vimacs2

Yes and Ganymede appears to contain concentric layers of oceans separated by layers of ice. There is also Callisto, Encaeladus, Titan, and since New Horizons, potentially even Pluto - not to mention that the trace amounts of H20 present in the sun would outweigh all of it a thousand fold.

Bottom line is that water is never in short supply. Nitrogen is likely to be the real bottleneck in our future efforts at colonisation and terraforming - at least till if/when we master star lifting of resources. At that point, mass and energy no longer make meaningful limiters and waste heat disposal becomes the primary menace to further development.

I assume by "life", you mean post-industrial revolution humanity which shouldn't be treated as the norm, for either life nor even human history.

It's also irrelevant, water is incredibly abundant in our solar system and we don't even have the largest oceans on Earth, they're just the largest ones on the surface.

A civilisation capable of significant depletion of the earth's oceans for the production of hydrogen and oxygen is so far ahead of us in economies of scale that we would be long past the point of needing to worry about something that could (to the point of view of such a civilisation) be trivially solved with an air wall or a secondary low earth orbit artificial magnetosphere.

There isn't a paywall I can spot in the original link - perhaps it's a regional thing?

What you might be missing here is that the "only downside" should be emphasized far more. Hydrogen is a bloody nightmare to store long term. It's boiling point makes the -20 C involved with this technology look like an oven and you really do want to ideally store it as a liquid since the exceptionally low molecular weight means leakage is a constant problem save for some very advanced (and expensive at scale) carbon composites.

Graphene seems to be a potentially excellent storage medium but we are still a while off from being able to manufacture that at the amount that would make it economically usable for hydrogen storage at scale.

Social justice movements are almost without exception extremely critical of countries like Saudi Arabia but despite this fantasy conjured up by conservatives that it's the woke crowd that shy away from criticism of Islamic theocracies, it's amusing how it's always the former that love multi-billion dollar arms deals with them (though to be clear, both neoliberals and neocons are guilty of this).

I guess hijabs in American streets are a larger problem than enabling the mass surveilance and extermination of undesirables in their eyes.

Not to mention that we don't even currently have a real capability to repair the currently malfunctioning Hubble telescope anymore. That was designed for maintenence from the now non-existent space shuttle in mind. Trying to accomplish the same with the Dragon would be unknown territory and it seems that there is little desire from both NASA and congress to even bother.

JWST in comparison is a far trickier and complicated beast to tinker with. This is the biggest reason why they are so paranoid about any fault before orbital launch. It would be all but impossible to service it - on both a technical and political level.

What concrete evidence do you have that social justice movements are "doing more harm than good" or that whatever harm they are doing is equivilent to flat earthers, anti-vaxxers and white supremacists?

A restrictive monolith kernel?

Very low but a more common and likely possibility is that it could disturb the oort cloud and cause comets to fall in system. Guess that could classify as what you are referring to depending on your definition of solar system.

A passing star is more likely to do this though and we believe that they indeed have caused disturbances in our oort cloud in the past. They might be potentially less numerous than rogue planets as our universe ages but they have a far larger potential hill sphere than even a very large planet so interactions with neighboring stars' hill spheres are more likely and frequent.

While I did pick the projects for their notability, I could point out the fact that Gnome have an active disdain for extension developers and the entire idea of extensions as well as Mozilla continuing to make unpopular decision after unpopular decision with their browser.

There is definitely a growing voice there of people not happy with Israel's actions or the Biden administrations handling of the situation either but honestly, the supposed representative democracy there is mostly a farce. Most of the people with actual power and influence have been brought out.

There would need to be a real revolution within Israeli politics but decades of increasingly hardline right wing politics have pushed dissent to the margins. Israel recieves billions in USD from Uncle Sam for their military spending so that as well as the businesses looking to set up shop in the illegal settlements means there's a lot of money invested in continuing the situation.

Tbh, I actually will take the possibly controversal stance that I do not think governments, foreign or otherwise should be prevented from broadcasting provided that they do not attempt to disrupt the broadcasts of others in the same network. Then it's simply a violation of ToS like any regular user.

Problem is though that the networks always play favorites with governments they have business relations with or property in.

Definitely not the government but the citizens and even then, there are still many staunch defenders of Israel and the IDF there which makes sense given their ongoing relationship.

This is a ridiculous accusation. Aside from the obvious fact that chimpanzees and humans cannot cross-breed, biologists consider the actual physical morphology and features of an animal when categorizing species. When you take that into account, it's absolutely absurd to consider humans to be in the same species as chimpanzees. We - and this is by no means an exhaustive list - differ with Chimpanzees by:

1. Having far less facial and bodily hair than all primates to the extent that we are forced to utilize clothing to survive all the seasons in most of the biomes we occupy.

2. Substantially reduced general strength - a chimpanzee boasts the equavilent of 3 of us.

3. The lack of opposible thumbs on our feet which prevent us from using all four limbs with the required dexterity to climb or exercise fine motor control.

4. Being able to constantly stand and travel upright and boasting an incredibly efficient running gait.

5. The most powerful throw in the animal kingdom.

6. The ability to sweat which combined with the previous two differences would make humans an incredibly dangerous pack animal even without the next difference.

