It's tough to take the climate alarmists seriously when they all travel in private jets and with motorcades burning 10x the fuel any of us use in a week for one day. While purchasing beachfront real estate and screaming that nuclear is bad and can't even be considered.

Even if I think the worst predictions are true, why should I give a fuck when the people "most concerned" obviously do not?

All the so-called "solutions" amount to killing 50%+ of the people, or everyone except them has to go stone age. Neither of those is going to happen without a LOT of death and fighting from those people they want to kill or disadvantage. They want to take natural gas from people. That will cause people to die from cold. Those people will not just sit down and die. They will burn whatever they can to try to stay alive, and it will pollute far worse than even a poorly maintained natural gas burning setup will. And they WILL resort to violence if the situation gets bad enough. That's just basic human nature.

Without storage and/or huge grid upgrades, renewables can't do it. And that's from someone that owns a good size rooftop solar array (~15kw). Nuclear could, though it has its own problems. And if you want to replace gas heating, you are going to require huge upgrades to the grid. Even with modern heat pump designs, that is a LOT of electricity that needs to move around. And that ignores EVs and other loads they want to add. And that's before you get into the costs to replace all that gear, not the mention the environmental costs for manufacturing it.

If you want to see change and be taken seriously, you and your leaders need to live it and provide realistic solutions that people will accept. For example, we have mostly replaced incandescent lights with more efficient tech. Once it worked well and was reasonably priced, it was obviously better and people adopted it. If you can't do that, you need to accept that prevention is impossible and move to mitigation. I don't think we're there yet, but we will be if the alarmists keep this crap up. The more they yell while insisting that the rules don't apply to them, the less people will listen.

The 110 is not created from 220. Both are created from the HV lines, usually around 7200V for residential areas. The transformer doesn't waste copper supplying 110. It's a center-tap on the secondary coil that splits the 220 into 2 hot rails. It would need the same number of turns for a 220 only setup. I guess the lead for the tap could be called a "waste", but it's a tiny amount compared to the overall amount of copper.

The complaint about conductor size for 110v is somewhat valid. However, that was chosen at the time and changing it would be a huge pain. That's why 110 circuits top out at lower amperage levels, usually around 20A. So the waste is smaller at least. I wouldn't mind changing new stuff to 220 only, but then you have 2 types of appliances everywhere, and will for decades. Look at People of Walmart and tell me what you think would happen then...

The ground and neutral serve different purposes. Cross-connecting them outside of the service entrance or omitting the ground creates an electrocution risk as it's quite possible to develop a voltage difference on the outside of the appliance as a result. Yes, it's a risk only in a fault situation, but it does happen.

The amount of copper you would save is smaller than you think, particularly compared to the overall use.

Another good example is the Luty submachine gun.

Do you REALLY need to remember the IP of the DNS server though? If you have an address, you have RAs on the network. The RA can easily distribute the DNS IPs as well. So if you can talk at all, you can resolve names.

Sure, this doesn't help with servers you static assign. But in that case you probably have some documentation in front of you while setting up the OS. Or, for more fancy setups, something like Ansible. You could also just use SLAAC to start up, then use that to get the info to set up your statics.

IMO, if you can't handle IPv6, you can't handle networking. It's not any more difficult than IPv4, it's just different. As for firewalls, you don't need anything much. The default should be to block all inbound and route outbound. That's enough for home users that have no clue anyway. And they can "open ports" easily, at least as much as they could with NAT44. Which you can't do at all with CGNAT. The firewalls aren't complex for the users, they are pretty simple, far more so than NAT setups.

One thing I think they dropped the ball on is multihoming. NAT actually makes that easier, significantly so. NAT66 is a thing, and you can use it for that. You can also use NPT if you have static addresses, which most people interested in this are going to be willing to pay for.

Probably the biggest issue right now is moron ISPs trying to apply address starvation techniques that are required for v4 to v6 setups. There is no excuse for single addresses being assigned to home users. A /64 should be the default, with at least a /60 available with no issues. More than that for home users is unlikely to come up, but it would be nice if they made it a paid option at least. Yes, a /64 is a LOT of addresses, but it's only 1 subnet. And with the amount of addresses available, we will all be long dead before it's an issue. And subnetting less than a /64 causes lots of issues, and completely breaks all Android devices.

