Comment Re:Sodium is more suited to static installations (Score 0) 84
oh look, the bot for lithium is here
It will plunge. Because sodium is everywhere
Go back to your AI programmer and ask for more cycle time.
oh look, the bot for lithium is here
It will plunge. Because sodium is everywhere
Go back to your AI programmer and ask for more cycle time.
Exactly.
The same group that applauds Asian companies for thinking in terms of Decades suddenly has an issue of doing bi-annual reporting.
Not really. It's rsilvergun. That means there is a lot of thought going into the absolutely wrong conclusion.
Bill Gates, Soros, Zuck, etc. all spent the last 15 years hacking the system. One guy stands up and says "This is BS" and now suddenly Musk is a king? What a joke.
I swear, this religious issue of CO2 being bad has absolutely taken over.
Educate yourself. CO2 is not a leading indicator. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
You know the CIA had a gun to induce heart attacks back in the 70's right? The 1970's? Yet, you think this is too hard to pull off? If so, you are living in a dream world.
This would be very easy to do for a dedicated and trained individual.
Try to pay attention to what is actually happening everywhere around the world. These agencies have had billions of dollars in funding for decades upon decades. Why did Boeing suddenly divest itself of manufacturing everything in house that was operating perfectly well? Had to spread those Benjamins around a bit more and cause more havoc once Boeing was one of two manufacturing concerns left for jumbo jets. How the fuck was that allowed to happen? Benjamins is how.
Except for the part where there is zero climate "emergency" and it is all a bunch of hysteria driven by a bunch of political BS.
This is, once again, the biggest crock of shit out there.
Just go to Youtube and listen to actual experts who no longer care about having to find grant money in today's academic world. Search for Climate: The Movie (The Cold Truth) Updated 4K version and get real information that doesn't have a so called environmentalist agenda baked into it.
From January of 2023. Why is it being shown here now???
The important thing here is "for 80 years." Literally noise in the scale of global climate change.
Look up a graph of what temperatures have been for the last million years. We have been hotter and way colder than we are now. And keep in mind that the rate of change from our proxy samples should also be taken with a small grain of salt as we don't exactly know where the samples were originally formed due to plate tectonics, etc. They are decent, but these are still estimates and they are estimates from from proxies.
The interesting thing from the one million year graph is how strangely consistent the up and down cycle is. It is almost like something triggers once the temperature gets up to 58F then plunges. That seems like way more of an issue than the idea that the temp is going to run away to get too hot.
Now look up temperatures for the last 100 million years. It is colder than it used to be as far as we can tell. Which makes sense as the Sun is getting older, we are slowly moving away from it, etc. Then do 500 million years. You will see, again, that the temperature was way hotter than it is now.
These kinds of things are why so many people hear the panic about "this is the END!!!" and blow it off. Looking at the graphs, the last several thousand years have been by far the most stable temperatures that there have ever been. Ever. Do we know why it was that stable? No. We have lots of ideas but nothing that explains it. Do we know if that stability is simply coming to the end naturally? Nope, we don't know that either. We have fears that we are impacting it, but we don't know it.
So why should we panic and cause mass havoc when temps move a microscopic bit. Looks like the way, way bigger threat is that temperatures are going to plunge in the relatively near future. Now, we might actually cause that through our warming. But based on these graphs, there are a lot of other things going on that seem beyond our abilities to actually impact in any way with current technology.
Seems like a better plan to keep improving our technology and migrate things around as better solutions come up rather than shoving "solutions" down peoples throat which lower standards of living and will 1000% cause a backlash. And probably a pretty nasty one given how tense everyone is these days.
Past performance doesn't guarantee future results....but it is BY FAR the best indicator of what will happen at the macro scale. I didn't predict which jobs would be created and I never said that jobs such as your horse example wouldn't go away. I said the opposite. Today's horse driver will be tomorrow auto mechanic or Uber driver or whatever. But there will be more of them than AI will displace. And if you think that the manufacturing jobs of the 1970s vanished into thin air, you are looking in the wrong place. The US and to a lesser extent European "leadership" simply exported them all away. There are still tons and tons of these jobs. Just not as large of a percentage of them in the West as there used to be since they are now in Asia and South America.
Also, if you think the working class that drove a horse was in any way better off or had more income than what is available today then you need to read more about what life really was like back then. The reason you see so many people with butlers, maids, etc. in black and white movies only 100 year ago is that those people were essentially indentured servants and made pennies for their labor. I was fortunate enough to have 4 great grandparents live well into their 90s. Hearing the real stories about "the good old days" was eye opening. Hollywood never portrayed what life was like, especially for the working class. It may not have been hell on Earth, but you could certainly see it from there.
As for workforce participation rates, that is due in no small part to the rise in the welfare state, not in spite of it. Just look public spending by GDP from 1940. Google/Bing will do their best to hide this data as it doesn't look good but you can find it. It has skyrocketed in recent years. That, combined with the aging population, directly correlates with the declining workforce participation rate.
Lastly, have some faith in humanity. Maybe not in the current leadership, but humanity itself. Things are way better off than what you are constantly being bombarded with from the media and political class. Look up Michael Schellenberger on Youtube. He sheds some interesting lights on things and he is far from being some reactionary Right wing nutjob
Not even close. This kind of fear mongering about "technology is going to take all jobs" has been debunked since 1811 you Luddite...
Technology ALWAYS ends up creating more jobs. The jobs just shift. That’s it. That’s all. And it has been proven over and over and over and over again. Clever people will figure out ways to make AI useful in a new fashion that will spawn job growth. You just can’t see it yet. But it will happen.
Short sighted and hysterical personalities like yourself that are always looking for “the end” because you aren’t comfortable unless you are feeling the rush of drama. Just about any drama will do. Your battle cry of “this time it is different” is pathetic. Common tool sets, factory lines, pneumatic systems, computers, robotic assembly, etc. etc. have all been the harbingers of the end of jobs according to people like you. And they were wrong each and every time.
Prior to 2016 everyone was on this board panicking about how everyone was going to need UBI. Then the unemployment rate plummeted to historic lows after several restrictive regulations were relaxed/removed. Now AI is going to put us all out on the street. Better get the government built up and ready to step in because everyone knows how good the government is at handling people’s wellbeing.
Give it a rest already. Your predictions are ridiculous.
I'd rather just believe that it's done by little elves running around.