ZeroGravitas

I though the 4D chess explanation was that he bought it (was forced to buy it by courts) because he was entering politics and wanted to be able to ensure the deaths of half a million children in Africa:

https://www.impactcounter.com/dashboard?view=table&sort=inte...

It looks like he succeeded wildly at that.

Counterfeit Monkey similarly fuses classic text adventure mechanics with a wordplay mechanic where you can transform objects by adding and removing letters to solve puzzles.

Far north places have long summer days. This doesn't align well with the winter heating needs but it does balance really well with wind generation which peaks in winter.

There is an art to taking pictures of solar farms from exactly the right angle so that the panels seem continuous, often making use of deep shadows to cover the gaps.

It's similar to the telephoto shots of wind farms taken from far away that make them seem really close together.

The anti-renewable policies would cost the UK a roughly similar amount to Brexit.

Some random numbers:

Renewables reduced UK energy costs by 100 Billion over the 2010-2023 period (despite just getting started and costs continuing to decline)

The conservative "cut the green crap" changes around 2013 that are milder versions of what Farage would do, add a cost of about 5-15 billion a year (ongoing) in higher bills.

EVs will be 30 to 70 Billion a year savings once you get to 33 million.

He's also against grid batteries that will save about 5 to 15 billions per year once scaled.

Brexit is about 100 billion a year according to Bloomberg.

Behind the meter solar, on both homes and factories, is about 5% in California and that gets missed from these stats too.

Maybe X thinks X users might be unaware of the ability to pay money to see other random X users naked, so it's basically an advert for non-consensual sexual image generation.

Seems to avoid directly answering the question in the title and mostly just imply an answer with innuendo.

What it suggests is that you should avoid processed snacks and choose fruit instead, which seems like good advice, but is slightly tangential.

Just the beginning:

> Battery storage is now cheap enough to unleash India’s full solar potential

> Ember’s analysis shows how solar and battery storage can meet as much as 90% of India’s electricity demand at lower LCOE than the average power purchase costs in most states.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47688164 (4 days ago, no discussion yet)

Direct link;

https://ember-energy.org/latest-insights/battery-storage-is-...

With modern tech, these 100% renewable electricity countries have effectively overshot. Many other countries would be better off getting to 85% and then shifting to focusing more on EV and heat pump uptake to get the best bang per buck.

Finland has electricified 40% of primary energy which is pretty much world leading (Sweden and Norway are 50%). European average is 19%.

Largest chunk left is transport which can mostly be electrified now. Industrial and home heat too. There are hard to electrify sections in both but overall it's fairly obvious what to do next.

And the easy parts eliminate 3 or 4 units of primary energy for every one they replace, so even 40% primary energy is way over 50% toward the finish line of electrifying all the useful stuff.

I think it's also an interesting question as to whether countries that use a lot of electricity have lower per kWh prices because they spread the fixed costs further.

Recent video by someone from Puerto Rico comparing their island's renewables with Uruguay and interviewing the guy in charge of their renewables rollout:

https://youtu.be/TsmlyqZJOug

There's significant debate about exactly why the crime rates are falling around the world. But not about whether it's happening.

Which particular expert you listen to might emphasize different things to focus on to enable the trend to continue.

Listening to the people who ignore the facts because they find scaring people with lies more effective for their putposes is almost certainly a worse idea.

Trump's crusade to save non-binary Iraninian feminists seems to be going quite badly. I'm not sure he planned it out that well. But it's the thought that counts.

In human multiple choice tests they sometimes use negative marking to discourage guessing. It feels like exploits should cancel out several correct solutions.

I think solar starting construction before July 2026 or completed before 2027 still got the old federal subsidies. Residential cut off was the end of last year.

So we don't know exactly how things will look after subsidies and there will have been a pull forward effect before the various deadlines.

Lots of subsidies?

Only got as far as the subhead due to a paywall but anyone notice how insistent these articles are that government subsidies are not the answer?

It seems there is strong agreement from the elites that sharing the country's wealth is not something they'll accept to solve this problem.

