in some parts of society. You can't use public transport if you are miles away from the next house or the nearest town. Rural areas need transport too.

areyouevenreal ,

We weren't the ones having people invading the capital. When have we had fascists trying to take over?

areyouevenreal ,

The first part is sort of true, but nobody does it more aggressively than America and Russia.

You aren't even close to peacekeepers. You are literally sponsoring genocide in Palestine. You started a whole war in Vietnam and then lost. Stop pretending to be the good guys.

areyouevenreal ,

The point is there is still a point in funding battery technology. Not that you shouldn't try to use public transport where necessary. Things like buses will also need batteries in order to operate if we are getting rid of fossil fuels.

areyouevenreal ,

Prove it.

areyouevenreal ,

That makes no sense. The government owns the railway, not the companies. They are the ones struggling to put in electric lines.

Also battery electric trains are a big step up from diesel. I don't get why you are complaining.

areyouevenreal ,

Yeah the conservative party is not great, you're not wrong there.

areyouevenreal ,

One bus is 30 to 60 cars not used at the same time🙂

I know all this.

I don't say "stop building batteries" but "enhance public transport".

That's exactly what this conversation was about. People said stop investing as much money in battery technology - which is ass backwards given we have needs for this in both the grid and in vehicles.

areyouevenreal ,

A hormone in the human body that's typically present in higher concentrations in females than males. Often given as HRT to trans women and post-menopausal women.

areyouevenreal ,

It's not just google who have AI stuff built into their phones. All recent SoCs I have seen have had NPUs going back the last couple generations. A lot of older or cheap phones won't have one, but the new devices will.

I don't see the problem with using the phones normal GPU. This shouldn't be more insecure than making a call currently is. I am pretty sure android phones don't have a secure enclave just for making calls as you can give different apps access to calling features, and most calls I make are through third party apps anyway, not via POTS. That being said android is pretty secure anyway provided you don't give permissions to the wrong app. It's more secure than your average Linux system, as each app has its own user and is only allowed to access things it has explicit permissions to access. Secure enclaves aren't all that in my opinion.

And let's not forget that if the phone can listen to your conversation to detect malicious intent, any country can legally compel Google to provide them with the data by claiming it is part of a law-enforcement investigation.

The point of doing it locally is the audio never gets sent to google directly. That being said they could definitely do some dodgy things by training the ML model to search for words like abortion, drugs, transgender, etc depending on what the laws are in the country the phone is being used in.

areyouevenreal ,

Unlike what some people may have told you children aren't allowed surgery, and are rarely allowed hrt. Sometimes they get puberty blockers, which is somewhat controversial, but is also used in cis children with precocious puberty. It's been demonstrated that even small children have formed a gender identity (can't remember the exact age but it's around 5 or 6 years old), and that this doesn't really change. It is possible for someone to not know their gender identity, though I think this is more common with non-binary people and those who aren't taught about gender identity.

areyouevenreal ,

Some jobs require more skill, and some workers are more skilled. You can't get around that fact. That doesn't mean anyone should be making poverty wages. I think it's fair though that workers are paid more for learning skills. That can be either though paying them more at work, or paying them while they are in education. Note I don't just mean free education, I mean actually giving them money to study. That's the only way to make paying skilled and unskilled workers the same a fair system.

areyouevenreal ,

Some skills take longer to acquire. Much longer. Some require certain aptitudes. As you say you can be more skilled than another worker at the same job, because you have more experience, training, aptitude, or you just care more. How is paying them all the same in any way fair?

Oh yes and some people have a greater number of skills than others. How is that not being more skilled than another?

areyouevenreal ,

Now you're just being pedantic.

areyouevenreal ,

So you were just being pedantic then?

areyouevenreal ,

What does that have to do with being pedantic?

areyouevenreal ,

My dude it's not about rarity. It's about how long it takes to acquire a skill, and what kind of aptitude you need to have, and how difficult it is. Also one person can have more skills total than another. You can't say that learning to flip burgers is as difficult and time consuming as learning how to do brain surgery. Are you nuts?

areyouevenreal ,

You're not just being pedantic, you're also misinterpreting what people mean, probably deliberately. You're also ignoring the fact that some people have more skills than others.

areyouevenreal ,

Someone confusing load-store with RISC again.

areyouevenreal ,

AA relies on religion and finding god to treat a medical problem like addiction. I don't think it's the best example my dude.

areyouevenreal ,

That's what you got from it? To me it was hard to understand what they were getting at. Not even sure I finished it.

areyouevenreal ,

The issue I think I have with a lot of this stuff is that's it's been written well over 100 years ago. The language is hard to understand, and these authors rarely get straight to the point. It's hard enough to get my head around modern political texts, never mind the old ones. This isn't just a criticism of Krapotkin, Marx is even worse in this regard. I still don't really understand half of what the communist manifesto is talking about if it's even relevant anymore. Old texts don't always deal with issues like climate change or overpopulation. It's easy enough to say we can feed people now, even with the overpopulation, but once climate change kicks in hard it's another issue.

