cynar
@cynar@lemmy.world
- Comment on In Open Carry states, is it also allowed to openly carry bladed weapons like Swords? Bow and arrow? 1 week ago:
Could you use a long rifle as a stick for a protest sign?
- Comment on How can people know what they want at a given moment? 2 weeks ago:
I’ve noticed there seems to be a divide between deep thinking and wide thinking.
Deep thinking tends to be directed and has a tight focus. It covers a lot of intellectual thinking.
Wide thinking is a lot more integrated, it’s how we instinctively know how a particular action will affect others, both directly and indirectly. It integrates a lot of topics, but at a far shallower level.
As an aspie, I’m good at deep thinking. I struggle with wide thinking. I suspect I am fairly blind to a lot of wide thinking effects. Whether their more intuitive thinking is better or worse than my logical deep thinking is a different matter.
- Comment on Plug-In Solar Panels Are Starting to Sprout in U.S. Backyards |Ten U.S. states have legalized systems that can be plugged into standard wall outlets. The technology typically does not require permits 2 weeks ago:
I believe they try and shift the phase slightly. If the mains in present, it will overwhelm the inverter and keep it locked, or at least show up as a distorted waveform. If it can swing the phase freely, then there is no mains power, so it shuts down.
E.g. (in Europe) an oscillator with a frequency of 49.95 will be dragged to the mains 50.00. By measuring the frequency it will read 50.00, if it drifts low, then it is not phased locked, and so will shut itself down till 50hz reappears.
Think of it like how metronomes come into harmony. Only 1 is a little desktop unit (your inverter) and the other is building sized (the grid).
- Comment on Plug-In Solar Panels Are Starting to Sprout in U.S. Backyards |Ten U.S. states have legalized systems that can be plugged into standard wall outlets. The technology typically does not require permits 2 weeks ago:
The European systems definitely have line sensing. They need to, to stay in phase. If the power goes, so does your solar.
I think some systems can be turned on from an app, but default to off, without mains as a reference.
- Comment on New clean energy comes out. *look inside* It’s just boiling water again… 2 weeks ago:
Very true. It unfortunately doesn’t include the delays from bureaucracies throwing excessive red tape at the project, with the goal of, if not killing it, kicking the decision down the road till it’s someone else’s problem. The UK government has been problematic on that front.
I might be an optimistic pessimist.
- Comment on New clean energy comes out. *look inside* It’s just boiling water again… 2 weeks ago:
Fusion has been 10 years away, with proper funding. It never got that funding. It struggled to maintain the break even funding to keep skilled people employed, and the lights on.
The difference is that over unity has been achieved, in a normally sustainable manner. The funding is such that it’s 5-10 years at current funding. Most of that is building the actual test plants.
I fully agree that renewables are currently the best cost option. The catch is that they are not viable everywhere. They are also inherently low density, so can get expensive in certain areas.
Basically, we want a mix of options, to fit local requirements. Nuclear (and later fusion) should be part of the plan.
In practice, I’m of the take what we can get. We need to crash CO2 output, and we need to do it yesterday. Anything speeding that up is a win, as far as I’m concerned.
- Comment on New clean energy comes out. *look inside* It’s just boiling water again… 2 weeks ago:
Fully agreed, though it’s also something you really don’t want done on too much of an accelerated timeline. Rushing the construction, when the fail-safes rely on it, and it will be an absolute bitch to fix later, is a poor plan.
Unfortunately the red tape has become far too risk adverse. E.g. the reactors china is now building were designed in the UK. The UK government killed 5 attempts to get them built through red tape and time killing. Eventually a Chinese scientist found out about the plans. (With permission) he contacted the Chinese government. Sufficient to say, those plans formed the basis for the newer Chinese reactors they are building out now. They are also exporting the expertise, since most western countries have had their skilled engineers reach retirement, before passing on their skills and knowledge.
In practice, you are looking at 5-10 years minimum, from site selection to power on.
- Comment on New clean energy comes out. *look inside* It’s just boiling water again… 2 weeks ago:
It’s relative harm. New nuclear is far cleaner than coal, and can slot into it’s place in the grid. We should have done this decades ago, but the plans languished till china found out about them. (Much to the designers joy)
It’s also not an either/or situation. As china is demonstrating, there is a limit to how quickly you can roll out renewables. Doing other, pollution reduction in parallel makes sense.
Taking nuclear off the table was the biggest win the oil barrons pulled off.
On a plus side, we will finally find out if fusion is viable in the next 5-10 years. The first over-unity test reactors, designed for sustained operation are being built.
- Comment on New clean energy comes out. *look inside* It’s just boiling water again… 2 weeks ago:
Coal plants put out more radioactive material than even the bomb factories they call nuclear power plants. Newer plant designs are FAR more fail safe too, and some can actually ‘eat’ the waste from older plants.
New nuclear is right up there with renewables, with the added bonus of being great for baseloads. The only problem is we needed to be building it 20 years ago, since it takes a long time to design, permit and build them properly. If we try to rely on them now, it will be too late.
