laverya

11 ms·

121.
by laverya 4y ago
This heavily depends on what the proposed restrictions actually are - and people never seem to actually know what the current restrictions are either. Ask for Universal Background Checks, and people say "sure". Make a national r
122.
by laverya 4y ago
It all depends on how you phrase it. "Supporting the Constitutional rights of Americans" will get broader approval than "protecting the rights of Neo-Nazis to march through Jewish neighborhoods", even though something is
123.
by laverya 4y ago
A lot of people really, really hate guns, and some of those charities really, really love guns. (and one has the reputation among ~half the US population of really, really loving guns, and a reputation in the other half as "Negotiating
124.
by laverya 4y ago
"can't stop sending money to people they don't like without cutting the entire program" would indeed be a reason to cut off the entire program, yes.
125.
by laverya 4y ago
The current governing party is not the Republicans, which control only the House while Democrats control the Senate and Presidency.
126.
by laverya 4y ago
Right, which would imply that Nazis are pretty damn strongly disfavored .
127.
by laverya 4y ago
> Antisemites aren't a disfavored minority, the Jews they're hating on are. Are you saying that: 1. the majority of the population of <Western European Country X> are antisemites or 2. antisemites aren't disfavored b
128.
by laverya 4y ago
Right, but they should have to prove that the home was paid for with crime, and not the other way around.
129.
by laverya 4y ago
> (The reason it might be done despite costing more money is mostly PR.) And practice for doing so in locations that have access to water + CO2 but not petroleum refining capabilities, such as Mars.
130.
by laverya 4y ago
> It does not need more than the tiniest fraction of a cubic km of water. One cubic km is one billion tons. Each ton is ~10kJ per meter lifted, and let's assume you can separate your reservoirs by 100m vertically. That would give a
131.
by laverya 4y ago
No matter where you put the few cubic kilometers of water that pumped hydro requires, you need to put it somewhere . The ecosystem of that place will then be displaced or destroyed.
132.
by laverya 4y ago
Pumped Hydro doesn't have to be built on a river - you just need a pair of reservoirs that you can fill and transfer water between. This obviously destroys the ecosystem of the valley you use, but at least you're not impacting riv
133.
by laverya 4y ago
Depends on where those ships can offload the LNG. If they were in Asia or the US Northeast, prices would not be negative. (But prices differ by significant multiples between those locations)
134.
by laverya 4y ago
> First, pregnant women are generally excluded from vaccine trials - this isn't something specific to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. This is perhaps not an argument in favor of the proven safety of vaccines for pregnant women. > Second
135.
by laverya 4y ago
The source I linked has data for a few other countries, and crucially has "whole-grid" wind measurements for the UK. And the UK never went to 0 for a whole 30 minute reporting period! 99th percentile was under 2% of rated output,
136.
by laverya 4y ago
> You didn't provide a cite, FWIW. But taking the numbers as given: Ah, hell. It was meant to be ' https://energynumbers.info/germanys-offshore-wind-capacity-f... ', which was Google's infobox for when
137.
by laverya 4y ago
> No, this is wrong. Wind power is in fact extremely reliable, especially when you remember that things like fuel distribution routinely idles fossil fuel plants too. Nothing is 100% reliable. According to [0], Germany's wind farms
138.
by laverya 4y ago
There's a difference between thermodynamic efficiency and cost efficiency. Extracting 40% of the energy in the wind for $500 is very often going to be better than extracting 70% for $5000.
139.
by laverya 4y ago
> > vaccines take years to test not months > This is because of money, not because of fundamental scientific issues. This is not at all true. There is only so much you can parallelize things, as every software dev should know. It w
140.
by laverya 4y ago
> A dirty bomb would render areas uninhabitable - or at least dangerous - for decades after a war is over. So does being the target of a sustained artillery barrage, among other things. Unexploded ordinance, after all.
141.
by laverya 4y ago
> Previous attempts such as exterminating anyone with flawed genes was certainly unethical, but that was just an example of people drunk on power exercising it. IMO it really depends on how you're doing the extermination. Killing
142.
by laverya 4y ago
I think he's literally in the process of invading and subjugating a neighbor, actually. The Saudis might not call what's going on in Yemen an invasion, but it sure looks like it from here.
143.
by laverya 4y ago
There's a few problems with this. For one, your prop noise is going to be almost entirely masked directly ahead of you, because there's a whole submarine in the way. Isolating "sound of our propellers from in front of us&quot
144.
by laverya 4y ago
I've got no clue about the downvotes either. Maybe because the first version of the comment was a little snarky, and didn't include how submarines actually avoid crashing into things?
145.
by laverya 4y ago
Yeah, I should have said "very good inertial measurement systems" instead of dead reckoning. It doesn't leave quite the same impression!
146.
by laverya 4y ago
Passive sonar shows "things making noise". It doesn't show things that do not make noise. Mountains do not, as a general rule, make noise, and do not show up on passive sonar. In addition, when running at flank speed the effi
147.
by laverya 4y ago
> How about everyone in the world consume as less per capita as some of the poorest countries on the planet Hmm, live the life of someone from the Congo, or do literally anything else . Not a tough decision. I think that in practice a
148.
by laverya 4y ago
Drag explosives on a rope, but don't blow it up when it hits the pipeline - instead have it drop when that happens, and then detonate a week or more later. Vessel positions are tracked and recorded after all.
149.
by laverya 4y ago
I did mention the French - they're the "Marine Nationale" in question! I'm not sure the Italian carriers are relevant for operations in Southeast Asia. Maybe once they get F35Bs, but their Harriers would not fare well ag
150.
by laverya 4y ago
Yeah, the only NATO navy worth talking about is the USN, with the Royal Navy and the Marine Nationale following distantly behind. The Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force is much more impressive than the Brits and the French though. (And Japan

More ›