No, it's really inefficient. In order to be useful for power generation, the three square mile circle it illuminates would have to be completely full of solar panels in order to capture all the energy being reflected. And it it's as bright as the moon, that's about one half millionth as bright as the sun. So those solar panels, assuming no cloud cover, will be operating at one millionth the efficiency of daytime.

Meanwhile, battery technology, particularly for terrestrial power storage, keeps getting better and better. This has zero potential to offset CO2. Which is deeply sad for the science fiction geek in us all, but honestly, right now solar generation technology is starting to feel pretty science-fictiony, so maybe that's okay.

The other thing about saving is that if you can depend on UBI, and it's enough to live on, then that takes the pressure off of individuals saving for retirement. Right now the amount of money people have to save for retirement in the U.S. is actually a problem, because there's no safe place to put that much money. And so we wind up with things like private equity and various other forms of securitization a specific group of which led to the 2008 crisis.

All of these securities are just ways of storing value, but you can't actually store value—value is work. "Stored value" is an obligation that someone else will have to work to pay back: I use my wealth to pay you money to do the work that I need done.

So public support for people who need it is actually the same thing as living off savings, except that living off savings is individual, and public support is collective. So public support can take advantage of the law of averages, and private savings can't. Which massively increases the amount you have to save as an individual to be sure you'll be okay in retirement.

And this motivates wealth inequality, which makes things worse and worse for the people who are creating the value you as a person with a decent amount of retirement savings need done. We've already had people saying "no more taxes" because they don't want to work to pay for other peoples' retirements. This is the same thing, and at some point it either turns into runaway inflation, which means your savings loses its value, or else it turns into regime change, which means who knows what? Right now, it means that a bunch of elected people are just raking in money through fraud, which isn't likely to end well for the rest of us.

It's weird how people think of socialism as being somehow expensive in comparison.

"There is no safety or cost reason to prefer this over normal analog protein vaccines. Only advantage MRNA has is reduced up front capex."

Nice attempt at shaping the discussion to flow down the limited paths you prefer. In reality world the gigantic advantages of having straightforward yearly influenza vaccines be mRNA-based is that (1) after enough experience it would become possible to reformulate the vaccine midseason if the dominant flu strain changes (2) if a 1918 Kansas Flu boils up out of a giant pig farm somewhere it will be possible to create an mRNA vaccine for it and get it into distribution rapidly.

The streaming services have already done multiple rug pulls, rights-stripping acquisitions, and bankruptcies to take away "purchased" streaming rights and force people to pay a second time (and a third, and a fourth...). But yeah, the people who have CD players with analog outputs and who buy CDs are the dumb ones.

The AI crash is coming for not only the profits but the capital of everyone who thought there was going to be some trees-growing-to-the-sky "AI" miracle, so there's that.

"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect"

To conservatism I would add billionaireism.

[note that this is not Wilhoit the academic political philospher, but a different Wilhoit]

The smartest guys in the room somehow failed to realize that 40% compounded growth forever at 80%-3000% gross margins wasn't possible. It can happen for 5-10 years of an economic turnover (whether driven by new technology, new forms of organization, immigration, or other fundamental changes) but just because it happens to some organizations for 5, 10, even 20 years does not mean it can/will happen to every organization - and trees don't grow to the sky.

Before starting a local nuclear power industry Korea did a thorough study of the global industry and decided to basically copy US NRC regulations. They had the option to start from scratch and create a new regulatory framework but they decided to go with one that had experience behind it and known weak spots documented. I don't track that part of the industry closely any more but my understanding is that Korean nuclear operational and safety requirements are now tighter than those of the US.

Admiral Rickover's presentation on paper reactors vs real reactors is as applicable today as when he first gave it in 1953.

Well, and not only that, but the article itself clearly says that it was the tariffs that killed the company, not Lena Khan. So the headline looks a bit like it's just clickbait nonsense, and Lena Khan had nothing to do with this. Sure, if Amazon had acquired them, maybe they would have operated at an apparent loss in order to collect all that hot hot private home use data, but that would not have been a win.

The worry that iRobot would be acquired by Amazon was reason enough for me to disable my device—I hadn't actually heard that the merger was canceled, because I moved shortly after that and we sold the Robot so we wouldn't have to move with it. :/

Contrary to the scaremongering we hear, the world is not full of terrorists. They exist, don't get me wrong, but the reason we're so afraid of them is that our fear of them is incredibly useful for people who want to control us.

And also, the ones who do exist aren't engineers. So a shooting, or a stabbing, that's pretty easy to figure out how to do. Derailing a train? That's physics. Physics is much harder than pointing a gun and pulling the trigger.

Unfortunately Acela sucks. I took Acela from New York to Boston once. Once. It was terrifying—the tracks aren't really suited for running at (haha!) 100mph. The idea that this is high-speed rail and that anybody takes that name seriously just illustrates what a backwater the U.S. is nowadays.

There is already a rail corridor through western Indiana into the Chicago metropolitan area. And there are already passenger trains running on it. The problem isn't getting a train into the city center—it's that we don't have electrified high-speed rail lines between the cities. Which, given that we do have low-speed (only 75mph max) highways, which are insanely expensive to build and maintain, seems like an eminently solvable problem.

The real problem is that there are huge fortunes dependent on keeping those roads full of cars. But really that's not even the problem. You can see the problem right here in this discussion: if you haven't lived in a place where high speed rail is ubiquitous, it seems really really hard. If you haven't lived in a place where cars are not completely and utterly dominant, it seems inconceivable that things could be any different. Even people who are anti-car tend to think with car brain because of this.

Math is hard.

If a substantial percentage of the population is vaccinated, the likelihood of being exposed to measles is very low, so the 3% who might contract it if exposed have a good chance of not being exposed. This also doesn't account for whether the severity of the infection will be different for those 3% if they have been vaccinated.

"If I go find an actor/actress that I like the sound of their voice of, and want to create a weird golem of a voice, what I'd do is get several 48khz 16-bit recordings from audio books of that actor, run it through the training (because I have their voice and the book they are reading) and then find a performance style of that actor/actress I want (from maybe a movie or or television show) and thus "skin" that voice to sound like that performance. That will give me a 95% reasonable sounding voice for all the words from the books they read, and a 10% accuracy on words that they never ever said before.

And of course you would contact the appropriate copyright clearinghouse or actors' association and pay the associated fees for using those voices, which the massive IP theft organizations known as "AI" do not.