- Comment on Why don’t Gen Z buy rounds in the pub? 2 weeks ago:
If I’m going to the bar, and it’s busy, I’ll grab drinks for the people I’m explicitly with. I also keep a vague mental track of if I’m in a deficit with someone (I owe them a drink to balance out).
I don’t do it with the expectation that they will buy my next drink however.
- Comment on Why don’t Gen Z buy rounds in the pub? 2 weeks ago:
As I read it, it basically comes off as the author being grumpy that it’s harder to sponge off people who drink less, or slower.
I will do reciprocal drink buying, but hate formalising into “rounds”. My drinking rate can vary wildly. I don’t want to be forced to drink faster, to keep up with others.
Gen Z is the most financially squeezed age group in my memory. The fact they want to be more discerning in how much they drink and pay makes complete sense.
It’s also worth noting that contactless card machines also remove a major bottleneck in going to the bar.
- Comment on Labour overtakes Reform in voter poll for first time since March 2025 3 weeks ago:
I just get an urge for a large, sticky milkshake when I see him. I’ve no idea why…
- Comment on Labour overtakes Reform in voter poll for first time since March 2025 3 weeks ago:
It’s unlikely, but I’m still hoping his encounter with count binface throws him in the trash.
- Comment on thoughts and prayers for science 3 weeks ago:
Given the title of the blank list is “Diseases eradicated by prayer” this list gets a lot funnier.
- Comment on It's becoming widely accepted that it's not safe to put pictures of your children on social media... (cont. in post) 3 weeks ago:
The modern world has made it so that teenagers have nowhere to “exist” without paying. Even hanging out on the road gets the police called on them.
Many have moved to online communities. At that point the line between social media and game are quite blurry. Is a Minecraft server a game, or a way of having fun with your friends?
As someone who “found my tribe” online, long before I found them in real life, I understand where the woods are coming from. Even for adults, the modern world has become VERY socially isolating.
It’s also not just bad households. A lot of families now have 2 working parents. This leaves very little time for arranging playdates, or giving lifts to friends. Kids supplement their lost social time with online time. Some end up in toxic communities, but most flow through it with years of experience at this point.
I watched a talk on internet safety for children (as a parent/guardian). One of the biggest bits of advice was to stay involved. Play the games they love, even if they bore you. Let them talk about their online friendship groups. You can then help guide them towards good choices, rather than deal with the fallout from bad ones compounding.
- Comment on Why in America is .08 the legal limit for drunk driving? How come it's not an even 0.10? Who decided at what level being drunk starts? Then 4 beers of 12oz's is 0.08 why is it that small? 5 weeks ago:
2 reasons, remembered from a lawyers lecture on the subject at uni, years ago, in the UK.
-
Some people produce small amounts of alcohol in their gut. It’s generally not much (more becomes auto brewery syndrome) but not zero. This can blip the test up slightly, even when they haven’t drunk.
-
The awkward fact that a small amount of alcohol actually improves driving. It’s somewhere between 1/4 and 3/4 pint of beer. It’s also the reason alcohol is considered a performance enhancing drug in some olympic sports.
The limit is set high enough that there is no arguing these points in a court. It also covers the residual alcohol in people’s systems the morning after. It’s well into the point where all but the heaviest alcoholic will definitely be impaired. That lets them use blood alcohol as a proxy for impaired driving due to alcohol.
On a side note. I know someone who blew red on the breathalyser. He knew something was wrong, since he has been teetotal for 20 years. He got arrested, only for the blood test to show 0.0. The police were quite confused, but let him go. It turned out, he had (unthinkingly) eaten a liqueur chocolate before being pulled over. It was enough to mess up the breathalyser.
-
- Comment on How does death with a mechanical/artificial heart work? 5 weeks ago:
Our mind is dependent on the exact wiring and firing potentials of the neurons. This is what stores everything (skills, memories, autonomic functions etc).
When the neurons die, this information is rapidly lost. Connections break, and triggering potentials collapse.
Reversing brain death involves reversing that process. It would almost be easier to digitise the brain and simulate it at that point.
What might be possible is localised repairs. Strokes can take out small, but critical areas of the brain. Rebuilding a speech center is a lot easier. The brain can distribute a lot of functions, if required. Putting new material in and letting it both learn to use it, and teach it to function is within the realms of medicine. It’s the difference however between a skin graft and rebuilding a limb that’s been through a wood chipper from the bucket of parts.
- Comment on Anon ruins christmas 1 month ago:
I’m scientifically trained (physics specifically), I’m also an atheist myself. I believe, based on a preponderance of evidence, that no creator being exists. The exception possibly being the simulation hypothesis. However, without specific evidence of that, the chances are extremely slim so I default to the null, aka atheism.
Interestingly, science has very few “facts”. Facts are mostly a thing of mathematics , which can create rigorous proofs. There is a lot of evidence in science, along with predictions and theories, but few facts.
