ChurchillsLlama

6 ms·

1.
by ChurchillsLlama 6mo ago
I'm genuinely curious why some of these results are so terrible for so many people. I've built in my own harness, and while I've noticed a degradation of quality, the local harness - as well as validation agents - generally c
2.
by ChurchillsLlama 2y ago
As an excuse on the part of the oil companies, I completely agree. But that point was directed at the supply/demand situation from the perspective of the world's consumers and not from the oil companies. So any effects emissions h
3.
by ChurchillsLlama 2y ago
I do agree with this. They stifled progress as much as they could but that only slows things down, and because we don't truly know what would have happened, it's not productive to play the blame game and say we'd have a spotl
4.
by ChurchillsLlama 2y ago
I completely agree if these negative externalities weren't several degrees of separation. Car companies could have produced cars with better emissions which isn't the fault of the oil companies, people could get their products lat
5.
by ChurchillsLlama 2y ago
True and it does bring some awareness, but this is lazy approach. I love the passion people have in cleaning up the environment but we all know (especially the engineers among us) that building a solution, or contributing to one, is far mor
6.
by ChurchillsLlama 2y ago
This is true, but my point is there weren't cost-effective alternatives at that time anyway so blaming climate disasters squarely on the shoulders of oil companies and not acknowledging the fact that demand fueled the value of oil does
7.
by ChurchillsLlama 2y ago
Nevermind the billions of people who (still) drive cars and buy shipped products because there hasn't been a more cost-effective alternative. This entire oil-based economy situation is simple supply and demand and transitioning to clea
8.
by ChurchillsLlama 3y ago
The main point of the article is that the CDE is preventing those who partner with them from testifying about anything, even what's unrelated to the data CDE provides - 'Viewpoint discrimination'. > That begs the question: