palata

11 ms·

181.
by palata 2mo ago
> Global gross tonnage is growing [1] In Europe?
182.
by palata 2mo ago
> Because by your metrics, decarbonistion is a folly—the measures are probably made up anyway! Not sure if you're consciously being manipulative or not. Sure, you are more eloquent than I am. But do you understand my point about est
183.
by palata 2mo ago
> How are you defining an economy? I said it above. The economy is what we produce and consume. Because the metrics economists use (like GDP) make no sense does not mean that the economy does not exist. There are physical metrics to meas
184.
by palata 2mo ago
It can be open source and locked. Android is an open source OS: you can take the sources, compile them, run them on your phone and you will have a fully functional OS. Because it is open source does not mean that nobody can make a proprie
185.
by palata 2mo ago
I don't know if you are trying to defend that "Android is not an open source OS" or if you are trying to play on words like the other poster? The best open source mobile OS you can get nowadays is based on AOSP, where the A m
186.
by palata 2mo ago
I genuinely didn't know :-). I don't generally downvote comments I reply to. I don't downvote when I disagree, I downvote when I believe the comment is very low quality, in which case I don't engage at all.
187.
by palata 2mo ago
> And for the record, profit oriented market economies are extremely old. Of course it works if you take the part that is convenient to your argument. What about globalised economies?
188.
by palata 2mo ago
I didn't downvote you, not sure what you are talking about.
189.
by palata 2mo ago
This is not what open source means.
190.
by palata 2mo ago
https://www.stockholmresilience.org/research/planetary-bound...
191.
by palata 2mo ago
> There is no reason to assume that we can't have the same kind of economy Has there been, in history, the same kind of economy we have today without fossil fuels? No. That's a first reason. Are there practical replacements for
192.
by palata 2mo ago
> American emissions per capita have been falling alongside rising GDP/capita GDP is artificial. Did you ever check how they correct for inflation? GDP is worth nothing for science, it's just there for economists to do... whate
193.
by palata 2mo ago
> We need only to sufficiently reduce emissions. Well I agree on that. And even if we cut them to zero, the temperatures will not go down. So the very best we can hope is to keep the temperatures at the current level, and that's ass
194.
by palata 3mo ago
TL;DR: for the people who are replaced by AIs, AIs are scary. And if it was possible to make sure that those people are replaced by AIs but actually get to use AIs as tools, it would be better.
195.
by palata 3mo ago
Do you even know where the discussion comes from? After enumerating "macOS, Windows, Linux, iOS, Android", it was said: > it would be best if developers all over the world boycotted proprietary platforms entirely. I noted that
196.
by palata 3mo ago
If you define "success" as "we prevent climate change", there is zero chance of success. But it is not binary: the less we do, the worse it will get. It's not about whether we "succeed" or not, it's a
197.
by palata 3mo ago
> Fortunately, “economy is fossil fuels” is nonsense Is it? The economy is what we produce and consume. The economy grows when we produce and consume more, it shrinks when we produce and consume less. How do we produce stuff nowadays? Wi
198.
by palata 3mo ago
> So the neat thing is that this isn't at all true. Then goes ahead explaining something completely different.
199.
by palata 3mo ago
This is like saying "of course we can travel at the speed of light. Proof: the light does it, it's possible".
200.
by palata 3mo ago
No. The "OS" part of "Android" is AOSP, period. What runs in your phone is AOSP, with some firmware blobs (many of which are proprietary), with some system apps that may be proprietary (like Play Services and Play Store
201.
by palata 3mo ago
Today, pretty much everything you do increases oil dependency. What's clear is that we will have less and less oil (just because... physics: it's limited) and anyway we need to use less and less oil (because climate change). So
202.
by palata 3mo ago
We get energy by extracting oil and burning it. It takes a lot more energy to do the reverse. We already cannot stop burning oil today because the economy would implode. I don't think that it is reasonable to think that not only we cou
203.
by palata 3mo ago
> I.e. We can use different energy than the one we got out of the fossil fuels we burned. We're talking about using more energy than the one we got from the fossil fuels we burned, right? So that means that on top of replacing f
204.
by palata 3mo ago
Because they are those that get elected. People just have to vote for those who are not for growth.
205.
by palata 3mo ago
Ok teach me. What is Android?
206.
by palata 3mo ago
Not entirely sure what you are trying to say, other than you don't really care as long as you are not the one who is marginalised. Anyway it's generally a tradeoff: is it worth doing it? By adding very strict age verification syst
207.
by palata 3mo ago
Those space datacenters that SpaceX is building, can't they make them out of wood?
208.
by palata 3mo ago
> It doesn’t do well economically Well, economy is fossil fuels. In the world after fossil fuels, we may have to redefine what "economy" means.
209.
by palata 3mo ago
Countries who can do hydro are pretty much doing as much of it as they can. Like... there really isn't much room to increase hydro unless you start inundating valleys.
210.
by palata 3mo ago
> The only way I think you can get rid of the excess CO₂ at scale [...] The unsolved problem is extracting You answered it yourself: it's not possible to get rid of the excess CO2. Think about conservation of energy: we extracted en

More ›