Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)RO
Posts
1
Comments
937
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • That's just it, these pricks who keep throwing a fit about who uses which bathroom are really much more interested in hating transgender people than they are about protecting anyone. You can point out stats about who is actually assaulting who and how it's happening, and it won't change a thing, because protection was never the point.

    The cruelty is the point.

  • The Sheridan was the size of the Sheridan, and they want the transportation capability of the Sheridan, but the Sheridan itself was also a wildly unsuccessful tank. It was also fully reliant on the MGM-51 Shillelagh missile, which also was not good. Nobody actually wants the Sheridan back, they want something they can transport like it.

  • And it's a stupid point. Just to power this one single endeavor we would have to increase the TOTAL NATIONAL POWER OUTPUT by more than 11 times. For this one thing. That's not just a new invention, that's not suddenly figuring out how to make Thorium-based nuclear reactors work, that's not squeezing a few percent more in efficiency out of Solar or figuring out how to recycle wind turbines or investing in pumped hydroelectric storage. It would take a literally world changing development. More than an ORDER OF MAGNITUDE more output. For ONE project. If you can make that kind of leap in energy output then investing it all into this wildly inefficient and dubiously effective method of cleaning up waste water is the least of your concerns. That kind of energy output is the stuff of post-scarcity utopian dreams, and your plan is still to just use it all to pressurize and superheat water to get rid of SOME of the pollutants in it.

    It's a stupid idea.

  • Which doesn't change the fact that it would require more than 11 times the total energy production of the entire country. If the solution to a problem requires some miracle technology that increases energy production by more than an order of magnitude, it's not so much a solution as it is a fanciful dream. When step one is "Solve cold fusion" then it's not a serious solution.

  • Heating water is a matter of physics, not technology. The amount of energy used to increase the temperature of water is literally how the units are defined. Do feel free to make a breakthrough on Fusion power though, I hear it's still only 20 years away.

  • Their point, which you quite clearly missed, is that people don't need a steady, reliable, high volume flow of steel delivered to every single home and business.

    And maybe you should look into steam engines a little more and check out things like how hot that water actually gets. You're gonna discover that for all the prodigious fuel use, the temperature is far below the goal of 500C and the flow rate far below requirements. But keep up the sass.

  • They were protest voting because Harris wasn't good enough, so now they hold their heads high that they didn't vote for the person who wasn't strong enough against genocide while the genocide accelerationist tries to speedrun the bad end.

  • The Ratio says it's actually pretty stupid. The percentage of people who can't afford a home purely because they bought a $60k car is going to be absolutely minuscule, but it's a great dog whistle for trying to lay the blame at the feet of personal responsibility.

  • Satisfactory @lemmy.world

    It's finally the Tenth!