Yes, but sometimes ideas come ahead of the infrastructure that would enable them, in this case fiber rollouts and geographically distributed data centers with GPUs. I've been really impressed by GeForce Now lately and XBox Cloud Gaming is a thing.
810 karma · joined February 3, 2010
https://www.volts.wtf/p/enhanced-geothermal-power-is-finally
> Will the 4-year gap and my choppy CV be a major hindrance to my hirability?
Yes, so spend some time thinking about how to get a hiring managers attention. If there's nothing separating you from someone with more recent experience you're going to struggle and get filtered out before anyone talks to you.
Ideally you can find a way to have conversations with a hiring manager or someone on the team you'd like to join vs emailing in a resume that a recruiter is going to toss. Find or create a reason for them to want to talk to you.
Regardless of what the US does, throughput is much higher on public transit than it is on highways. You can fit so many more people on buses and trains than in automobiles.
For the actual numbers, compare deaths-per-passenger-mile in-city and deaths-per-passenger-mile between cities (highways vs buses, trains, etc), and you will see huge difference in fatality rate.
I believe ATC moves are implemented as macros by the machine. So the code emitted looks like:
M6 T2
and the ATC behavior is filled in with a macro for the specific machine.
To nerf ATC users, Fusion is preventing toolpaths with multiple tools from being exported in the first place. So you have to generate individual toolpaths for each tool.
The sad part is that hobby machines also make use of the "M6 T<tool number>" macros to move the machine to a place where it's easy to change tools and then do automatic touch-off before continuing. It's not only professional-class machines that will be affected.
It should be theoretically possible to run the multiple generated files through a script to put them back together, but this is likely too much complexity for the vast majority of users.
Or people in Houston who see 500 year floods yearly. Or Californians breathing wildfire smoke. Or Hondurans suffering from drought. Or people in Miami wading through floods on sunny days.
Insurance will also not protect banks from stranded assets if the perceived value of coastal real estate plummets and people abandon them as we saw in the housing crisis.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normalcy_bias
Listening to the cultural zeitgeist is one thing, but actually listening to the scientists who are doing these studies or people who are summarizing their findings is another. I really recommend reading through the NCA summary https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/ and sitting with the data and what it says.
The short answer is that you are vastly underestimating the problem
Read the assumptions behind those projections and get back to me. They are very, very conservative and should be read as a "best case scenario".
Ex:
- Economic growth is assumed as part of the model
- They look at the marginal economic cost of an additional very hot day today, look at the projected increase, and assume that the impact will scale linearly
Even those numbers are damning, and are put forth to help justify the cost of climate action. Reading them as "well that's not that bad" is just way off the mark.
> US CO2 emissions peaked in around 2007. Per capita CO2 in the US is the lowest it's been in 50 years. We're behind the EU in CO2 reduction, but it is going down.
Not nearly fast enough. Direction is correct, but magnitude is not nearly as big as it needs to be. Assuming that technological progress will make up the difference is magical thinking that the data does not back up.
You're hand-waving away what experts are saying based on a gut feeling of "it's not going to be that bad" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normalcy_bias). I recommend reading some papers, especially the NCA, and really sitting with what they say. https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/
Do you realize that the most optimistic projections in climate change papers already assume massive improvements in these technologies? They also assume massive carbon extraction technologies working at global scale that don't exist yet. Even these optimistic scenarios have dire consequences, and we're not on track to hitting these at all.
If it were a matter of "small improvements in over time", the tech would be sufficient, but it's more like we need to reduce double digit % of CO2 emissions year over year for the next several decades. https://twitter.com/robbie_andrew/status/1129667484527804418
Some countries do have declining CO2 emissions, but the ones that matter: China, India do not. Unless dramatic action is taken, we're still a long ways away from a global peak in CO2 emissions.
Is it? Before touch sensors became the norm people would put in their PIN every few minutes. It would get picked up by countless security cameras. You could talk to a stranger for 2 minutes and pick up their PIN if you didn't avert your eyes.
And most people didn't use a PIN at all, because it was too much bother.