Hirom @ Hirom @beehaw.org

Posts

146

Comments

936

Joined

2 yr. ago

We'll see.

Once there's enough hydrogen drilling and hydrogen production no longer depend on fossil fuel, then maybe H2 vehicules will make sense. Or maybe H2 will still be impractical due to other drawbacks.

Meanwhile it make sense to focus on less polluting options.

What about leggings.world?

Damn speculator. Someone already bought it and isn't even using it.

File sharing services powered by free software, without ads: https://entraide.chatons.org/

Génial

Great point. Announcing tariffs should be painful for the US, not an easy way to get a sweater deal. If the EU accepts an unfair deal under pressure, the US will announce new tariffs again to put further pressure, and further change terms.

The commission is pushing back on tariffs, as it should. Each time the US' shameful leader announces upcoming tariffs, the EU executive prepares and publishes a list of US product that will be hit by retaliatory tariffs.

Could you share a link to the infographic? I'd be curious to see the details.

Renewables like solar have a great potential at reducing CO2, but ONLY IF it replace fossil fuels.

As an example, big tech is wasting so much energy of AI they're increasing both renewable and fossil fuel consomption to cover rapid rise in energy use. The end result is more pollution.

The amount of energy wasted on stupid shit is unbelievable as well.

We need to laud efforts put into renewables, as much as we need to decry wasteful energy usage.

Ça fait longtemps que le réseau mobile est réputé non-fiable pour l'authentification, mais de nombreux services continent à proposer le SMS comme moyen de "sécuriser" son compte.

Maglevs are overhyped. Adam Something call those GadgetBahn.

I don't doubt Monero has decent privacy. I may have been cryptic in my latest reply, sorry.

My point is, privacy isn't the only thing that matters. IMHO a decent currency/payment system shouldn't cause signifiant harm through pollution. Also it shouldn't make it too easy to launder large amount of money, which undermine taxing/funding of things which keep society working (infrastructure, school, public health, research...).

Fiat has downsides, but all things considered it seems better than crypto. And it's possible to have privacy with fiat by using cash, so it's not as if only crypto allowed some privacy. There is also project GNU Taler that may one day provide decent privacy for online fiat payments without facilitating money laundering.

Do you know of concrete plan/solution on the horizon to solve or mitigate Monero's problems? You might not consider those big problems, but those are absolute deal killer for many.

Better enforcment of GDPR and DSA may be enought to effectively ban big US tech without passing any new law.

We don't use USD here. Even so, USD isn't as bad a Monero, there's even privacy when using cash.

Except the lack of government AND the massive amount of pollution and resources waste.

Monero is more about polluting and money laundering than privacy.

There is some privacy in it, but it's overshadowed by the other things.

Please, do name and shame.

Wake me up when they consider joining Taler.

Disabling downvotes can avoid such drama. Some instances do.

Obesity isn’t just about what people eat or how often they exercise. It’s shaped by biology, experience and the environment we build around people.

Changing the food industry and/or regulation isn't easy for a single person, even if every bit of pressure helps.

At some point there is physics involved and calories matter. I guess it could be framed as the industry's failure to produce healthy food, which individuals can try to workaround by comparing calorie count when choosing food, and by avoiding soda.

It'd be interesting to see if there's any study to verify if making nutritional recommandation works better when stressing it's in large part an industry's failure, in order to minimize feeling of failure from individuals.

Cost of action far lower than cost of inaction

This applies not only for climate action in the UK, but to climate action elsewhere.

It sounds like this ruling is based on a technicality. If so, couldn't FTC make the same decision, this time better following letter of the law?