For those that really do want NAT, use it. NAT66 is commonly available on many platforms. I think it's stupid, but whatever. It's another tool and if you like it, use it. You can even use global addresses internally since ULAs are broken in dual stack, and just not route them outside, requiring the use of the NAT. Or NPT which requires less state tracking and router/firewall resources.

Keep in mind, there are announcements for new battery tech a few times a year. I have yet to see one actually released for public use since Li-Fe. For grid level storage, flow batteries do exist, but they are too heavy/large for vehicles. Nickel-Iron is another old tech that might be useful, but it's expensive and heavy.

To compare to computer tech, remember how we had new storage systems a few times a year for the past few decades? How many of them actually made it out of the lab?

I'm sure we'll get some new tech eventually, but there's no way to know what the time frame will be.

Easy to solve!! Just do all filling of vehicles in a zero-oxygen environment!!

Bonus, it helps solve over-population!

It's not just degradation, it's also advances in overall efficiency. I'm not sure where the break even would be for a large scale farm, but since there is a market, I figure they have done the math. So if they can replace a rack of panels with new units that are 10% more efficient, plus the 15-20% from wear, that might be worth it. Replacing them could be cheaper than expanding as well, as they can reuse the racks, wiring, inverters, etc.. There might have been subsidies in play as well, so if they also got tax incentives to upgrade, it might have pushed them to swap earlier than you might expect.

I think of it a bit like the off-lease server replacements businesses do. It likely ends up costing less overall to replace them, even if they work fine, than to spend on labor etc. repairing issues later. And they get newer, probably faster and more efficient gear with a warranty.

OPNsense.

Those who truly can't take it are a very low percentage. Those who choose not to are making a choice to take the risk. While we should care about them, that doesn't mean we should make the whole population suffer by destroying the economy. At this point, we have done what we can for the most vulnerable and if the unvaccinated are concerned still, they can take whatever precautions they like. The unable likely need to take precautions for loads of other diseases. Those making the choice have the info and can do the same.

Kids were never at significant risk for this disease, and have likely achieved herd immunity from exposure anyway, so they aren't relevant in this discussion. There is also news that at least some of the vaccines are expected to be available to children soon, so that becomes another option. Parents who think their children have some specific reason to be more concerned can do masks, distancing, etc..

I don't see how masks, as used by most people, can possibly be particularly helpful. Stuffed in pockets, touched constantly, etc.. Properly used N95s, sure, but how many people have the training, store them in a sterile way, and use them exactly one time before properly disposing of them, outside of a hospital? Even a small leak drops the effectiveness dramatically.

I see a lot of people say this sort of thing, but it doesn't add up. There is an absolute ton of land out there. And current homeowners can't do a thing about people building on it. What can be in short supply, is land IN CITIES. That isn't a huge deal, so long as you are willing to deal with utilities and such yourself. But not many people are. It turns out people like the convenience of the electrical grid and sewer lines. What actually happens, is developers want to build a huge complex right in the middle of a suburban neighborhood and are all shocked when the people that already live there have a problem with it. While some of that is related to property values, not all of it is. Where I live, there is a large development planned. The locals here were upset more about things like transportation issues than the buildings and people. We are in the corner of a valley and the area was built up without proper planning and road building. So traffic is insane already. Adding 2x the people in a small space is not going to help with that. There is also the issue of the power grid, water and sewer systems are not set up for that amount of use in a small area, and there was no visible plan to deal with those issues, the plan seems to be to dump the problem on the neighboring cities. I'm sure there is some NIMBYism there, but there are also some valid concerns.

As for price and supply and demand... Well, all those units were priced at about the existing going rate. And why wouldn't they be? Why would the developer take less than they could get? I have yet to see a new development result in prices going DOWN. I can see the argument that perhaps it should, but I've never seen it actually happen. Perhaps it would take a lot more units to do it, but then why would the builders do it? They have to know what would happen, or at least suspect. And that's leaving out the recent huge spike in prices for materials like lumber.

While I agree that good teachers can do those things, there aren't that many of them in my experience. I am happy to admit most will TRY, and succeed at least to some degree. But the rules above them often prevent even that. Those rules tend to prevent most of the better teachers from sticking around as well. At least according to family members that are/were teachers, including in math.

