Yeah, but it wasn’t the hair spray that did it, as the marketing would have had us all believe. It was banned (and enforced) from industrial processes, and far more importantly, trade partners also needed their own bans. The trade angle made the rule go global almost overnight, and thus it was effective.
Canadas new rule is everything but that, and therefore is useless.
I read it. They’re banning VOC in spray cans, as if aerosol cans are suddenly to blame for smog. More political noise to appease the uneducated while accomplishing nothing of substance. Look at the shiny birdy, kids, and pay no mind to the industrial processes behind the curtain.
We already played this game in the 80s, when hair spray was supposedly causing the hole in the ozone layer. Look where it got us.
Less than a decade, I think. We won’t live to see the first completely generated movie star. We’ll live to see them become the default. We’ll live to see a time when live human acting is, in and of itself, a noteworthy occurrence.
AI isn’t even driving this forward. Square has been ringing this bell for more than a decade with its movies. AI is just making it cheap. And that fact alone is why it will continue, unabated and unhindered, come what may.
What the studios aren’t realizing is that it’s not just the end for human actors, it’s their end as well. If you can generate feature length films with effects and acting and sound, who the hell needs a major studio?
Long range transmission of AC power is limited to about 40 miles. DC can be transmitted much farther, but the infrastructure is substantially more expensive (because it’s more dangerous), so that’s only done for extreme need.
We aren’t getting away from having many power generators all over the place, so one location-dependent storage solution isn’t going to solve all the problems.
Absolutely. Coal has remained consistent as demand for power has risen steadily. Renewables are growing, but remain a tiny slice of the whole generation picture.
Natural gas has become a cheap and reliable replacement for coal over the last 10-15 years as it’s become less expensive to transport. Many coal plants have been converted, even. So as demand has risen, it’s natural gas, not renewables, that is filling the gap.
But, like geothermal power generation (which is also very good), it’s extremely dependent on location. Most populated areas don’t have the altitude differential (steep hills) and/or water supply to implement pumped hydro storage.
Where it can be used, it should be (and largely is - fossil fuel generation does better with some storage as well, since demand is not consistent), but it’s hardly something that can be deployed alongside solar and wind generators everywhere.
Storage. Coal, natural gas, and nuclear generate power regardless of weather, day and night.
Solar generates plenty of electricity (with enough panels installed), but it slows down significantly under cloudy skies and stops entirely at night.
Wind generates plenty as well…unless the wind stops blowing.
The grid needs power all the time, not just when it’s sunny and windy. For renewables to actually compete, the excess power they generate during sunny and windy times needs to be stored for use when it’s dark and still.
As much as we applaud lithium batteries, our energy storage technologies are abysmally inefficient. We’re nowhere near being able to store and discharge grid-scale power the way we’d need to for full adoption of renewables. The very best we can do today (and I wish I were kidding) is pump water up a hill, then use hydroelectric generators as it flows back down. Our energy storage tech is literally in the Stone Age.
People need electricity. Renewables are great, but they don’t provide for the full generation need. Coal and natural gas power generation will continue unabated until a better (read: lower price for similar reliability) solution takes their place.
In my opinion, fossil fuel generation won’t take a real hit until the grid-scale energy storage problem is solved.
That’s true, and there are people who go see movies specifically because of whom appears in them. But I’d hesitate to call that the majority, especially in gaming. The set of people that play games and the set of people who follow the industry are certainly overlapping, but are far from identical.
Sad to say, but the union probably won’t get many meaningful concessions from this one. The technologies to fully generate model movement (motion capture) and emotive voice (voice acting) are already reasonably mature and constantly improving.
The artists will (rightfully) get strong control over their own likenesses, but if they think they’re going to stop mass adoption of AI in video games they’re dreaming.
Criminal cases are ones in which the dispute exists between a private citizen and the government, which is to say that the government has accused the citizen of breaking the governments laws. The government must prove its case beyond a shadow of a doubt, but once it has done so penalties can include the loss of freedom, as the law defines.
Civil cases are disputes between private citizens, one accusing the other of some wrong. Private citizens do not have to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt, just present a preponderance of evidence. Because civil cases don’t judge the breaking of law, penalties are much less harsh, and revolve around compensating the wounded party for the wrong indicates by the evidence.
Insurrection and rebellion are crimes that, by definition, could only ever be commit against a government. As such they would necessarily have to be tried as criminal cases, and a conviction secured before invoking any loss of freedom as punishment (and on such a conviction, loss of a political campaign would be the least of these).
It is theoretically possible that the federal government could sue Trump for damages from J6, but for that case to be relevant to the 14th amendment it would have to provide evidence that the event that day was indeed an insurrection or rebellion directed by him. That moots the point of a civil suit, however, because if the government had that sort of evidence, it could charge him criminally instead.
It’ll be interesting to see how the courts play this out. Usually the determination of whether someone did or did not engage in an illegal activity is upon conviction by a jury - innocent until proven guilty. Consequences cannot be rendered until that point.
Trump hasn’t (yet) been charged with insurrection specifically, so a conviction on the existing charges likely wouldn’t trigger the 14th Amendments restriction.
“Giving aid or support” could be an interesting argument though, because a few of the J6 participants have been convicted of “seditious conspiracy”, which could maybe fall under the definition of rebellion, and Trump has certainly spoken spoken in support of the participants in general.
I look forward to reading some riveting decisions over the next year.
As a hiring manager, I’m always interested in seeing a candidate’s exercise of their skills. But “from absolute scratch” is not something we really do in the working world if we can possibly avoid it, so I wouldn’t expect it in your portfolio. If you’ve got some amazing JS or CSS to show off, definitely do so, but point it out because I’m otherwise expecting frameworks.
Ethically there are no problems with libraries and frameworks. If you’re using them consistently with the creators’ licenses, we’ll, that’s what those things exist for.
When it’s on. When you aren’t using it, it draws zero. I’ve had a tankless electric for 8 years, and my power usage hasn’t changed much either up or down.
Yeah, but it wasn’t the hair spray that did it, as the marketing would have had us all believe. It was banned (and enforced) from industrial processes, and far more importantly, trade partners also needed their own bans. The trade angle made the rule go global almost overnight, and thus it was effective.
Canadas new rule is everything but that, and therefore is useless.