4 ms·

One thing that is fascinating about the last decade or so is the extent to which the narrative that the media is pushing as "obvious" and "inevitable" is out of

One thing that is fascinating about the last decade or so is the extent to which the narrative that the media is pushing as "obvious" and "inevitable" is out of synch with what the actual facts on the ground are or what is realistic or actually technically or economically feasible. Some examples of farcical media narratives: humans will settle Mars soon. -Not happening. Primarily due to radiation and general life support problems. driverless cars are just around the corner. -No they are not for various, obvious technical reasons that should be apparent to anybody who both understands technology and the real world of driving. solar power is inevitable and will be widespread and cheap -solar power will always be lower energy density than chemical power or nuclear power. It will always have higher fixed costs per unit generated than large scale hydro. Solar takes a lot of space and is expensive to produce low density power. Battery power electric cars are going to be in broad demand by consumers soon. -I doubt it. Range is limited. Battery technology has not advanced significantly in the past decade. I think more widespread public transportation (e.g. trains) is more likely as hydrocarbon fuels become more expensive. Run away global warming is inevitable or it is a human tractable problem that we can solve by spending money on new technologies. -It is actually really complicated. There are very complicated feedback loops at work. It is not as simple as more CO2 in the atmosphere higher temperatures. For one thing as CO2 concentrations increase plants grow faster and turn more CO2 into solid compounds. Ditto for temperatures. Additionally there is a tragedy of the commons effect about CO2 emissions. The Earth has had much higher CO2 in the past and life has survived and often thrived. Also sometimes CO2 did increase rapidly such as when there were massive flood basalt eruptions for example. I could go on on topics the media gets wrong...

admax88q 6y ago
> The Earth has had much higher CO2 in the past and life has survived and often thrived. There's no doubt that life in general will survive, but there is doubt that the comfortable post industrial life that most of us enjoy will survive.
- CameronNemo 6y ago
  Additionally it will impose a tight chokepoint on all life, with little time for them to adapt. Adaptation usually happens over the course of generations, but thethe changes occurring are happening over the course of a single organism's lifetime. Our ecological systems will lose so much diversity and genetic history.
TchoBeer 6y ago
>No they are not for various, obvious technical reasons that should be apparent to anybody who both understands technology and the real world of driving. Wanna explain to me why? From what I've seen, a driverless cars within the next 10 years is feasible, and a driverless car within the next 20 years seems likely.
- yumraj 6y ago
  > Wanna explain to me why? From what I've seen, a driverless cars within the next 10 years is feasible, and a driverless car within the next 20 years seems likely. Weren’t they saying the same thing 10 years ago. As an example this Google video is just a little over 10 year old: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bp9KBrH8H04 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bp9KBrH8H04 Driverless cars are a classic example of last 10% taking 90% of the time.
  - avmich 6y ago
    > Weren’t they saying the same thing 10 years ago. Doesn't matter. Physicists are often accused that "thermonuclear energy plants are promised soon since 50 years ago". Yet there is steady measurable progress by Lawson criterion, and ITER is being assembled as we speak. Estimations can be wrong, but that doesn't mean progress is impossible.
    - morpheos137 6y ago
      >Estimations can be wrong, but that doesn't mean progress is impossible. No but it does mean, when estimations or estimators are consistently wrong, that they should lose credibility. If estimates are wildly wrong what good are they besides gas-lighting malinvestment? Theranos estimated that it could do blood tests on a very small sample. Juicero estimated that it could sell a several thousand dollar juicer... Biggest media farce I forgot: where the heck are Amazon's flying delivery drones? See the fallacy "false dilemma." Estimations can be wrong and progress can be possible. Both can be true.
      - avmich 6y ago
Merrill 6y ago
Driverless cars? They should test them in Boston in the Spring, after all the lane markings are gone, at night in the rain. Testing in cities with grid street systems and visible lane markings during fair weather in the daytime is not informative.
- pkolaczk 6y ago
  Even with visible lane markings, in the day time, Tesla FSD can't do very basic maneuvers like taking left turns that cross the opposite traffic. Or stopping at red light reliably. Autonomic cars are still inferior to human drivers and it will take years to change that.
CameronNemo 6y ago
I feel like this comment is getting the thread really off track.
- mlindner 6y ago
  If I could flag it I would. It's completely off topic and also mostly incorrect.
mlindner 6y ago
> humans will settle Mars soon. > -Not happening. Primarily due to radiation and general life support problems. You don't really understand the science here. The radiation effects are vastly overstated and the media loves to fearmonger them. Secondly the life support issue is a solved problem if you have the mass payload ability. Yes if you don't have a large rocket capable of taking many tens to hundreds of tons of payload to Mars, then there's life support issues, otherwise there isn't.
avmich 6y ago
> humans will settle Mars soon. > -Not happening. Primarily due to radiation and general life support problems. You must be kidding. We have fastest progress in launch systems since 1960s. Seriously, when was the last time multiple spaceships for human spaceflight carried tests at the same time in USA alone? Radiation and weightlessness - two biggest roadblocks for interplanetary flights - are known for quite some time, there are some plans and propositions, even though experiments are mostly long-term ISS flights. But it's hard not to see progress - would you say, for example, that Moon flight can't be used as a stepping stone in preparing Mars expeditions?
- DrScump 6y ago
  You must be kidding. No. The key word is settle, not "visit" or "explore". You won't have meaningful numbers of people wanting to settle there, because there's no "there" there.
anonuser123456 6y ago
> Battery technology has not advanced significantly in the past decade. ok buddy.

