drake
@drake@lemmy.sdf.org
- Comment on Anon questions our energy sector 5 days ago:
You have no idea what you’re talking about. shut the fuck up, you pretentious cunt.
- Comment on Anon questions our energy sector 5 days ago:
Notice how pro-nuclear people always point towards a bunch of fictional technology as the solution? Oh, we just need fusion, or breeder reactors, or a bunch of other shit that doesn’t exist. No, bro, we just need to build renewables and proper energy grids. It’s really not that complicated. If it’s not sunny where you live, then you just get electricity from where it is sunny. It’s really really simple
Nuclear energy is a solution looking for a problem. Total tech bro bullshit. Like crypto.
- Comment on Anon questions our energy sector 5 days ago:
Are you fucking serious? Nuclear power plants cost way fucking more than some cables. You people are fundamentally so unserious. Pull your head out of a reactor for ten seconds and take reality as it exists
- Comment on Anon questions our energy sector 5 days ago:
and breeder reactors are more expensive than faerie magic, I prefer to use technologies that are actually real rather than things I wish were real
- Comment on Anon questions our energy sector 5 days ago:
I can’t, sorry - I blocked him for being a pro-nuclear shill. Rather than link to a specific study, because there are dozens at this point, I’ll instead just link you to a Wikipedia article that has plenty of references for you to explore - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/100%25_renewable_energy
If you want to find studies, you can find them - there are actually quite a lot of 100% renewable energy feasibility studies that all seem to come to the conclusion that 100% renewable energy economy is completely achievable and viable with current technology. Many of them consider nuclear power to be a fossil fuel.
Ask a pro-nuclear guy to provide any source that doesn’t come from somewhere funded by the nuclear lobby and watch as they flail around ineffectually and then link you to some pro-nuclear lobby group anyways. It’s quite funny
- Comment on Anon questions our energy sector 5 days ago:
yes
- Comment on Anon questions our energy sector 5 days ago:
if 15% of the land used for parking spaces in the USA was instead used for renewables, that would generate enough electricity to power the whole country.
a report from the IEA showed that renewables CAN, and I mean CAN fully power the entire world. So take that one up with the experts. thanks!
nice brainwashing though!
- Comment on Anon questions our energy sector 5 days ago:
There is a huge lobby of pro-nuclear think tanks who try to astroturf pro-nuclear shit onto social media. We, scientifically literate, rational people, need to counteract these harmful narratives with some facts.
FACT: Renewable sources of energy are as cheap or cheaper per kwh than nuclear.
FACT: Renewables are faster to provision than nuclear.
FACT: Renewables are as clean, or cleaner, than nuclear.
FACT: Renewables are much more flexible and responsive to energy fluctuations than nuclear.
FACT: Renewables will only get cheaper. Nuclear will only get more expensive, because uranium mining will get harder and harder as we deplete easily accessible sources.
- Comment on Anon questions our energy sector 5 days ago:
“oh it won’t run out, it’ll just be ridiculously expensive, despite the fact it’s already more expensive than renewables!”
Yeah great fucking argument dude, 10/10.
- Comment on Anon questions our energy sector 5 days ago:
Nuclear isn’t in competition with fossil fuels, it’s in competition with renewables. Renewables are better than nuclear by pretty much every conceivable metric. So fuck nuclear power, it’s a waste of money and time.
- Comment on Anon questions our energy sector 5 days ago:
When energy storage and transmission methods are also not up to the task, nuclear becomes the best answer.
Obviously, the best answer is to improve energy storage and transmission infrastructure. Why would we waste hundreds of millions on a stupid toy power plant when we could spend 10% of that money on just running decent underground cables.
- Comment on Anon questions our energy sector 5 days ago:
and we can have 100% clean, renewable energy in 2024, we just don’t need the nuclear reactor
- Comment on Anon questions our energy sector 5 days ago:
Nuclear may have been good 10 years ago, but it isn’t really good anymore. This is like saying “if I had bought a PS2 in 2002 then I would have had fun playing Final Fantasy XI Online. Therefore, I should buy a PS2 and FFXI Online so I can have fun in 2024”. That ship has sailed
- Comment on Anon tries programming in Java 1 week ago:
If you create a new project from scratch, yes, you can enable it project-wide. If you have a project which has a bunch of code predates nullable reference types, and you enable it project wide, you’ll have a billion warnings about it. Also, they’re warnings and not errors by default, which just encourages developers to either ignore or suppress them.
So the reality is that you need to remember when you’re making new classes to add the attribute, and then deal with external stuff - which isn’t always clearly marked whether it’s nullable or not unless it’s using attributes, by the way… just such a total mess.
