ZeroGravitas

Well hopefully.

People have noticed that the weird social media bot accounts that are usually posting in the UK about Muslim immigrants have all suddenly shifted to talking about drilling for more oil in the north sea.

This is a bad idea for multiple reasons, but clearly someone wants you to think that is the solution rather than wind, solar, batteries, evs and heat pumps.

They've partially succeeded each time we've gone through this kind of fossil energy crisis, and they'll likely partially succeed this time.

I'd guess the propaganda is slightly harder to make in the 70% of countries where they import fossil fuels and the political/media landscape isn't so broken that they can pretend otherwise to dig themselves deeper into a hole.

The big difference between Vietnam and Iran is that Donald Trump had a plan to get out of Vietnam.

Rare earths are not used to make solar panels.

Very neat.

It feels like you could make the patterns modular too, a series of discs that you line up as needed and then lock in place?

I read a weird sci-fi novel called Limbo by a guy who the author blurb said was Trotsky's secretary and bodyguard around this time.

Apparently he also wrote a roman a clef about the situation with some names and details changed.

Is this even as fast as the existing CATL tech? It seems to just be where batteries are heading through a bunch of small improvements over time.

I often say that when cycling I don't mind the cold, the rain or the wind, only when you get all three at once it gets bad.

Clever idea.

I noticed with post-edit hooks that Claude would do things like import a Python module in one edit then add code to use it in another. The lint hook would fire after the first edit and complain about unused imports and it seems to confuse or slow down Claude. It got there in the end but with some unnecessery drama polluting the context.

Some advice suggests to use "stop" hooks so Claude would lint after it had finished its current task, but apparently by that point it can lose the context of which file it changed. Possibly not a problem if you lint everything in a small project.

I also see potential for running automated fixes without bothering Claude about it. Though again there's potential for the llm to get confused by things happening "behind it's back". I've seen edits get redone if the underlying file has changed.

One final idea, fixing lint issues feels like something that could be done by a cheaper sub agent without bothering the main model for small things, possibly even more so with this kind of prompt based feedback.

It happens a lot. The gray area is that the medicine isn't patented, just the delivery mechanism.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36495532/

And that mechanism can be tweaked and repeatedly patented.

One of the positive cases for patents on medicines is that they are often chemicals. It's fairly simple to tell whether a chemical is the same or different. "Good fences make good neighbors". You infringe the patent or you don't, and you know that in advance.

But if you want to introduce a similar mechanical device to deliver your definitely patent free generic, now you have to roll the dice that the dozens of patents they've taken out on different delivery mechanism don't affect your approach.

This is an NMC vs LFP battery comparison.

They have different trade-offs but LFP is gradually taking over from the bottom of the market and heading up market in a classic disruptive manner.

They are heavier but cheaper and safer and better longevity.

> Gas prices have been "sky high" for a week and people who are under financial stress just decided to ditch their cars and buy a brand new BYD?

Or, America's "No War" candidate is starting wars in the middle east with no plan. It's co-belligerant is targeting oil production facilities, and the defender is responding by taking out refinery capacity in the area. Markets are predicting higher fuel costs for years.

That seems a reasonable time for a bump in EV sales interest.

Mearsheimer was predicting Putin wouldn't do a full scale invasion of Ukraine right up until shortly after he already did , so strange choice of Cassandra to pick.

Root cause analysis might suggest Donald J Trump is the greatest global energy security threat in history.

BYD also makes better PHEVs than are available in the US, EREVs as they are known in China.

Basically EV first with a generator.

Presumably China is also taking notes on the disregard that international players have to large nations economically crippling nearby islands that they feel they should control.

It's really not clear from this reporting whether the effect is just the removal of the benefit of taking it.

They're clearly trying to hype up stopping being even worse but they don't actually say that, which is a basic question they should be answering clearly.

Is it really sleepwalking if a politician funded by the weelchair corporation is dragging you out of bed and throwing you down the stairs to increase their profits?

Combustion with energy recovery is slightly lower down the "Waste hierarchy" than recycling. Nordics get even more bonus points if they use the waste heat for district heating after generating electricity but I think it still comes out as a bit worse than recycling overall.

There's complicated interactions though, removing the plastics can affect the makeup of the fuel and the post combustion products can free recyclable metal from other materials they were combined with. Recycling processes often have an unrecyclable fraction which can be burned etc.

Any money spent on blunting short term spikes in fossil fuels should be added back to fossil fuels over time. And windfall profits should be automatically seized. Otherwise you are just incentivising wars.

The billionaire oligarch who put that (stupid) idea in Trump's head is still out there. His son-in-law will probably be the next head of the Federal Reserve.

If the oligarchs don't feel any pushback they'll continue to wreck the US and Europe.

About 50% of all EVs and coincidentally 50% of Teslas use the safer replacement LFP.

Globally that is mostly Chinese made/sold though.

EU is more like 10%, USA 5%

It's generally used for lower end models though.

Title of his sex tape.

So EVs that reduce both are a double win!

EU is introducing regulations for this kind of emissions which will likely create a market for a few new techs that reduce it (reformulated tyres, modern drum brakes that capture dust, etc)

One key element is whether the incentive/penalty is attached to buying the vehicle or buying the fuel.

PHEVs in a world that includes externalities in the cost of fuel will be used in EV mode more. Same vehicle different outcome.

Currently it's a mishmash with some countries penalizing electricity use while subsidizing fuel sales in lots of different little ways.

In general it's trending in the right direction though.

But in the context of the current topic, USA could be demonstrating their technical prowess and running EVs off this amazing coal and gas bounty.

Instead they seem to be in a cycle of buying massive inefficient vehicles and then getting annoyed at gas prices.

Oil is 2/5ths of US energy use.

Let's say that I'm in the same info-bubble as you and the OP and we all agree that renewables are more expensive than nuclear and furthermore that this point is so well accepted that it's not even worth mentioning.

Still in that case, it's kind of weird to attack a pro-nuclear politician for not replacing deadly coal fast enough without even mentioning that he is against wind as well.

Or to avoid any reference the exact same thing happening in your own country.

But they're not all in. The politician who is being attacked in this very article for being insufficiently pro-nuclear is also against wind power.

And if the author believes the non-mainstream claim that nuclear is cheaper than renewables then they could have stated that rather than mysteriously avoid the topic.

You could probably do a series of parody 007 trailers and insert clips of a different Palantir leadership team member saying insane shit in interviews as the Bond villain in each one.

You can't accidentally write an article about German energy and not mention solar, wind or renewables once.

So what's going on here? Why intentionally avoid those topics?

Because they are cheap, and nuclear is expensive?

Because they are being shut down politically in the US (and threatened in Germany by Merz) which makes their argument that nuclear is the test of pragmatic government ridiculous?

Do they have investments that mean this is them in sales mode and so lying (not just by omission) is considered okay?

The EU regulations are in many ways built to prevent this kind of free riding, for the sensible reasons that if everyone free rides, aiming for excess profits on the short term, the transition doesn't happen and the Chinese eat your whole market.