Delete your account if you want to, but please don't delete posts and comments. I sympathize wanting to stick it to Reddit and not giving them free content to whore out to AI companies for training, but for the millions of normal people who might get value from comments it's really frustrating.

There are tools to mass-edit all your reddit comments and it's incredibly frustrating to see when people do it. I've thought I finally found the answer to some question or technical problem or whatever in a reddit thread, only to then see the original post replaced with something like "This comment was removed because Reddit made me angry. Lorem ipsum dolar sit amet shit." Perhaps unfair but it makes me hate that person's selfishness much more than make me dislike Reddit.

I live in Utah and get to witness this first-hand. Just yesterday it was windy enough that unpleasant dust clouds were coming off the dried parts of the lake bed. Utah snowpack is at a record low this year and peaked for the 2026 water year earlier in March. We broke several high temperature records this month (along with a bunch of other states in the west / mountain west). It's looking pretty bad.

Right now it's a lot like watching a slow-moving train derailment. Everyone knows what's coming, but 80% of the population, the majority being Mormon religious nuts, rationalizes it away or refuses to acknowledge it, but those that do see the problem won't take action to address it, preferring instead to "hopes and prayers". Brian Cox, the damned governor, has declared multiple "days of prayer for rain".

There's a sick fatalism amongst many religious groups, assuming that God won't let terrible things happen to them, but it's especially bad with Mormons. They think they're a chosen people, living in a chosen land, and that the "end times" are coming soon. All this adds up to "I don't need to do or sacrifice anything to deal with Problem because God won't let me suffer and it doesn't matter because the world is going to end soon anyway."

For any rational thinking person this is disgusting, but when 90% of the legislature, the governor, and all US congressmen are owned (mentally and financially) by the Mormon church, there's not much we can do. At best voting them out just gets a different lizard in the seat.

Grok was constantly say it was doing something that it had ZERO ability to, and I kept calling it out and it kept apologizing and then immediately doing it again.

As a guy who spend 5 figures a year on Ai, the last thing I want is that. I know Claude and ChatGPT also do it, but Grok was doing it CONSTANTLY.

It is however entirely sensible. I rarely agree with trumps lackeys, but Jesus, I have no idea what gateway was meant to be for. This on the other hand will actually be useful.

If Hong Kong hadnâ(TM)t returned to china, then under UK law, the police could demand their password for any reason at all, with similar sentences in the case of national security related offences.

Think logically, you say, and then proceed to lay out a series of non sequiturs.
1. The implication of renewables having lower LCOE than fossil fuels is not that fossil fuel generation gets shut down, because it's not a perfectly commoditised market with instantly effective price signals. Assets last decades, purchasers optimise for more than just cost, policy makers intervene as Trump has repeatedly done, etc etc.
2. It does not follow that if there were zero fossil fuel usage for power generation, I'd be far less happy about (other people) attacking Tesla. This is a completely bizarre false chain of logic. I can't even tell what point you think you're making.

Why do you guys always make such crap arguments? Can't you just have a private discussion with ChatGPT for an hour and get yourself something robust to counter with, rather than this drivel?

Tell us you don't understand how the government works without telling us you don't understand how it works.

Congress has the power to delegate it's authority to smaller expert groups. Passing a law that says "The FTC can set rules for trade and commerce in these ways..." is completely valid. Or sure, we could have Senator "series of tubes" Stevens write every single specific rule that controls Internet communications. That will work fine.

There are only two groups of people who want to eliminate regulatory authority: (1) people who are too dumb to understand the negative impact it would have on normal people, and (2) corporate hacks and simps who understand exactly that negative impact and see that as the goal.

As an aside: I find it hilarious that the same people who bitch about "we are a republic, not a democracy" and fight against, for example, eliminating the electoral college, are often the same people who bitch about "unelected bureaucrats".

Abrogate doesn't mean what you think it does. One abrogates a treaty, not a subsidy.

Also, is now *really* the apposite moment to be talking about subsidizing the costs of renewables, while untold billions are being spent to try to manage the coming supply shock from the blockade of the Straits of Hormuz?

The LCOE calculations are readily done, and it's absolutely blindingly obvious that not having to pay the costs of supplying fuel means renewables are substantially cheaper than fossil fuels.

1. The balsa trees were largely from plantations, not wild balsa trees
2. There are about 390 billion trees in the Amazon
3. The plantations covered about 10k hectares out of the 700m hectares of the Amazon basin
4. About 4.5m hectares of Amazon basin are lost annually, mainly due to deforestation and fires, and climate change is a force multiplier for both of those

Here you are talking about forests, and you can't see the wood for the trees

It's true that Texas has fantastically cheap onshore wind due to its geography. But that isn't true in the north east of the US, where the geography is much less favourable (and also insolation). The costs of a distribution network to take meaningful amounts of net new power from Texas to New York would be enough to swamp the LCOE benefits of Texan wind. So offshore wind is actually more financially compelling than onshore for these places

There is absolutely no way this is actually money-neutral for the US government. That would require a degree of executional competence that is patently well beyond them.

You're *still paying* a French company to build power infrastructure, you gibbering fuckwit, it says so right in the story. You're paying them a refund and then paying them to build an LNG plant and then you'll pay other countries for the fuel. You will pay and pay and pay to other countries for this and similar decisions.

Not to mention that the first thing any gamer does when they get a game is turn all that artistic crap off, both to get a better framerate, but also to make the game easier to see. The fewer "artistic effects" on the screen, the easier it is to see what's happening. The idea that gamers care about "artistic intent" is hilarious if you've ever seen any gamer community.

We are starting to see a partial disintermediation of the global financial system, as millions of homes and small businesses put up panels and batteries. That’s because to do that, they don’t need sovereign borrowing, dollar reserves and frequently they don’t even need formal finance. To the extent that there remains dependence following the shift to renewables, it’s front-loaded and decays over time, because assets last decades, and raw materials are widespread.

There's some weirdnesses in the reporting, but I think the point is that going from essentially zero to 10% in a single year is quite fast. It's not that fast, though - I think Pakistan went faster, for example

Ember are pretty sharp, so I think it's likely to be just crappy reporting of what they've actually found