noxer
noxer on Hacker News
No one even mentioned the oil industry. You're showing your bias here.
I also never said that reducing emissions would kill people. I said the exact opposite: killing people would reduce emissions. This distinction is important because killing people on a large scale is, unfortunately, theoretically possible. Reducing emissions by the same amount without reducing the population is not.
Simply eliminating fossil-fuel-based fertilizer worldwide would cause at least a billion people to starve. And I said "would" because it's not actually going to happen... you cannot convince a billion people to starve. You would have to kill them.
If you think reducing oil emissions to zero tomorrow would result in the first curve on the XKCD image, I have bad news: it would not. There are many sources of emissions that are not related to oil, gas, or other fossil fuels, and the CO2 already in the atmosphere would not disappear if humanity stopped using oil overnight.
Emissions come from human activity. Oil is what enabled the human population to grow rapidly, but oil itself is not the root cause of emissions, humans are.
To stop emissions to that extent, you would have to reduce the population. I have not seen any proposed alternative that doesn't fall apart under even basic mathematical scrutiny.
After reducing the population, you would then have to devote a large share of the newly available resources to removing CO2 from the atmosphere. Only then could you, in theory, flatten the curve again.
Setting aside the obvious moral issues, it would also be extremely difficult to carry this out without triggering the collapse of human civilization through wars and eventually global nuclear destruction.
We both know you understood what I meant but you have nothing acctually to say so you point out issue with the phrasing, good job dude.
Who said it makes it better? It's horrible, pretending that there is some kind of "massive action" that we should take, but that massive action would need to be to kill billions of people.
If you want to do anything, go ahead, but the only thing we know that would work is killing billions of people within a very short time.
Is that what you want to do? If yes, then how? It would need to be done carefully; if the world powers just start nuking each-other, it's not going to lead to the desired outcome.
And no, it's not over, the curve will just not follow the first or second line. That's all. The planet is still habitable at +4°C according to our best models.
That's an assumption based on a multitude of assumption all of which could be wrong to various degrees. It's perfectly possible that birth rates will go down in the future and become negative and population will shrink and together with tech-progress it could eventually reach a sustainably level.
Yes, the chance of this happening is not great but it's not zero.
One of the worst xkcd's. It just leaves out the information that the supposed "immediate massive action to limit emissions" is, in fact, a mass dying of humans; nothing else currently known to us would change the curve the way it is drawn.
I agree, modern Sony cameras and lenses have much more sophisticated tech in them than any Walkman ever had. Much smaller and more efficient too. The tech is not lost, it's just obsolete. The tiny motors used in a Walkman haven't been used in a Sony camera or lens for probably 10 years. They are loud, weak, heavy, inefficient, unreliable etc. we simply have much much better tech today.
Ofc Sony would need to start from scratch but they could absolutely do it. Assuming they want to keep the outside dimension and material exactly like an old one, they would have to design it kinda in reverse.
But the idea that the manufacturing tech has been lost is ridiculous. Sony still make tons of stuff that is electrical and mechanical. Most prominently cameras and lenses. They have tiny motors in them and tolerances are much tightener in these than in a Walkman type device.
The real reason why they "can't" do it is cost. They can sell a camera for $3000 USD (or much more even) and a high end lens too. But no one wants a $1000+ USD Walkman.
I have 8+ million rows added daily to a 100+GB DB. There is a limit somewhere but I haven't found it yet.
I have a 100GB SQLite DB in use that gets 8+ million rows added dally.
It's on an off-the-shelf nvme SSD in a "server" that I build from 5+ year old parts.
Those are writes not hits so not directly comparable.
As for the DELETE issue the easy solutions are:
-Delete it batches
-Delay between batches
-Preload the rowids before deleteing with SELECT (Select does not block)
Additionally if data was added sequentially primary to the same table the data is likely stored this way in the file and deleting it in this or in reversed order can be faster (depends on storage medium and other factors).
No, its 99% binary equal and there are no rounded corners in window 10 anyway.
I know that no one who uses it likes to reinstall it unless absolutely necessary. Its pointless in this case so what's your argument? That people should waste more time becase they already waste time? Genius /s
So you suggest switch over to LTSC for having the exact same OS because it's better? Make it make sense pls.
I'm confident became I have tired it all and LTSC has zero benefit and only possible downsides.
All the benefits it once had are irrelevant nowadays because windows 10 is EOL and there are no more annoying updates regardless of which version you use.
Try read maybe? There is no benefit to switch to LTSC because normal windows 10 is EOL there are no updates/no features updates and thus all the benefits LTSC HAD are moot. Its a total waste of time to switch to LTSC. A clean switch needs a full reinstallation.