What happens in practice, is that everyone is held to the speed of the slowest student on any particular topic. If you happen to be good at that topic, it is insanely boring and demotivating. Until high school calculus, I was often at least a month ahead in the math book. Just doing all the problems and leaving the work pages folded in the book. There were a few teachers later that had a problem with me doing that for some reason. I ended up just zoning out most of the time in their classes. So long as I sort of looked busy.

Give more help to those that need it, 100% agree. But those who don't should be encouraged, not held back. They will likely need more help at some point in the future. At the very least, let them learn on their own if they are capable. If you can achieve that without accelerated class tracks, great. I don't care what you call them or how it's done. So long as it is done. I think it makes more sense past a certain point to have "honors" type classes that run an accelerated schedule for those students that are really quick at that subject, but I'm open to discussion on it. It's not about a "slow" class, it's about getting those who can manage it moving faster. And if there is a slower track, the idea should be to get students moved up to the normal track. It should almost never be a permanent thing. It would likely help if students didn't hear about how hard math is all the time. Much of that comes from other students though, so I'm not sure what can really be done there.

The first priority is to boot all this "equity" and "woke" garbage out of math classes entirely. It has no place there. Put it in with the religion and philosophy classes if you must have it. That said, if students are being put in a track based on race, that is a problem of the teachers and other staff. That is a ridiculous idea and math teachers should know better. If there are teachers doing that, they should be fired, immediately.

Glass is HEAVY compared to plastic. That means more fuel burned to move it around. Then you increase the fuel taxes, so sugar water prices have to increase significantly to compensate for it. Sure, at some point demand will go down as a result, but the companies aren't going to eat more of the cost than they must to make sales. We could push fountain drinks more, but the cups/lids/straws, even the paper based ones, can be problematic on the recycling front. The paper based stuff at least breaks down reasonably in landfill.

Plastic wouldn't be bad overall if we required recycling in country with pollution controls. There seems to be little interest in it though. Perhaps the old bottle deposit system could help here?

For moving humans around, those human powered transportation options are useful enough. So long as you have at least reasonable weather to work with, timing works, you don't have cyclists getting hit all the time, etc.. For moving large amounts of cargo around? Not going to happen. It would help incentivize electric vehicles I suppose. Which helps some, more if you also keep pushing cleaner energy options.

Then you have to consider government mixed messages. In my home state, they almost passed another tax increase on efficient vehicles (PHEV and EV). They added one last year, and wanted to add another one this year. Total would have been over $600/year. To make them "pay their fair share" of road maintenance. Never mind that the first tax covered estimated wear for more than the average miles per year for them. And we have very bad air quality here. Granted, it's growing, but this is over around 2% of vehicles at the moment.

I think that an investigation by law enforcement should have happened, and the company taken to court with the evidence collected. IF convicted, then size all their assets and cut them off from financial services etc.. Not some private company with no accountability and no opportunity for the accused to defend themselves. Particularly when there is almost no competition.

I think this should be the case for any business, regardless of my opinion of their product. I don't care about this particular company one way or the other. Unless a court can find that they knowingly distributed CP. But if there is enough evidence for that, they would likely be shut down and have people in prison already.

As for suits from victims, I think that so long as the business reports anything they find to law enforcement promptly, they should be immune to any legal issues. I don't think that is the current situation, but it should be.

There wouldn't even be much delay if the evidence is as compelling as they claim. Most any court would order the financial side shut down pretty quick if it's obvious. Many would with even the slightest justification.

Just park a bunch of them in a bay, run extension cords down the hatch. Preferably frayed ones with non-UV safe insulation.

Or put them on blocks in a trailer park. Fit right in. :)

EVs don't have to be super expensive. Even Tesla makes a competitively priced model. Most people would be using more economy priced models than Tesla anyway. And in 15 years, a lot of used vehicles are going to be available. A used recent model Leaf runs between 6k and 20k depending on year and miles, according to Autotrader in my area. A quick scroll through the similarly sized gas cars are pretty similar in price. That doesn't cover the very low end, but those will come as older cars make it to the market. It's pretty tough to find a used EV older than 2013 models right now.

My workplace has 6 6.6kW chargers available. If we could get the 3 douche nozzles to move at lunch when they are charged up, we could easily charge everyone with an EV daily. As more load sharing setups come available, I suspect they will add those for new spaces and make it more reasonable for people to stay parked in the same spot all day. Assuming we all ever end up going back to the office..