I would also worry about counter-revolution and why anarcho-communist revolutions haven't stuck to the extent other revolutions have. There are lots of nations that have tried marxism, few seem to have had anarchism for a similar length of time.

areyouevenreal ,

If they put themselves in that situation you have no obligation to help them. Not saying it isn't a good thing to do, but the idea it's an obligation to save someone from the consequences of their own decisions is whack. You're only obligation here is to make sure you don't create situations that are dangerous. If everyone followed that rule there wouldn't be a problem in the first place.

areyouevenreal ,

No

areyouevenreal ,

What kind of thing do you even mean by a sketch party? Like a party where people do drugs or something? Been to plenty of those, they aren't inherently unsafe. Why wouldn't someone be able to call themselves a taxi? Not everyone can even drive in the first place. I certainly can't.

areyouevenreal ,

They all support two monitors (one internal and one external for macbooks, and two external for desktops). It's not an artificial restriction. Each additional monitor needs a framebuffer. That's an actual circuit that needs to be present in the chip.

areyouevenreal ,

Not necessarily. The base machines aren't that expensive, and this chip is also used in iPads. They support high resolution HDR output. The higher the number of monitors, resolution, bit depth, and refresh rate the more bandwidth is required for display output and the more complex and expensive the framebuffers are. Another system might support 3 or 4 monitors, but not support 5K output like the MacBooks do. I've seen Intel systems that struggled to even do a single 4K 60 FPS until I added another ram stick to make it dual channel. Apple do 5K output. Like sure they might technically support more monitors in theory, but in practice you will run into limitations if those monitors require too much bandwidth.

Oh yeah and these systems also need to share bandwidth between the framebuffers, CPU, and GPU. It's no wonder they didn't put 3 or more very high resolution buffers into the lower end chips which have less bandwidth than the higher end ones. Even if it did work the performance impacts probably aren't worth it for a small number of users.

areyouevenreal ,

Not really. There is a compromise between output resolution, refresh rate, bit depth (think HDR), number of displays, and the overall system performance. Another computer might technically have more monitor output, but they probably sacrificed something to get there like resolution, HDR, power consumption or cost. Apple is doing 5K output with HDR on their lowest end chips. Think about that for a minute.

A lot of people like to blame AMD for high ideal power usage when they are running multi-monitor setups with different refresh rates and resolutions. Likewise I have seen Intel systems struggle to run a single 4K monitor because they were in single channel mode. Apple probably wanted to avoid those issues on their lower end chips which have much less bandwidth to play with.

areyouevenreal ,

Well yeah, no shit Sherlock. They could have done that in the first generation. It takes four 1080p monitors to equal the resolution of one 4K monitor. Apple though doesn't have a good enough reason to support many low res monitors. That's not their typical consumer base, who mostly use retina displays or other high res displays. Apple only sells high res displays. The display in the actual laptops is way above 1080p. In other words they chose quality over quantity as a design decision.

areyouevenreal ,

Yeah people don't get that they are trading output quantity for output quality. You can't have both at the same time on lower end hardware. Maybe you could support both separately, but that's going to be more complex. Higher end hardware? Sure do whatever.

areyouevenreal ,

Sigh. It's not just a fricking driver. It's an entire framebuffer you plug into a USB or Thunderbolt port. That's why they are more expensive, and why they even need a driver.

A 1080p monitor has one quarter of the pixels of a 4K monitor. The necessary bandwidth increases with the pixels required. Apple chooses instead to use the bandwidth they have to support 2 5K and 6K monitors, instead of supporting say 8 or 10 1080p monitors. That's a design decision that they probably thought made sense for the product they wanted to produce. Honestly I agree with them for the most part. Most people don't run 8 monitors, very few have even 3, and those that do can just buy the higher end model or get an adapter like you did. If you are the kind of person to use 3 monitors you probably also want the extra performance.

areyouevenreal ,

It's not just about Retina displays. High res and HDR isn't uncommon anymore. Pretty much all new TVs anybody would want to buy will be 4K. It has to support the Apple 5K display anyway because that's one of their products.

As we've discussed two external displays are supported on the new macbook base models. It was a bit of an oversight on the original sure, but that's been fixed now.

Also the same SoCs is used in iPads. It's not mac only. I can't imagine wanting three displays on an ipad.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • random
  • tech
  • kbinEarth
  • testing
  • interstellar
  • wanderlust
  • All magazines