7. Substantially higher intelligence to the point where there is a qualitative as well as quantitative difference in general intellect between even the dumbest of us and a chimpanzee, even if they might be able to outperform the dumbest of us in certain domains.

8. Bit of a silly but interesting factoid - boasting the largest penis of the primates by a large margin.

Even having a few of these would probably be grounds for speciation, never mind all 8.

That's a good point but while they have managed to successfully dehumanise the palestinians in the eyes of their own population, that's less true internationally - even in the US. This provides yet another excuse for them to flout when being confronted for their war crimes.

I'm pretty sure the elite are going to meet their reckoning long before they get to live in climate controlled domes. It's going to make the French Revolution look like a pillow fight.

I don't reallly think we're even at a real risk of actual extinction though. We as a species have gone through far more traumatic climate change in the past. Modern civilisation might collapse but humanity before the hubris of the state and capital - hunter gatherers and nomads will just continue business as always. Even many modern anemeties might be able to persist using more decentralised and sustainable fabrication methods. We will have to make up for the breakdown of those supply chains but there are many alternatives to modern electronics that are not being persued because the status quo is currently more economical.

Hopefuly, the next iteration of civilisation will do a better job of stewardship with the planet instead of being a pest.

Clearly not a perspective born out of much empathy. Very few people have the requirements to even attempt to start a company and out of that limited pool, most fail within the first year, with luck playing a large role in which companies survive the first 3 years.

It's also bullshit - they do not want anyone to take that advice because employers cannot achieve anything without their employees so if even 20% of their workforce took that advice, their company would implode.

Here's a link for those who don't want to grant the Sun the dignity of your click: https://archive.is/VxEJN

Guess this means that they can blame faulty AI when civilians inevitably get taken down by their systems.

I don't see the absurdity frankly though perhaps you mean hypocracy. Both superpowers love to exercise soft power as well as the kind backed up by munitions.

Just re-read this and realized that I'm using the term catalyst in a way that would make a chemist eyes weep. These would be used up in the reaction so it's not a true catalyst but the term has been kind of co-opted to mean anything that can speed up the reaction of something.

I should have clarified that I mean large self enclosed ecosystems, as in bigger than a jar. Something that can sustain multiple larger animals is to put it lightly - a major challenge. The mess that was Biosphere 2 should be a testemant to that.

We would likely have to generate such ecosystems for ourselves, probably in giant rotating space habitats which can be enclosed off from invasive species and poachers. So, to put it lightly, probably a few centuries off.

We have never even made a truly self sufficient closed ecosystem on Earth, our knowledge of such complex systems is far too infantile.

Maybe it cannot act as a direct catalyst for fusion but it could potentially act as a catalyst for another potential catalyst for fusion, such as a pellet of fissionable material.

You're overthinking this. It's on by default because many users now expect it and it's surprising (at least to me as an Emacs user) how little people tend to dive into configuring their editors.

I guess it also looks kind of neat.

I'm not arguing that this will necessarily fix your woes as I have no experience with any Nvidia hardware but one of the greatest but in hindsight obvious discoveries I made with regards to management of my Arch based system was discovering how to downgrade packages. Once you know how to do this, it's a lot less painful having to deal with broken updates - which are pretty rare anyway.

I personally cannot stand using Ubuntu and it seems I'm not alone in that regard. I hear nonstop issues with it from my friends who tried it and I attribute a lot of failed Linux converstions of people thanks to it.

https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Downgrading_packages

> This is why I qualified open source with "community maintained." When there's a strong partition between the community and the developers then FOSS looks a lot like closed software.

I'm just going to come out and say that I think Gnome and Firefox are two of the worst offenders of this.

Except nobody was arguing that. However, back in the world of reality, English is the most used language in programming and by such a large margin that it's laughable. It is a valid and practical problem that you are finding it difficult to constructively collaborate with 99% of the programming world thanks to the name - something that the French authors apparently completely recognise, hence why they're trying to come up with a good rebrand.

How is this "political correctness"? While I like silly and vulgar things, I don't think you need to be an SJW to find it annoying that every time you discuss your coding project with an English speaking or international team using Coq, everybody else erupts to a pile of giggles. It would probably be even more annoying if I was a women who used it.

The real problem with Youtube towards children isn't the videos explicitly labeled for 18+ though - it never has been.

It's the videos that are specifically geared towards showing up on underage feeds that are. I don't know about you but I'd much rather catch my child watching an R rated movie than them watching a video that is targetting them explicity while using creepy and inappropriate imagery.

Children aren't stupid, they're well aware that there are entire sections of society and human activity that are the exclusive domain of adults and it's completely healthy for them to be curious about that great mystery. The problem is when other adults pray on that natural curiousity for their own malicious motivations.

> They're imagining future revenue streams that won't exist. Furthermore, Chinese companies will reach parity and will compete back on the home turf.

I seriously doubt that the US wouldn't be practicing protectionism themselves by that point - at least towards major rivals on the world stage.