batmaniam @ batmaniam @lemmy.world

Posts

3

Comments

323

Joined

2 yr. ago

I'd say worth discussing but none of these articles are ever "hype" worthy. Its really cool to know about, and should point to a brighter future, but there are always gremlins in this kind of thing. Even fuel cells, which have a deserved reputation on WAY over hyping early, helped lay the groundwork for a lot of manufacturing infrastructure and technical know how that laid the work for a lot of the battery boom we saw and continue to see.

Salt batteries are really bad, but, you know, at least they're salt. I don't know much about salt batteries at the expert level, but I also work on an e-chem system that is low current low density. There's definitely applications, especially because materials and tanks are cheap, but it turns out power is stupid cheap as well.

I don't think anyone can really predict a new "winner" right now, but it's the biggest reason why I'm a proponent of electronification in general; we absolutely won't be tied to Lithium forever.

Did I miss that or are you saying it rhetorically? I didn't pull the actual scientific article but this one mentioned decent performance over 800 cycles and 100 mAh/g. I'm not really up on this kind of tech but that seems pretty nifty for a new chemistry .

If you were just being rhetorical I get the frustration. There's always gremlins hiding somewhere.

Still, I take stuff like this as indicitive that were absolutely not going to be stuck with Li ion forever.

That voltage output is pretty typical. They should have gone with "cell" over "battery" though.

I have only one thing to say about this book: "Good good good!" ;)

Oh fair point. My dumb-ass sitting here going what is he talking about? A motor can run backwards, most pumps and compressors can't, or at least wont be effective if they do. Unless their something like a peristaltic.

it is, (although the design is slightly different, you couldn't just run the motor on an AC backwards).

Heat pumps are better for the environment because it's (usually) more energy efficient to extract existing heat than create it. Heat-pumps get more heat per unit energy spent than resistive heat (like electric radiators) because they're not creating the heat, they're just moving it.

Natural gas still kind of wins out, but that has the issue of constantly needing more natural gas.

The most environmentally friendly play would be, if you were like on a space station or something: Imeaditley stop producing more natrual gas, use up whatevers left in reserves, then install heat pumps. But of course that's not how things work so we're transitioning now.

edit: re: AC not being good for the environment. AC isn't the problem, just the power is. So it's just seen as a luxury as opposed to necessity, although obviously that's starting to change.

As others have said yes, thats an air conditioner, but to expand: that's why the outside of an air conditioner (either one of the big ground mounted ones outside or the window ones) gets hot while it's operating. You could technically just mount your window AC backwards.

To expand further, that's part of why heat-pumps weren't in expanded use for a while. In the summer you're extracting hot from the room and putting the hot outside, so your heat exchanger is hot. But in the winter when you're extracting heat from outside and putting it inside, you make the heat exchanger outside more cold. So cold, infact, that icing becomes an issue, and when it ices over it's less good at extracting heat. There are some neat tricks modern heat-pumps use to avoid icing over their outside heat exchanger (including running backwards to extract heat from inside and heat up the coils for a bit).

It's also why you saw early adoption of heat-pumps in areas where people might need both heating and cooling, but it didn't get bitter cold.

Another way this is avoided in some cases is to simply bury the heat exchanger to a depth below the frost line, where it can't freeze. Then you can add/extract as much heat as you want. That's geothermal heating/cooling. In some cases geothermal may be passive (ie: you're just circulating a fluid and temperature you get is what you get), but it's real strength is as a heat exchanger.

In fact, with the ground being able to accept/source as much heat as you want, you could actually place the "topside" exchanger in an area where you weren't trying to control the temp, and take advantage of the temperature difference to create power. Thats geothermal power. However, the efficiency and payback of that is based on the difference in temperature, which is why you only see it in instances where there's some natural source of higher temp heat underground. I suppose geothermal power would work just as well with a natural source of low temp cold (like the opposite of lava), but I'm hard pressed to imagine what that would be.

I have a lot friends and family who served. I think its hilarious the way everyone but people who have been in service hold up the image pushed by recruitment efforts and Call of Duty and the like.

From everything I've been able to tell it's one of those "it's boring and sucks until its very very very NOT boring and then it can REALLY suck."

And I hope that doesn't come across as dismissive or something. It's meant to be the opposite. It seems absolutely more brutal to me and probably why it's not the part that makes the movies. Sit around in difficult conditions until some horrible fucking shit breaks the monotony... that sounds insane.

I have a friend whos a firefighter. Usually they're doing cooking, cleaning the truck, whatever... until they're watching a kid fucking die or something.

Fucking write poems, do some coloring books, fucking whatever gets your through it lmfao.

No, the bar is accountability. If the FSD screws up either:

1. It's claimed the driver was responsible, in which case it's absolutely not FSD
2. Someone other than the driver is investigated and cleared/convicted of wrong doing.

It absolutely does not matter that it's better than an "average" driver. If the best driver in the world screws up, they are still held accountable.

Oh I've got no shame in audio books. I have a lot of drive time depending on where work takes me, and it's been amazing. Still love turning the trees over, but I don't want that to stop me from all the good stuff out there. But I just know house of leaves does some cool stuff physically.

