I'm trying to figure out what SpaceX's share of that $18 billion is.
Seems like they launch once a week and when they do they block out a 1000 square miles for an hour.
There are 168 hours in a week, and 3 million square miles in the US, so that's (1/168) * (1000/3,000,000) * $18 billion per year = $35.7k per year.
Do I do that right?
Is the government really complaining about that tiny an amount of money?
The old saw they will parrot is "If you haven't done anything wrong, you have nothing to hide."
Didn't the feds demand that google keep their request secret?
Guess they knew they were doing something wrong
Speed is important, but at a minimum I'd like to know about outages and latency. And consistency. If my "broadband" is 200Mps sometimes, but throttled to 5Mbps on Wednesday nights, then it's not as useful to me as a constant 75Mbps even if it is "over 100Mbps" on average. And I think "cost" is a far more important metric to most -- U.S. internet doesn't seem advanced at all when you look at that metric.
And how about adding a category for "adequate" speed? Higher speed is great and all, but most households could function just fine with 10Mbps, 25Mbps is already overkill.
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/files/2023/10/monthly_ice_09_NH_v3.0-1.png
Looks to me like the "normally ice-free" projection would be about 45 hence, around 2070.
I realize this is not a sophisticated model, but I guess those slackers at the NSIDC are not willing to stay up to date with the latest theories, preferring outdated things like actual measurements.
Whenever a fat story pops up, there's always someone who says it's because of lack of exercise, someone else who blames high fructose corn syrup, or bad nutrition in general.
The green revolution happened more than 3 decades ago. How much worse has the worlds nutrition has gotten in the past 30 years? How much less are we exercising?
A world wide increase in the last 30 years seems more likely to be something environmental. We stopped using leaded gas, maybe that has something to do with it. Or maybe it's the increase in CO2.
280,000,000 people driven cars resulted in 40,000 deaths per year?
That's about 1 death per year per 7000 cars.
There are something like 2000 self driving cars, and they've killed 11 people in the past 3 years.
That's more than an order of magnitude worse.
Self driving cars might have the potential to be safer, but they aren't yet.
When a self driving car can correctly handle a plastic bag blowing across the road AND correctly handle a baby carriage rolling across the road, then we can talk about letting them drive.
The judge said nothing of the sort.
Consider these three levels of "monitoring";
1. Asking my electric company how much electricity I use.
2. Publishing my electric bill.
3. Asking me to compile a list of every appliance that uses electricity, the times that I operate said appliance, and how much I paid for the appliance.
Texas is a lot closer to 3 than to 1.
Think of it as a 15% improvement - they used to be 3/5 people.
The idiots who bought S.F. real estate at $2000/sf need to lose a ton of money.
Anything else just makes the problem worse.
Relaxing building codes won't help.
"It shows that the plastic bag ban that we passed in this state in 2014 did not reduce the overall use of plastic. It actually resulted in a substantial increase in plastic,"
They tried banning plastic bags, and the problem got worse. So their solution is even more of the same.
From The Fine Article
Our preliminary estimates suggest that annual electricity use from cryptocurrency mining probably represents from 0.6% to 2.3% of U.S. electricity consumption.
So they estimate 1.45% plus or minus 0.85%. That's crytocurrency in general, not bitcoin specifically, and under 2%, not over.
The methodology used in the CBECI is based on a hybrid top-down approach that builds a basket of real-world hardware, which represents a typical mining unit,
I.e. Poor methodology.
with an underlying assumption that mining participants awarded Bitcoin are rational economic agents.
I suspect it goes even further downhill from here, but that's as much as I could withstand reading.
I think a more relevant question is why do so many sites have passwords at all.
I use the same crappy password on a lot of sites, because I really don't care if someone "steals" my account.
The fed never issues bad news. Anything the fed says, is therefore suspect. Any forecasts based on information from the fed are tainted.
This isn't because they don't know, or because they can't make good predictions, it's because they're lying.
Anything they say is an attempt to forge public opinion, to make the economy move in whatever direction they think it should.
Populist economic reporters take that bad information and use it to generate clicks. They don't care about accuracy either.
Naturally, you'd have to figure in distribution losses too but even then, I'd be surprised if the economies don't work.
Wholesale cost of electricity is about $0.04/kWh.
Retail cost of electricity is about $0.16/kWh
Unless you think electric companies are performing graft on an epic scale, I'd say those distribution losses are pretty significant.
I realize the government has made it a crime to hide information from it, but that sort of thing has always made me scratch my head.
Do we really want the government to have the power to discover all the information it asks for?
Congratulations! You are the one-millionth user to log into our system. If there's anything special we can do for you, anything at all, don't hesitate to ask!
