cinntaile

Business and self-help books are always 90% fluff and 10% content, not much to do about that.

Ivory tower.

Interesting that it's called silver tower in your language. What's your native language? Is the word for silver and ivory the same? Probably not, but just curious.

What I'm wondering is why researchers from a brewing company are interested in creating blue roses? How will they apply this to the brewing craft?

That's the next iPhone.

What are the equivalent numbers in the EU? Be sure to compare the same numbers. Usually they're in MtCO2e and not in MtCO2 like in that PDF.

Yes, penguin conservationists do this to scam the penguins... You didn't really think that one through did you.

Sure, why not.

You have very simple fume extractors. I don't get why it would not be worth it just because you rarely do it. It's like wearing a respirator mask when using a grinder. Or ear muffs when drilling or sawing.

Perhaps you could try addressing the arguments instead of irrelevantly focusing on Harvard?

As I understand it, you're an investor in Featherless. It's good to mention that.

That one went right above your head.

I don't understand. What's special about being able to charge your phone? Can't you do that anywhere you have a power socket?

I think you would need something that tracks relevant per cable metrics over time to see if it is degrading. That one just says yes/no, but maybe yes/no starts to flicker around its end of life?

Your sibling comment is right. It stands for Levelized Cost Of Electricity.

You could try using arguments instead of an appeal to authority fallacy?

It's not as clear cut as you describe it here. In the other old thread you linked there was no real consensus if this should be considered a backdoor or not.

There is no such thing as the Renaissance Fund. Quanta receives funds from the Simons Foundation... I also don't know where you get it from that Renaissance Technologies is heavily invested in AI. Any sources to back up your claims because I suspect you made all that up?

Another commenter already mentioned that it's more likely a lack of compute and funding that forces their hand to focus on niche tasks.

Why does it say 0 for the US? You have Thanksgiving, Christmas, 4th of July and more? Are they unpaid days off?

That would be Sv, not SV.

I don't see how that's relevant, my original post made no safety claims.

I don't find it ideologically inconvenient, I just don't think it's a realistic take. There are situations for power generation where fossil fuels are the only viable alternatives hence why I mentioned them. Now if you had infinite resources and infinite money then that's probably not true, but we don't live in a world like that.

A bit of a weird tangent? You can tell them yourself. You are free to reuse my sentence if it helps.

It's unsafe so it's never a good fit? That kind of reasoning is just noise. Unsafe for what? Compared to what? What alternatives, given the constraints, exist?

I can access court decisions just fine and I'm not in the US, so no. It's not.

The chances are not very high that you are well-versed in how all the other countries in the world work. Whenever you think something is unique, it is quite likely that you will be wrong.

It's not going to reduce any time soon. Either way the reality is that sometimes fossil fuel power plants make sense, that's why they're still being built.

> Americans know because we can access our US court decisions, unlike any other country in the world.

This is not a uniquely US thing?

> It depends on what you are optimizing for and what is geographically, (geo)politically and economically possible.

I mentioned all of this in my message. What was unclear about it or did you perhaps not read past the first sentence?

I don't know what you mean with "no safe level of fossil fuel use". It doesn't mean anything without contextualizing that statement.

People arguing for one alternative over the other are usually politically motivated. I feel like you are doing the same. Sometimes nuclear is a good fit, sometimes renewables is a good fit, sometimes fossil fuels are a good fit. Most of the time a mix is the best fit. It depends on what you are optimizing for and what is geographically, (geo)politically and economically possible. All these systems are then built using assumptions, sometimes those assumptions no longer make sense after a certain period of time and sometimes you just temporarily or permanently have to adapt to the changes in the environment. This is an unusual but expected scenario for the nuclear plants along the Danube.