I'm just copy pasting from above because I liked this book and am trying to bait a conversation lol. It was a fun one.

I just finished! I liked it a lot to, although I give it a solid B. Humor was great, there were some really nifty concepts, I just don’t think it was a slam dunk. I think the author will do some really great stuff in the future though. It’s a perfect vacation read: Plot is pretty linear for the most part, it’s not terribly long, and it keeps a solid pace.

I’m going to compare it to a not so great book, but because of the elements about that book I liked: “NeXt” by Chriton. I’m in the biochemistry field, and “NeXt” is really interesting as a capture of where the public (and a lot of professionals) thought the field was going. The human genome project was well underway, everything seemed possible. “Lumpsucker” shoots into the future a bit (“Next” is 100% contemporary), but really captures a ton over the last 5 years that simmers in public consciousness the way Next did. It’s not like the topics both discuss don’t get plenty of headlines, but they both do a cool job capturing a general “vibe” around the topics as opposed to just facts. I found it really cathartic to read, actually.

So all in all, to anyone else, I’d give it a strong recommend. It wont go down as an all time classic but the author put together something beyond competent, and really added some spice here and there capturing something special.

I just finished! I liked it a lot to, although I give it a solid B. Humor was great, there were some really nifty concepts, I just don't think it was a slam dunk. I think the author will do some really great stuff in the future though. It's a perfect vacation read: Plot is pretty linear for the most part, it's not terribly long, and it keeps a solid pace.

I'm going to compare it to a not so great book, but because of the elements about that book I liked: "NeXt" by Chriton. I'm in the biochemistry field, and "NeXt" is really interesting as a capture of where the public (and a lot of professionals) thought the field was going. The human genome project was well underway, everything seemed possible. "Lumpsucker" shoots into the future a bit ("Next" is 100% contemporary), but really captures a ton over the last 5 years that simmers in public consciousness the way Next did. It's not like the topics both discuss don't get plenty of headlines, but they both do a cool job capturing a general "vibe" around the topics as opposed to just facts. I found it really cathartic to read, actually.

So all in all, to anyone else, I'd give it a strong recommend. It wont go down as an all time classic but the author put together something beyond competent, and really added some spice here and there capturing something special.

I've got that sitting on my shelf! Have been only able to do audiobooks for a few weeks and know that's one you want to read read. Glad to see another endorsement.

Fun conversation.

I don't think the statistics resolve the issue though. At the end of the day, you can't give something agency without accountability. I guess it's similar to a well behaved dog at a park that loses it and eats an old man or something. The statistics only matter so much: the owner introduced an unpredictable element with it's own agency, you can't hold a dog accountable so the owner inherits that responsibility.

When I drive, I do accept a risk, but I do so knowing there are a set of rules everyone is following to minimize that risk, and that there's accountability should someone choose not to follow them. I guess what I'm saying is that an autonomous vehicle reducing my risk by 3x, 100x, 1000x, doesn't change the accountability for a single instance in which it got it wrong. Not when we're talking about it knowingly and intentionally violating established traffic laws. That's like saying a highly trained race car driver get's off the hook for hitting someone while driving way to fast in public because, statistically, they're actually much less of a risk to the public than most drivers.

This is all assuming, by the way, that we're talking about a well tested, well understood system. I think having vehicles on the road right now which are advertised as "full self driving", when there are known issues, make a whole group of people of people directly responsible for any deaths that occur.

I should have been more clear: I meant an AI trained to break the rules the way we're talking about. Having the ability to make a judgement also means responsibility for that judgement. If I cross a double yellow to get around farm equipment on a back country road, and I misjudge and kill someone, it's on me. It doesn't matter if 999/1000 I could have broke the rules responsibly.

So who goes to jail when a car does it?

When someone is driving, if they misjudge and bend the rules at wrong time, and kill someone they go to court. They can potentially be convicted of all sorts of things.

Who's going to court when a car does it? Who serves the jail time?

As a recent penguin I don't get the gnome thing either. To each their own and whatnot but to me it just reminds me of the weird themes from the early 2000s. I clicked into plasma loved it.

But, you know, it's Linux. So I can try gnome and tweak it anytime I want to see if it grows on me. Love it.

Until I read Project Hail Marry, Seveneves was my favorite book.

The only other Stevenson I got around to is Crypto (really enjoyed, putting a foot into "love"). My friend is a Stevenson nut, and is incredibly lukewarm on Seveneves, and I couldn't tell you why. Go in as blind as possible (that infamous opening line is fine). It is a RIDE.

It's Indiana Jones meets... Congo, like the movie? I don't know take Indiana Jones and cross it with your favorite early 90s action movie focusing on telecom and "the internet".

It's a really fun ride and if the tech doesn't hold up, the science does. Lots of information theory stuff that's a lot of fun.

Edit: You don't need to be a versed in data theory to enjoy it. He does his usual thing of being pretty accurate and dives beyond the surface, but keeps it digestible. But you should enjoy hearing about it. I'd compare it the depth he gets into orbital mechanics and whatnot in Seveneves; competent but not PhD level.