admax88q 6y ago

> The Earth has had much higher CO2 in the past and life has survived and often thrived. There's no doubt that life in general will survive, but there is doubt that the comfortable post industrial life that most of us enjoy will survive.

CameronNemo 6y ago
Additionally it will impose a tight chokepoint on all life, with little time for them to adapt. Adaptation usually happens over the course of generations, but thethe changes occurring are happening over the course of a single organism's lifetime. Our ecological systems will lose so much diversity and genetic history.

TchoBeer 6y ago

>No they are not for various, obvious technical reasons that should be apparent to anybody who both understands technology and the real world of driving. Wanna explain to me why? From what I've seen, a driverless cars within the next 10 years is feasible, and a driverless car within the next 20 years seems likely.

yumraj 6y ago
> Wanna explain to me why? From what I've seen, a driverless cars within the next 10 years is feasible, and a driverless car within the next 20 years seems likely. Weren’t they saying the same thing 10 years ago. As an example this Google video is just a little over 10 year old: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bp9KBrH8H04 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bp9KBrH8H04 Driverless cars are a classic example of last 10% taking 90% of the time.
- avmich 6y ago
  > Weren’t they saying the same thing 10 years ago. Doesn't matter. Physicists are often accused that "thermonuclear energy plants are promised soon since 50 years ago". Yet there is steady measurable progress by Lawson criterion, and ITER is being assembled as we speak. Estimations can be wrong, but that doesn't mean progress is impossible.
  - morpheos137 6y ago
    >Estimations can be wrong, but that doesn't mean progress is impossible. No but it does mean, when estimations or estimators are consistently wrong, that they should lose credibility. If estimates are wildly wrong what good are they besides gas-lighting malinvestment? Theranos estimated that it could do blood tests on a very small sample. Juicero estimated that it could sell a several thousand dollar juicer... Biggest media farce I forgot: where the heck are Amazon's flying delivery drones? See the fallacy "false dilemma." Estimations can be wrong and progress can be possible. Both can be true.
    - avmich 6y ago

Merrill 6y ago

Driverless cars? They should test them in Boston in the Spring, after all the lane markings are gone, at night in the rain. Testing in cities with grid street systems and visible lane markings during fair weather in the daytime is not informative.

pkolaczk 6y ago
Even with visible lane markings, in the day time, Tesla FSD can't do very basic maneuvers like taking left turns that cross the opposite traffic. Or stopping at red light reliably. Autonomic cars are still inferior to human drivers and it will take years to change that.

CameronNemo 6y ago

I feel like this comment is getting the thread really off track.

mlindner 6y ago
If I could flag it I would. It's completely off topic and also mostly incorrect.

mlindner 6y ago

> humans will settle Mars soon. > -Not happening. Primarily due to radiation and general life support problems. You don't really understand the science here. The radiation effects are vastly overstated and the media loves to fearmonger them. Secondly the life support issue is a solved problem if you have the mass payload ability. Yes if you don't have a large rocket capable of taking many tens to hundreds of tons of payload to Mars, then there's life support issues, otherwise there isn't.

avmich 6y ago

> humans will settle Mars soon. > -Not happening. Primarily due to radiation and general life support problems. You must be kidding. We have fastest progress in launch systems since 1960s. Seriously, when was the last time multiple spaceships for human spaceflight carried tests at the same time in USA alone? Radiation and weightlessness - two biggest roadblocks for interplanetary flights - are known for quite some time, there are some plans and propositions, even though experiments are mostly long-term ISS flights. But it's hard not to see progress - would you say, for example, that Moon flight can't be used as a stepping stone in preparing Mars expeditions?

DrScump 6y ago
You must be kidding. No. The key word is settle, not "visit" or "explore". You won't have meaningful numbers of people wanting to settle there, because there's no "there" there.

anonuser123456 6y ago

> Battery technology has not advanced significantly in the past decade. ok buddy.