<xentrac>or all the medical devices that aren't even conceived because everyone knows selling medical devices requires an extremely expensive certification process <xentrac>which doesn't actually make them safe, as I observed with your out-of-control oscillating hearing aids <Darius>i mean, i don't disagree, it's that human extinction or stable tyranny are even worse outcomes <Darius>of course greater freedom could help avoid them. i tend to think so, but then i like freedom. <OriansJ`>Darius: freedom without matching responsibility is dangerous long term. <Profpatsch>xentrac: Keep in mind that photovoltaic things have a lifespan of like 10–15 years and you need oil/gas to create them. <OriansJ`>Profpatsch: and oil/gas can be made from CO2 and H20 if you have an energy source to power it <Profpatsch>Like, most of our Hydrogen that we want to pump into cars is made from natural gas. <Profpatsch>And yes, in theory you can convert energy to matter directly. But you need a certain technical vantage point before that becomes possible :) <OriansJ`>Profpatsch: I think Planet of the Humans is a green way of expressing EROI <Profpatsch>ah yes, I forgot not every channel has a link bot, the link is to Planet of the Humans <OriansJ`>a talk called: "How to Enjoy the End of the World" <xentrac>Profpatsch: no, they have a design lifespan of typically 20 or 30 years, but actually last considerably longer than that; silicon is really a very stable material at room temperature, since that's only about 15% of its melting point <xentrac>and their creation doesn't involve oil or gas in the way that making ammonia or hydrogen do; it just involves energy <xentrac>OriansJ`: freedom without matching responsibility doesn't exist in the first place. you have the freedom to speak; correspondingly I have the responsibility to not intimidate you out of speaking <xentrac>I think the efficiency of carbon-dioxide-to-liquids processes is in the neighborhood of 15% but I can't remember for sure. there are a lot of different processes ***terpri__ is now known as terpri
<bauen1>germany (where i live) practically pushed solar and wind from "a nice idea, maybe viable" to "a viable option" using subsidies, too bad we've also been subsidising the coal industry that would have ceased exisiting maybe 10 years ago without it <bauen1>nuclear has become a fairly safe option (ignoring terrorist threats), they probably weren't during the cold war <bauen1>the biggest problem nuclear still has is the storage of spent fuel, nobody wants to have it near them and nobody wants to pay for it <bauen1>and we also have a law saying that wind turbines need to be (i think) a few kilometers from the nearest home, because some people don't want them near their backyard <Profpatsch>xentrac: The “silicon is just sand” idea is a dangerous propaganda myth. I highly recommend watching the documentary I linked earlier. <Profpatsch>Most of what we are taught about green energy in Germany is propaganda <Profpatsch>It’s a scheme to mostly keep tha status quo and the coal industry running. <OriansJ`>bauen1: well modern nuclear waste is still 98% unused fuel. Mostly because we made nuclear recycling illegal in the USA. As for dangers of a terrorist attack, adding more concrete is certainly a cheap solution to that class of problem. Especially with especially with Liquid Thorium Floride reactors. <xentrac>Profpatsch: you're suggesting that in order to avoid "dangerous propaganda myths" I should... get my information from YouTube videos?!?! <xentrac>certainly silicon is not just sand, any more than hydrogen is just water <Profpatsch>xentrac: well, if that is your selection criteria for the quality of information, maybe you want to change that :) <bauen1>you shouldn't be using youtube as your only source of thruth, same as wikipedia <bauen1>Profpatsch: for your first link i don't particularely see anything wrong with it (apart from having a graph that uses twh and one with gwh in it), nuclear energy simply costs more than e.g. solar to build <bauen1>that doesn't mean that nuclear isn't a good solution <Profpatsch>“only source of truth” cannot be further away from what we were talking about, “one source of truth” <Profpatsch>And the fact of the matter is, the documentary I linked would have played in cinemas, however Covid happened and so they published it on Youtube, which is a content platform <xentrac>documentaries are for manipulating people, not providing information; Michael Moore is notoriously dishonest <bauen1>sorry, i was mostly replying to the 3 messages above mine <xentrac>cinemas are generally full of nothing but lies; documentaries are their closest approach to truth <bauen1>and what i said goes against both you and xentrac <bauen1>but yes, it does look like moving the goalpost, but wasn't meant to be that <xentrac>probably at sufficiently polar latitudes nuclear energy is still cheaper than solar; German PV has an appalling capacity factor of some 10% <xentrac>and Germany isn't the most polar country by far <Profpatsch>Ah, btw, since you are talking about positioning being an argument for or against solar panels <Profpatsch>The UAE has brought online their first nuclear plant just a few days ago <xentrac>yeah, the UAE has no nonmilitary reason for building nuclear plants in 2020 <Profpatsch>That plant has a constant 5k MW output on a few km² of land, whereas the biggest solar farm in the world is 40km² and had a 1.5k MW output at a peak in 2018 <xentrac>yes, nuclear plants definitely are a lot denser than solar plants. <Profpatsch>xentrac: so you are saying they are just building it to enrich material for nuclear weapons? <xentrac>btw, you may not be aware of this, but the SI abbreviation for "k M" is "G" <Profpatsch>xentrac: please, I don’t need any attacks on my intelligence in this channel <xentrac>no, you're already taking care of that pretty well on your own, really <Profpatsch>Okay, I will stop talking to you now. I don’t need this. <xentrac>Heh, are you suggesting that I should leave here because you don't get along with me? <xentrac>You're declaring yourself incompatible with me because I'm criticizing your epistemology? <xentrac>not dead yet! so pretty good, all things considered <rain1>my partner is dealing with a lot of stress and its hard to support them <xentrac>these are very stressful times and a lot of people are reacting very badly to them <Profpatsch>xentrac: No, but I care for #bootstrappable and I would prefer if people didn’t stoop as low as earlier. <Profpatsch>And yes, I’d prefer people leaving over personal attacks <xentrac>Profpatsch: you're the one that initiated personal attacks; this line is my first personal attack on you, as opposed to a commentary on poorly thought out things that happened to be said by you <xentrac>I did personally attack Michael Moore, but I think that's justified by the context: it's important to know that he has a long history of a profound lack of integrity, and the film we were discussing is amply documented to continue that dishonest tradition <xentrac>oh, well, I guess I did say "you're already taking care of that pretty well on your own," which I guess really is a personal attack. but really I was talking about the dumb things you were saying, not some kind of platonic essence of you <xentrac>I suggest you stop saying such silly things if you're concerned about people's perception of your intelligence <rain1>I love this stuff about bootstrapping technology and civilization beyond just compilers <xentrac>yeah! there's an enormous mostly unexplored scope there <OriansJ`>Profpatsch: it is best here to assume that no personal attacks occur intensionally and if we feel that one has occurred it is best to seek understanding of what was ment by the other party; as such action will foster better long term cooperation and increase the odds of success in our collective goal. <OriansJ`>xentrac: use misunderstanding as a chance to create a greater shared understanding rather than something in which to prove that you are better than others. It doesn't help others come around to your point of view.