Yes, air pollution needs to be enforced globally for things like CO2 and other gases. However, there are also pollution where the impact is significantly local like microplastics, ashes, particulate matters. Those might be blown far away but the pollution density is usually much higher at the source. Why city air is so much more polluted than rural air?

Also, it is interesting that China is actually improving in air quality control in recent years. In fact, they are improving much faster than most countries due to their push for renewable energy (their massive hydroelectric dams, solar farms and cheap EVs might have arguable benefits) but it has actually significantly improved their city air quality. https://earth.org/how-china-is...

Meanwhile in Western world, the current generation have never experienced and forgotten how bad was the air pollution during their grandparent's generation. See Donora Smog https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Perhaps you didn't read the wiki article. It has already addressed many of the points you have mention.

Yes, the solar panel will not cover 100% and will still let some lights through. But so do most of the current large solar farms. They are always some gaps as they are usually mounted at an angled toward the sun. It is definitely not as good yield compared to 100% solar or 100% farm land but with combined land use efficiency is often much better than when they are done separately.

Also, while we should not be destroying virgin rain forest, it is well known that solar farm reduces much more CO2 per land area than natural forest. Since it is palm oil plantation, there is even much less CO2 long term sequestration since older plants are destroyed and carbon are released back into the atmosphere within a few decades when the organic matter rot to releases methane or burnt by the farmers.

Not all plants require direct sunlight. Many vegetables and fruits plants are naturally "understory" plants that grow beneath the forest canopy. For those plants, agrivoltaics is a possible option to the land for both solar and farming. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Perhaps you should try to read the article and learn Rust before commenting? Rust and CPU level memory exploits targets different class of vulnerabilities. Rust make it easy to write system level safely especially for temporal and spacial memory safety at code level. It not just help in security but also make your programs much more stable by avoid the issues in the first place. Those Apple/ARM CPU level enhancement are more like detecting and stopping the attack when it happens, it doesn't avoid/prevent the issues before it happens. So, if you are writing C/C++ programs, your program will just crash or kernel panic at the customer site when you accidentally forgotten you array bound checking. Or, do you prefer Rust to actually help you to prevent you from making the silly mistake before you even ship to customer? Also, Rust can't do anything to fix CPU speculative execution leaks and other hardware memory issues like row hammer attacks. That's also why they have to implement such HW level fixes. BTW i still don't understand what's with all the rust hate? There are so many programming languages out there. Each have a different purpose, use the right tool for the job, don't be obsessive with a single tool.

It depends on the objective of the commissioned study. If it is a PR stunt, then we have to take it with a big grain of salt, but companies also often do competitive analysis on competitor products to benchmark and set future product development directions. I can easily image how Qualcomm execs would like to how good is the Apple's C1

I think the problem is how they define political contents. While I'm also fine with removing all those toxic political hate speech, it seems that Meta is also limiting many scientific topic especially those that have been somewhat weaponized by politicians like climate change, health care, etc. This is causing issues with many legit science communicators on the platforms.

The same Joe Rogan who was spreading COVID misinformation? https://www.abc.net.au/news/20...

Either he is getting paid to allow those conspiracy crackhead to talk on his show or he is actually silly enough to believe all those BS? Either way, he don't sound like someone I'd like to listen to.

If 1.8 billion dollars sound like a lot of money, perhaps we as humanity should also consider why we have also invested over 400 billion into ByteDance, the parent company of a Tiktok when we could have used the valuable resources, money and brainpower for climate change?

Unfortunately there are people that will believe it. Remember di-hydrogen monoxide parody? There were actually so many people that believed in it that there were actual campaigns ban it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Yes, that's what I've been saying about these people complaining about lithium battery. We need to compare to the "waste" generated from gasoline. An EV have at most a few hundred kilograms of battery that usually last the lifetime of the car. Even if it is thrown to landfill, that just a large chunk of battery in the landfill. Compared that to several dozen tonnes of CO2 and other nasty pollutant from the tailpipe over the lifetime of an engine, that is several orders of magnitude less pollution.

There is a growing number of solar farms that actually also uses the land for agriculture use. For growing food that does not require too much direct sunlight or using the land for sheep grazing etc. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Yes, they have their own Star Trek-like Prime Directive of non-interference for inferior native population. They took a look at us making a fool of ourselves with silly elections to vote for crazy politician to become top leaders and also on a straight path to climate change self-destruction. So they decided that this barbaric world is not worth saving.

I'm driving a hybrid and I'm getting around 4.1 liter/100km or 57MPG on highways and 3.9 l/100km or 60MPG in city. A full tank of 45 liters can bring me over 1000km which is much better than most ICE cars of similar size. I've reduced my overall fuel consumption by almost half of my previous car. Also because about 30% of the range is on electric, it has a periodic service interval of 1.5x longer than typical ICE car. So, even the manufacturer has higher confidence that it requires less maintenance.

Raising sea levels due to climate change and island nation with mostly coastal cities does not seems like a good idea?

triple DES was mainly meant to increase key size, the increased security come mainly from much larger keyspace compared to the original 56-bit, not so much from encrypt/decrypt 3 times.