If you would acctually read the comment(s) then you'd understand that SWITCHING has no upside, all your arguments are irrelevant there is no point in wasting time to switch the OS version especially not if you need a full reinstallation.
And whether you like it or not there are bad coded software out in the real world that do not work on LTSC they will just error out saying this is not a supported version of windows. To fix this you have to regedit your LTSC installation to pretend to be a normal installation. A hassle no sane person would recommend for absolutely zero benefit.
Some "bad" coded programs have hard-coded version check and check for the OS name instead of build number, if they forgot LTSC (and server and education) the software will refuse to run on these version.
Some reg edits can fix this but its a pointless hassle, there is no need to use LTSC today there are no more annoying updates and unwanted features being added.
I have a windows 10 pro machine here running since 3 month 24/7.
There are no update, windows 10 is EOL since months and even before that it did not receive any real updates in a long time. The current version is stable and gets only security updates just like LTSC. There is no point to switch, at best its a waste of time and worst you could run into issues with software that expects home/pro and not LTSC.
This is bad advice that is being repeated over and over by the so called tech influencers. You go to an older version that only got security updates so you will lack optimizations and features already in the current stable windows 10. And for the foreseeable future you gain nothing at all.
If one day the normal version acctually stops reviving security updates, it almost certainly will be possible to switch the update channel to LTSC and get the LTSC updates that way but for now this is not needed and the switch is unnecessary
Also without some trickery, switching to LTSC requires a complete reinstallation, which for most people likely wasting sever hours.
Lead melting is not difficult. The brass case you can just collect used ones.
The primer would be harder to make (you can buy them online ofc) but with access to fireworks it is possible with no knowledge of chemistry and no realistic risk of losing body parts.
The guy who killed Shinzo Abe didn't need any of these things and still shot him.
You can make bullets yourself just like you can make the gun.
You may remember the assassination of Shinzo Abe.
In the US low powerd black powder is super easy to get you don't even have to take fireworks apart or do home lab chemicals stuff.
Everyone who has money to spend to influencing politics this way.
I personally don't think its some kind of shadow cabal. Its many people/groups/organizations with aligned interests doing these things.
Organization isn't the issue that is of course perfectly normal.
But stuff like handing out printed signs, protestors posing for photos in a way that makes it look like the crowd is much larger than it actually is. These kind of things aren't necessary if there is a real significant % of people unhappy enough to go protests. There are also faces known that travel from protest to protest. It's of course their right to do so but it seem strange nonetheless. Maybe they are just filthy rich and have no hobbies or maybe they do in fact get paid and are part of an organization that lets them jet around for free to be a protest groupie.
Many things do, mostly people on Twitter seem to get under his skin quite a lot lol.
If the goal was to "trigger" him I don't think the protests succeed in any meaningful way. Innocent Tesla owner where the primary victims followed by share holder, (damaged) property owners and people affected by insurances premiums due to the vandalism.
And then of course there are still a handful of people in jail for crimes committed in relation to the Tesla protest. Arguably not victims but still a negative effects that clear outweigh any perceived positive effect it all had on Musk.
Again another goal post moving and inventing some claim that were not made in this thread.
I never made such statements, I refuted the parent posts statement that the protest against musk "won" that's all I did before the goal post moving replies came talking about DOGE.
Elon Musk's role in DOGE was limited because he was designated as a "special government employee", a federal employment category defined under 18 U.S.C. § 202 that restricts service to no more than 130 days in any 365-day period.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/202
This was publicly know back in February. The exact date wasn't know since it was not public when he because such a "special government employee".
It turns out they started counting days straight from the inauguration date or rather the Executive Order 14158 (Creation of DOGE) date which was on the same day.
It is totally accurate to say he left as planned and thus also totally accurate to say that one of the statements above claiming the protest "won" by pushing him out of the administration is factually incorrect.
You are moving the goal post. I never said DOGE did achieve anything.
You said the protest lead to him no longer be part of the administration which is factually incorrect. His position was limited from the start and he left as planned.
Bring better numbers that show where the protest "won". I wasn't the one using the stocks as metric for "protest success".
I didn't leave it out, it doesn't matter to my point. I refute the part about "winning" because clearly the protest did nothing to Musk it only had severe negative effects on thousands of other people.
He left his position as planned from the beginning, the protest had zero effect on what he did trough DOGE.
They didn't care about Tesla they wanted to "hurt" Musk
Musks net worth is about $270 billion more today compared to when the protests began. Does this look like winning?
They protested un-elected president Musk who will stay in power forever.
Then he left his position exactly like communicated from the very start and people now think that they won, even tho they only annoyed tesla dealership employees and tesla owners.