cryball @ cryball @sopuli.xyz

Posts

0

Comments

208

Joined

2 yr. ago

I guess this is a joke, but regardless. The current climate is quite different from having an ice sheet 3km thick on the ground. This summer we were nearing 30°C/85°F on some days.

I would be very interested to know why the trend has moved away from building reactors in time and within a reasonable budget. It seems that most projects after the turn of the millennium haven't been cost effective.

Why did we manage to build reactors well before but not now?

Doesn't matter. Bad news at the time was enough to scare people for the next 30 years.

My personal dream scenario is one, where renewables and nuclear become such cheap production methods, that electricity is cheap and abundant.

At that point one could just use that energy to synthesize fuel to avoid the hassle that is hydrogen storage.

This is a very promising approach I've heard of also. Places with reservoirs could benefit massively from super cheap energy.

In other places an alternative approach could be what we kinda do already. Nuclear or some other stable production as a foundation that is augmented by renewables. The foundation would guarantee that energy prices wouldn't fluctuate too much, but we could still reap the benefits of cheap renewables when available.

Good question, that one can only speculate on. IMO it's a two part question.

First is that newly built nuclear plants are expensive. So the question depends on if we bite the bullet (build the reactor) today or in 2070. One built today will produce cheap power in 50 years.

For example in Finland we have reactors from 1980, that make up the backbone of stable energy production in our country. Those are going to be kept online till the 2050s. I'd argue at that point the cost per kwh will be mostly dependent on maintenance and fuel, so relatively small.

Wind and solar cannot reap the same benefits if you have to replace the plant every 20 years.

Storage is a completely separate question that is not taken into account when new wind farms and such are being built. If one was to account for storage today, the cost of renewables would be much closer to that of other means of production.

Also in the future, if storage costs keep falling due to billions of R&D money, similar effects could be achieved in nuclear via serial production and scale.

EDIT: Just read you have studied this stuff for real. Then ignore most of what I said, as you might know better :D

The only issue I foresee with using regular batteries as grid wide storage is cost. Many renewable sources are inherently unstable in output, so one would have to plan for potentially multi day deficits in production.

At least in my country some alternative storage solutions are being planned. One company wants to use excess wind power to produce hydrogen. That hydrogen could then be used to offset potential production deficits.

Otherwise I very much agree with your list.

In finland we have this big hole that goes half a kilometer into stable bedrock. The storage solution is engineered to withstand the next ice age.

Fortunately the nuclear reactor can be operated for >50 years :)

Might not qualify as a social network, but university hosted IRC servers were a thing once.

It's mostly the latter from what I've seen.

At least in my country IT departments have very little wiggle room as organizations have gotten more rigid with increased control from the top echelons. Some universities in my country used to host a lot of cool services for students to use. Nowdays it seems that the legacy stuff is kept online as long as the people maintaining them are around.

Anyone got any idea how this would work at a high level? I get that for static images some neural nets are "reducing" noise from random/base images based on prompts, but is this based on the same idea?

To me it seems that it would be worth it to repeat such groundbreaking tests before publishing the results just to avoid such negative press? Especially, if the material in question was relatively simple to produce.

However I know nothing about how this type of research works normally so ¯(ツ)/¯

The fine Lucas got was from omitting the director's credit from the start of the movie. It's not like anybody was defending the guys doing the work behind the scenes.

Relevant wikipedia entry

This might be a needless nitpick, but had to bring it up, as it's not the first time I've come across this.

Nyt vasta tajusin, että tuon voisi järkeillä niin, että toisella vuosineljänneksellä palkat on nousseet esim 3% (vuotuinen palkankorotus), mutta samalla aikavälillä inflaatio oli vain 1%.

Odotan innolla palkankorotuksia myös tuleville vuosineljänneksille :)

Mulla saattaa olla ymmärryksessä joku vaje, kun en viimeisen 1.5v aikana ole nähnyt ydinaseen käytöllä olevan saavutettavissa mitään hyötyä? Venäjän toiminnan on tähän asti ainakin periaatteessa ymmärtää, jos tavoitteena on ns. suur-venäjän rakentaminen.

Laajempi hyökkäys ukrainaan oli toki venäjän johdolta suuri virhe, mutta ajatus pohjasi luultavasti vääristyneeseen käsitykseen länsimaiden valmiudesta tukea ukrainaa. SIltä kantilta voi ymmärtää päätöksen hyökätä, kun tavoitteena oli venäjän aluevallan kasvattaminen. Nykyisellään huonosti etenevän sodan jatkamisenkin voin ymmärtää tietynlaisen maineen ylläpidon avulla.

Ydinaseiden käyttäminen on mielestäni kuitenkin sellainen keino, jolla ei saavuteta oikeastaan mitään venäjälle edullista.

Vuositasolla inflaatio on edelleen yli 6%, mikä ylittää joka suurimmalla osalla aloista saavutetut palkankorotukset, puhumattakaan siitä, että inflaation tahti on jo hidastumassa, eli suurin osa korotuksista tapahtui jo.

Ostovoiman noususta puhuminen kuulostaa kovin hämäävältä. Pikemminkin kyseessä on laskun nopeuden hidastuminen, tai sitten en vaan ymmärrä.

Positiivistakin kehitystä on tapahtunut ainakin asuntomarkkinoilla. Samalla korkotason noususta huolimatta työnäkymät eivät ole kovin huonot. Esim IT alalla on otettu takapakkia muutamaan viime vuoteen nähden, mutta ihan karmea tilanne ei vielä ole.

Kokemus on isolla valkokankaalla toki eri, mutta itseä häiritsee juuri kaikki ylimääräinen mitä teatterissa käynti tuo mukanaan. Kännykät on toki yksi, mutta niiden lisäksi toisilleen kuiskailevat, karkkien käärepapereita ja sipsipussia tms räpläävät katsojat.

Vajaalla tonnilla saa kotiinkin niin ison kuvan, että sitä ei lähietäisyydeltä näe kokonaan. Jos katsoo paljon elokuvia, niin ei mene montaa vuotta, että tuo maksaa itsensä takaisin. Samalla saa olla omassa rauhassa.

Thanks for doing the googling and bringing it up here.

Apparently the dreamcast controller had hall effect sensors, so it's not really new tech. With the volume that Nintendo produces stuff with, the extra price per joystick would most likely be quite small.

Yes.

Seems like the ones that find it necessary to print color references are either using fancier materials or use a ton of different colors.