E.g. I don’t know, for a fact, that the sun will rise in 1 year’s time. The evidence says it’s practically a certainty, but it is not a true “fact”. It’s a prediction based on an absurdly large evidence base.
- Comment on Anon ruins christmas 1 month ago:
Atheism does require belief. Even if it’s only in the axioms of physics.
As per my analogy, bald is not a haircut, but an absence of hair. You would be hard pressed to find a bald person who complained about it being lumped in with haircuts in a form.
Recognising the limits to our own knowledge is an important part of finding the truth.
Oh and the options “on fire” and “not on fire” obviously belong in the same grouping, even if they are different things.
- Comment on Anon ruins christmas 1 month ago:
Atheism is as much a belief as bald is a haircut. Technically slightly different, but makes sense to throw into the same box.
Learning that being right doesn’t make you not an arsehole is a lesson too many of us had to learn the hard way.
The satanic temple’s 7th tenet sums it up quite well.
Every tenet is a guiding principle designed to inspire nobility in action and thought. The spirit of compassion, wisdom, and justice should always prevail over the written or spoken word.
- Comment on Week-long heatwave due in England with 34C peak in south-east 1 month ago:
The ground has been dried out. It doesn’t happen often.
Also humidity is relative. Hot air holds a lot more water. The same amount of water will have a lower humidity, for a higher temperature.
- Comment on Ofsted drops ‘clumsy’ and ‘offensive’ guidance linking autism and extremism 1 month ago:
For those confused. The training tried to say that autistic people were more likely to be socially isolated. That then makes them more likely to be “befriended” into extremism.
It was akin to saying “black people commit more petty crimes”. While technically true (poor people commit more petty crimes, and a disproportionate number of blacks are poorer), it runs roughshod over the people it’s trying to protect/help.
- Comment on What can be done to prevent more dangerous heatwaves in Europe? 1 month ago:
Deep ocean algae farms might do it. Oil companies have brought up and side lined research on it for decades however.
- Comment on A FYI from Skeletor 1 month ago:
It’s read by multiple fans, doing a chapter each. It’s been years since I listened to it however, so the details are now quite hazy.
- Comment on A FYI from Skeletor 1 month ago:
That’s the correct one.
There’s also an audiobook version. Though it’s fan read, so a bit less consistent than most listeners would expect.
- Comment on A FYI from Skeletor 1 month ago:
It’s a dark gritty type sorry, before that became fashionable, with a lot of world building and explanation. You either love it or just can’t get into it.
In-story it’s the difference between a family bickering and fighting, Vs them suddenly fending off the text chain saw massacre.
- Comment on A FYI from Skeletor 1 month ago:
It takes the author a while to find their groove and start establishing the storylines, rather than just the world building. I understand what you mean though. I think a lot of people like it for the world building aspects rather than the writing style.
I can’t remember how it breaks down chapter wise, but If you made it to the first endbringer fight, and don’t like it, it’s not your style.
- Comment on A FYI from Skeletor 1 month ago:
The web serial Worm (Parahumans) has an excellent take on this.
The unwritten rules. Heros have to limit property damage, and not go lethal unless absolutely required. Villains, in turn, don’t go lethal on heros or civilians.
Both groups also respect each other’s secret identities, unless they out themselves. Heros because villains can get nasty if backed into a corner too badly. Villains because going after a cape’s family is a good way to get a kill order, and a heavy hitter involved.
In story there are also world ending threats. When one turns up, villains that are willing to help are out of bounds for retaliation. If they are willing to help, they are treated like any other cape.
End result, all the weird rules of heros and villains suddenly make logical sense. No-one wants to break the status quo.
It also leads to some funny encounters out of costume, or with new costumes.
- Comment on What do you do if you lose an argument, but it turns out that you were actually right? 1 month ago:
It depends if it was a discussion or an argument.
A discussion is a search for a common truth/understanding. Both parties need to be willing to adjust their views if the other person has a good point.
An argument is generally when you know you are right. Often it’s intended for the attention of those watching/listening. You’re not trying to convince the other person, but those who would otherwise listen to them.
Arguments with only the other person present are quite pointless.
As for your question. If it were a discussion, I would go back to them to see what they make of the evidence.
If it’s an argument, let it lie, unless they start spouting it to others in your presence. Then it’s down to you to counter them or not.
FYI, back in my uni days, a friend and I would clear the house with our “heated arguments” (atheist Vs devout Christian). When the rest of the house commented on this, we just both looked at each other in confusion. We had both been discussing and learning from each other. It might have gotten loud, but it never turned into an argument!
- Comment on UK weather: Amber extreme heat warning issued as 35C heatwave approaches 1 month ago:
I’ve just been looking at a graph of historical peak summer temperatures. In the 70s the peak was 35.9°C, with a majority being below 30°C. Back then 30°C was extremely hot.
A lot of homes were already standing back then, with most modern homes built on the same ethos.