Comments by "looseycanon" (@looseycanon) on "Thunderf00t"
channel.
-
30
-
16
-
Really this is problem of overspecialization. Just look at the list of papers in this video. Only one scientific something and the rest? Of the more well known ones, all CEO centric papers, that don't need to take care of what they publish from a scientific point of view, because the CEOs don't care, that they are being sold complete impossibility. They only care about the financial math, which is, sadly devoid of actual effects, because of how things like ESG is set up.
Really, we need the media to stop pondering to sensationalism, particularly in science and give ideas time to mature... oh and proper safety nets, so that when a scientist makes this big of a mistake, they don't have to double down on it and effectively commit fraud, to keep their lights on.
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
This can't be done. It's not the Universities fault really, that BS like this gets published. It should be published and the kid should earn their degree for it, because real world plausibility with current technology is but one aspect of a scientific work. Even though these are, for the moment at least, completely impractical concepts, there may be a breakthrough somewhere else, that could make the original idea not quite so idiotic. That is the very premise behind EVs and why everybody's trying to find a more efficient battery chemistry right now. Science needs to explore even dead ends, so that it can eventually evaluate them as dead ends, or determine, what is missing.
No, what really is the problem here, is that papers understanding nothing about science, like Forbes or Business Insider pick this up and sensationalize it. Papers, that don't have sufficient scientific understanding of the matter, which need sensationalist BS to get people's eyeballs to them.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@error404m There are other problems with them. First, you need to seriously upgrade tracks to run them at their top speeds. Two, the process need's to be extraodrinarily precise. Botho of these increase costs of bullet trains when compared to a normal train and provide little to no tangible benefit... You spend a million dollars for fifteen minutes cut from your journey. Even when calculated across train capacity, this will not result in cheaper service and thus isn't as effective as providing Internet on normal routes. And then there is the notable problem of through coaches. Can't do that with EMUs, which most high speed rail trains are.
What I mean, is that upgrading current rolling stock to work with the Internet, while not shortening travel time, is more cost effective per passenger for the company and can provide more flexibility to the passenger, be it commuter, who work's on his laptop traveling to/from work, student, working on an assignment, or a tourist listening to music.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
You know, what I hate about current climate idiocy discord? Global warming, climate change, the big hot, the no winter years... call it what you want, is not simply a s physics or environmental problem. It's a socio-economic problem with key being economic part, all the while, all focus is on environmental concerns and even worse, only one segment of it. If Europe were to just meet it's climate goals, we'd have to work only for three hours a day, earning three hours worth of salary, which doesn't even cover food and lodging, forget cars (to get to the place of work, public transport is not the answer). We're being forced into vegetarianism and veganism, even though as species, we are omnivores ad face actual problems dealing with meatless diets, to the point of having to eat supplements, which someone with a wide food pallet containing meats and diary doesn't have to deal with. We are being artificially made poorer, as to prevent consumption.
Problem is, the only true economic engine is consumption! Let's take GDP, for instance. It's Government consumption + individual consumption + investment (which is effectively deferred consumption, otherwise, why invest beyond a basic safety net) and net exports. Government can only spend as long, as it gets the money from it's tax residents, which only happens, when they are economically active. Meaning, slowing down individual consumption slows down government consumption with some delay (government debt is not infinite resource), there is no investment, because there is no need to produce more more efficiently at any time in the future, because the productivity boost from new gear is not enough to justify the expense (given the old stuff is already written off), hence no investment will take place and net exports won't save you, because only net exports contribute to your nation's GDP positively, meaning it is politically very hard to sell to become a net importer. Now, people always vote based on two factors. Their conviction and their current condition, with the latter being the more predominant one. Meaning you can't push it too far, the way the West had decided to go, because you either a) vote yourself out of power at some point, only being supported by the church of global warming (environmentalism is religion, given the amount of sacrifice being forced upon us to solve global warming), because people started to vote for those parties, which promised them economically better tomorrow or b) run out of resources as a state, because with every cut in production and on it dependent consumption to save the environment, you undermine your future efforts to save the environment, because even in spite of year on year increasing taxation, there is lower tax revenue. And that's assuming no scams get pulled in either environmental investments, nor in government spending aimed at preserving the environment!
This is, why we need to selectively black out the sun, which is what Tf00t suggests.
1
-
Games on highest settings? 1070TI over here, smashing titles like WH40K Rogue trader, which is in beta, Frostpunk, Battlefleet Gothic Armada 2, The Guild 3, ANNO 1800 and Outer Worlds at 1920x1080 @ 60hz on max settings. These are pretty heavy games, and this years old GPU can handle them with some light breeze. It's like ZSSK class 350, ancient by modern standards, yet it's playing with the heaviest loads like King Kong! It will be decades, before we'll need quantum to run games!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1