Skip to content

This new 40TB hard drive from Seagate is just the beginning—50TB is coming fast!

Technology
232 129 1.9k
  • 355 Stimmen
    135 Beiträge
    68 Aufrufe
    S
    Storing power is expensive and many energy storage techniques require a lot of resources to produce. The more we move toward solar generation, the more we should plan on being opportunistic with energy when it is plentiful For example, electrolysis isn't the most efficient way to store power, but if energy is cheap, it may be better on net to do it opportunistically when there's excess energy and use that hydrogen for things like producing artificial butter (and perhaps fuel mobile equipment like forklifts and delivery trucks). Cows aren't particularly efficient at turning biomass into human food. There's a ton of waste in the process, and they need a lot of space. A factory doesn't need to sustain life of an organism, it just needs to turn one set of compounds into another. Maybe it's not there now, but getting it there will be a lot easier than genetically engineering a much better cow.
  • 351 Stimmen
    43 Beiträge
    472 Aufrufe
    S
    Yup. The greatest danger of AI, is the corporations and governments having sole control of it. That is why it is important for ordinary people to not reject AI usage, but to make it cheap and common enough that no one has to rely on the elite for access. Be it guns, food, shelter, or knowledge, no one should have a monopoly. That is just asking to be abused.
  • 148 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    54 Aufrufe
    czardestructo@lemmy.worldC
    Likely. The coils only job is to ignite the lamp by whacking it with high voltage to strip some barium elections off the coil to induce plasma and therefore electrical flow. The plasma then excites the phosphorus to make light. After that the coils could just be stubs of wire so long as current keeps flowing through the excited plasma. If you did it inductively it would achieve the same means but I don't think the plasma would be as dense so the lamp not as bright. My theory anyways.
  • YouTube might slow down your videos if you block ads

    Technology technology
    226
    1
    649 Stimmen
    226 Beiträge
    3k Aufrufe
    D
    [image: 24aa87b2-162d-4296-aaf7-31d42f30ed63.png]
  • Matrix.org is Introducing Premium Accounts

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    19 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Affordable Assignments

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    19 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • The Internet of Consent

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    11 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    18 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Microsoft Bans Employees From Using DeepSeek App

    Technology technology
    11
    1
    121 Stimmen
    11 Beiträge
    101 Aufrufe
    L
    (Premise - suppose I accept that there is such a definable thing as capitalism) I'm not sure why you feel the need to state this in a discussion that already assumes it as a necessary precondition of, but, uh, you do you. People blaming capitalism for everything then build a country that imports grain, while before them and after them it’s among the largest exporters on the planet (if we combine Russia and Ukraine for the “after” metric, no pun intended). ...what? What does this have to do with literally anything, much less my comment about innovation/competition? Even setting aside the wild-assed assumptions you're making about me criticizing capitalism means I 'blame [it] for everything', this tirade you've launched into, presumably about Ukraine and the USSR, has no bearing on anything even tangentially related to this conversation. People praising capitalism create conditions in which there’s no reason to praise it. Like, it’s competitive - they kill competitiveness with patents, IP, very complex legal systems. It’s self-regulating and self-optimizing - they make regulations and do bailouts preventing sick companies from dying, make laws after their interests, then reactively make regulations to make conditions with them existing bearable, which have a side effect of killing smaller companies. Please allow me to reiterate: ...what? Capitalists didn't build literally any of those things, governments did, and capitalists have been trying to escape, subvert, or dismantle those systems at every turn, so this... vain, confusing attempt to pin a medal on capitalism's chest for restraining itself is not only wrong, it fails to understand basic facts about history. It's the opposite of self-regulating because it actively seeks to dismantle regulations (environmental, labor, wage, etc), and the only thing it optimizes for is the wealth of oligarchs, and maybe if they're lucky, there will be a few crumbs left over for their simps. That’s the problem, both “socialist” and “capitalist” ideal systems ignore ape power dynamics. I'm going to go ahead an assume that 'the problem' has more to do with assuming that complex interacting systems can be simplified to 'ape (or any other animal's) power dynamics' than with failing to let the richest people just do whatever they want. Such systems should be designed on top of the fact that jungle law is always allowed So we should just be cool with everybody being poor so Jeff Bezos or whoever can upgrade his megayacht to a gigayacht or whatever? Let me say this in the politest way I know how: LOL no. Also, do you remember when I said this? ‘Won’t someone please think of the billionaires’ is wearing kinda thin You know, right before you went on this very long-winded, surreal, barely-coherent ramble? Did you imagine I would be convinced by literally any of it when all it amounts to is one giant, extraneous, tedious equivalent of 'Won't someone please think of the billionaires?' Simp harder and I bet maybe you can get a crumb or two yourself.