They should have just gone with something more like Rust’s “Option” type. Would have been clearer for codebases that have to deal with a mix. They also could have clearly and decisively deprecated non-nullable reference types and just told people they were going to remove support in some future version so we could all migrate to them properly like we’ve done for .NET Core/.NET 5+.
- Comment on Anon tries programming in Java 1 week ago:
C# is pretty good generally - I know it far better than any other and it pays my bills! - but it certainly has its weak points. Particularly around the newer features, a lot of them feel really rushed and just kind of shitty.
The one I hate the most is the whole “nullable” pattern. It’s a total mess. Having to mark up files as
#nullable enable, having to mark methods with a bunch of attributes, and the way that it works differently if it’s a value type or a reference type, it’s just so half-baked.If you spend some time with a more modern language like Rust or Swift then you’ll quickly start to notice C#’s weaknesses.
- Comment on This might blow up in our face 1 week ago:
If you want to stop climate change, the only thing we can that has any hope of working is a peaceful revolution.
To start with, join a union or learn how to unionise your workplace. If you can, look into setting up co-operatives. The IWW has some great resources. Anyone can start a union, you don’t need any sort of special qualifications or knowledge. Join the IWW, they have some great free trainings you can join to learn how to make real change at your workplace.
Once enough people are unionised, we can start building a coalition of unions, all of which can work together to tackle larger and larger issues. If we have strong union efforts in each industry then we can protect the working class against the negative effects of striking - for example, if there are unions in the food production industry, then people striking don’t need to worry about going hungry.
This is how a true people’s revolution happens. With the least amount of violence possible, a bottom-up, people-led movement.
If you believe in this in any way, please, join the IWW. I know it seems like a long journey, but it begins with a single step, and that single step is joining the IWW.
- Comment on I'm surprised it hasn't been taken down yet ...well maybe not that surprised 1 week ago:
Don’t get me wrong here, I’m totally with you, I’m opposed to violence just as you are. I just extend my opposition to violence a bit further, including violence inflicted by states. I don’t want you to change your opposition to violence, I think that’s great. I’m just asking you to consider whether your exemptions given to states engaging in military conflicts is actually justified
- Comment on I'm surprised it hasn't been taken down yet ...well maybe not that surprised 1 week ago:
But haven’t you seen countless cases of examples where those strict rules for war have been completely ignored? Russia is just ignoring them completely in Ukraine, Israel is just straight-up conducting a genocide and no western country gives a shit apparently, for the US there are countless cases of shit like the My Lai massacre or the US sponsorships of terrorist organisations in South America…
States are just big systems that exist to give people a monopoly on violence.
- Comment on Premium Ads 1 week ago:
Sideload the uYou+Extras app on your phone abs then just use AirPlay to watch youtube videos on apple TV. Gets around adverts 99% of the time. Sometimes one will slip through, just close the video and reopen it and it’ll not have an advert anymore.
- Comment on Anon doesn't tip 1 week ago:
Sorry, I probably should have explained better, it’s a bit of intentionally misusing the meaning of the term “value” for a joke - the original greentext said “25% of the value of the food”, so if you think of the amount of money required to purchase the raw ingredients and the labour required to create the final meal, that could be considered 100% of the food’s value. So if the food cost $5 to make, the company would sell it at $12.50 to get 250% of the “value” of the food.
But the term “value” usually refers to whatever the customer is willing to pay in exchange for a product, so the joke has an extra meaning - the CEO demands to be paid 2.5x more than anyone is actually willing to pay for it.
- Comment on Anon doesn't tip 2 weeks ago:
Except instead of 25%, it’s 250%.
- Comment on She-Ra Lives! 2 weeks ago:
Actually, the history of why women divisions arose in sports is far more nuanced than you seem to believe. The main reasons for doing so were primarily rooted in sexism. Historical records show that women were able to compete with, and win against, men in sporting events during the early middle ages.
Anyways, I see there’s no reasoning with you, so I hope you have a pleasant evening
- Comment on She-Ra Lives! 2 weeks ago:
Anthropology tends to support the fact that women and men pretty much all had equal share of pretty much every task in the palaeolithic and neolithic eras.
You shouldn’t just reject scientific advances because it goes against what you learned at school. What you learned was wrong. Science adapts based on new evidence. You can too.
- Comment on She-Ra Lives! 2 weeks ago:
prove it
- Comment on Not likely to be AI-generated or Deepfake 2 weeks ago:
Hehe, I know, I’m just being silly - the /s on my message means it’s in a sarcastic tone :) but thanks for taking the time to share that video!
- Comment on Not likely to be AI-generated or Deepfake 3 weeks ago:
This obviously can’t be true, how did they do it without Photoshop? /s