Where is this happening? Nowhere you say? So, no,imagining a way of starting the process (that would not complete for tens of millions of years) is not making it "renewable".

We call that biomass energy production, and can easily distinguish it from coal.

No, coal is not renewable as nearly all of the coal now being mined was produced during the late Carboniferous (hence its name) and early Permian periods prior to 280 million years ago. It takes (took) unusual geological/climatic/biological conditions to lay down large coal reserves. It requires a high burial rate of plant matter which is not now occurring.

We have a primordial generation of Helium though. This process stopped at Lithium, because there is no stable core of relative atomar mass of 8, thus neither Li-8 or Be-8 have survived for long, as their halflife is less than a nanosecond. Only in the very rare cases three or four Helium cores fused in the primordial baryonic soup, we got some Carbon and Oxygen.

So the first stars were formed mainly from Hydrogen, a sizeable portion of Helium and some miniscule traces of Carbon and Oxygen.

No. We would be glad if climate change would stop to accelerate. Right now, we are still making it worse. The rate Carbondioxide is sequestered out of the atmosphere is fricking slow. You would have to store the equivalence of about 300-400 years of harvested plants and don't consume them and don't let them rot to undue the added Carbondioxide of the last 120 years). Right now, every ton of Carbondioxide added to the air is accelerating climate change.

Only if we fully stop adding Carbondioxide to the Earth's atmosphere, we would have reached the immediate goal of keeping climate change in check and get it to a constant pace. Only then we would be able to actually slow it down.

It's not what we understand by "renewable". It has to renew at least at the same rate as it is consumed, which coal is not right now.

The correct term thus would be: "Coal might become renewable in the future, when its usage has nearly stopped, thus the coal content of Earth gets replenished."

The common definition of "renewable" is quite different. It means that it is regenerated (renewed) at least at the rate it is consumed. Hence, coal is not renewable, as it right now is consumed at a far higher rate than it renews itself. At no point the definition says "sequestered solar energy" or something similar.

Have you tried visiting Twitter after hanging out on Bluesky for a while? OMG, it feels like a dystopia. Was it always that bad and did I just forget, or has it gotten that much worse since I left?

Indeed.. especially his parents. I couldn't get enough of them - always disappointed when they cut away from them.

I was never a friend of flip phones, and I probably will never be. On the other hand, I actually use my mobile phone mainly for phone calls, thus I don't need a large screen anyway. I never have used a Windows 10 phone, but I was deploying them remotely for a company handing them out to their sales reps.

The Bluesky Mir is coming ;)

Huh? You're upset that Jack left Bluesky because people there didn't like him? I'm confused.

Sounds like Jack went full Kanye, and got booted out of Bluesky.

He didn't get "booted", but it was a rather amusing situation, where he dropped a bunch of seed money on Jay's project to make Bluesky... only to find out that the vast majority of the people who flocked there don't actually like him, and weren't afraid to let him know ;)

1) You don't open to more people than you have the capacity to serve.

2) They do not use the same backend. Bluesky's backend is specifically designed to fix Mastodon's design flaws that make it so annoying.

3) Bluesky is growing far faster than Mastodon.

The real market is investors. He's seeking a $6B valuation on x.ai, which is just nonsensical vs. what they're offering.