He switched to supporting Trump after Trump repeatedly joked about someone breaking into a San Fransisco home to attack the owners with a hammer.

So the temperature has been high for a while and he's on board with it.

Does he ever go in-depth and specific about his weird disdain for bluesky?

He seems to suggest Twitter hides the people disagreeing with him most of the time, is it as simple as that?

His critique of the most popular accounts, which include billionaire-owned newspapers with an edict to champion free markets, appears to be that it's not got enough Marxists and centrists to attack Democrats from both sides?

I agree with most of the article, though it seems odd that rather than just plainly explain that the real incidence of autism has likely remained static or fallen and particularly for the more impactful kinds, and that it's just a misinterpretation of statistics, it instead tries to turn the better diagnosis rates into something to worry about itself.

Seems odd for something shared as a "doom-slayer".

Has the "miracle" actually been shown to have happened?

Apparently the people pushing it attribute the progress to nearly 20 years of the stuff mentioned in the article. Yet that simply doesn't show up in the 8th grade scores.

The people pointing to one specific intervention and an uptick in 4th grade scores can possibly say that the kids fully exposed to it won't have nationally comparable NEAP scores until after this year.

But this author says they are wrong to credit that intervention. But then it's probably on them to explain the lack of benefit for anyone in 8th grade or higher for these wider reforms.

Feels a bit like they're wanting to eat their cake and have it too. Getting the credit for the early years blip but wanting it for all the non early years stuff that apparently has no measurable impact on the scores used to claim credit for the early years.

It seems that more often than not any attempt to reference the web gets llms into a muddle because they try to access it and get blocked.

Ah, I see they have that on their TODO:

> Improve anti-bot handling for page fetches. Many targets still return 400-range errors, so investigate stronger browser mimicry (Playwright/Chromium behavior, headers, fingerprinting, and potentially user-agent/profile rotation).

From your link:

Caused by

    Rise of crude oil prices in 2018[29]
    Fuel tax[30]
    Traffic enforcement cameras[31]
    Austerity measures[32]
    2017 wealth tax repeal[33]
    Opposition to neoliberalism[34][35]

Goals

    Increase of minimum wage in France[36]
    End to austerity measures[37]
    Improved standard of living[37]
    Government transparency and accountability[37]
    Improved government services for rural areas[37]
    42 demands in total[37]
    Constitutional proposal for a citizens' initiative referendum, including constitutional, legislative, abrogative, and recall initiatives[38]

His counter example, gay marriage, was also "a conspiracy" in that conservative activists and billionaires pushed the issue to try to win votes by targeting a minority in 2004. 11 states had gay marriage bans on the polls in a cynical attempt to drive engagement and get their voters out.

Targetting minorities is a successful political strategy if you have no morals. People have built entire media careers on it.

Talking about Jewish or black or gay rapists is another classic that Jesse reprises here. It works.

Luckily he's just asking questions and isn't part of some "conspiracy".

I wonder if you could mostly have white spray paint and tiny cans of color. When I've seen paint mixed it's usually a surprisingly small amount of color being mixed in.

Accurate but still somewhat disturbing to read conclusion:

> The US and Israel's invasion of Iran has highlighted the danger of relying on global supply chains for fuel.

> "Even if the war [in Iran] ends, that momentum [of sales] will continue," he said.

> "If we're in a world where there's no rules-based order, anything can happen."

Why do you think it can't do green?

> While support for net zero remains strong among voters, with more than 60% in favour of climate action, experts warn that the same techniques that won the Brexit referendum for the Leave camp – despite it being the underdog to begin with – are now being brought to bear on the climate.

...

> They think it’s an easy target, it’s easy politics, and they’re presenting [scrapping the policies] to people as a panacea.”

I think this is a mistaken analysis. They're not attacking net zero because it's good politics they're attacking net zero because it's liked by the public and hated by their funders.

They're part of the campaign trying to convince people to abandon things that are broadly popular.

I don't see any reason to give in to their "populist" framing of themselves. They're spending a lot of money to change people's minds.

Also known as a "surrender".

But Trump is back to talking about badly run Greenland is so he's moved on.