6 ms·
> People also thought aqueducts were the best way to move water for thousands of years. They still do because they still are? I'm hard pressed to think of a be
by goda90 2mo ago
> People also thought aqueducts were the best way to move water for thousands of years.
They still do because they still are? I'm hard pressed to think of a better way to move water than creating a gently sloped channel(this includes any pipelines that don't use pumps, by the way) for it to follow from where it is to where you need it. Many places that don't have sufficient local groundwater are still supplied by aqueducts to this day. If you have to pump it, then you're paying for the channel and the energy, which is worse than just using gravity.
- summarybot 2mo agoAnd how many aqueducts lead to your dwelling today?
- ang_cire 2mo agoI'm fairly certain that you do in fact have a duct that moves aqua (water) into your house, bro. And gravity-feed systems are the best way to move large amounts of water. That's even how nature works, and nature moves much more water than humans do.
- summarybot 2mo agoYou miss the point entirely little bro. Modern water-moving infrastructure is qualitatively different than two thousand years ago. Why would modern education be exempt from a similar transformation?
- ang_cire 2mo agoThis is a false dichotomy. University impact on careers in the 1980s was materially different than now, and that is still "modern education". Opposing the AI impact on universities is not equivalent to opposing modern water infrastructure, it's more akin to being opposed to a new water pipe material that is shown to improve flow but have adverse health effects.
- goda90 2mo agoI live someplace with abundant groundwater so my water comes from a well less than a mile away. But millions of people have aqueducts leading to their city providing a significant portion of their water supply.
- summarybot 2mo agoAnd when you need water for drinking or showering do you go to the well to get it?