Maybe that surplus will lay the groundwork for a solarpunk blockchain future?

I don’t know if I understand what blockchain is, honestly. But what if a bunch of indie co-ops created a mesh network of smaller, more sustainable server operations?

It might not seem feasible now, but if the AI bubble pops, Nvidia crashes spectacularly, data centers all need to liquidate their stock, and server compute becomes basically viewed as junk, then it might become possible…

I’m just trying to find a silver lining, okay?

Holy fucking shit.

Yeah, self-hosted open-source models seem okay, as long as their training data is all from the public domain.

Hopefully RAM becomes cheap as fuck after the bubble pops and all these data centers have to liquidate their inventory. That would be a nice consolation prize, if everything else is already fucked anyway.

I know, she was the VP. I didn’t have her confused with Machado.

She conveniently happened to be in Moscow when the US invaded. I thought I saw an article saying she had been in contact with US officials shortly before her “vacation.”

Edit:

Venezuela’s Delcy Rodríguez assured US of cooperation before Maduro’s capture (The Guardian)

I don’t know, seems pretty unambiguous…

I don’t support her, I think she’s a self-interested opportunist and doing everything for the wrong reasons, and deep down she’s still a bigot and a grifter, but lately she’s actually had some reasonable takes. I find it mildly annoying whenever she says something I can agree with, but any fracturing of the maga base is a good thing in my view.

Of course, it’s mostly attributable to broken-clock syndrome, but strangely enough, that demonic look on her face has started to fade in recent photos. It’s almost as if breaking with maga is akin to having an exorcism. Weird…

They could route emissions through a system like this directly from smoke stacks, capturing the carbon before it even reaches the atmosphere

You’re deliberately ignoring the fact that in vernacular terms, “carbon” is used to refer to “carbon dioxide” in contexts where the meaning is obvious.

People using the term that way aren’t “morons” with “no clue about chemistry.” They’re just using a commonly-understood shorthand for saying “carbon dioxide.” They understand perfectly well that carbon dioxide has a molecular structure of CO2. You’re being willfully obtuse. [Edit: People also sometimes refer to table salt as “sodium,” so your example is really poorly thought-out.]

Also, while there’s a commentary to be made about corporate greenwashing using phrases like “carbon neutral” and “net zero” to mask their true impacts on the environment, there certainly is such thing as “carbon neutral,” and it absolutely is a scientifically useful term.

Going for a walk is a carbon neutral activity, unless you happen to fart. Planting trees to compensate for burning fossil fuels is not carbon neutral, although it may meet the regulatory definition required of corporations to use the term. That doesn’t mean the concept itself is mythical.

Planting trees or sowing a wildflower meadow is carbon-negative. While that can’t displace emissions from regularly burning fossil fuels, it might neutralize the carbon-positive processes of manufacturing a bicycle, meaning riding your bike to work might also be carbon neutral.

A circular-process that only emits as much C02 as it removes from the atmosphere is, by definition, carbon-neutral. And rejecting novel processes solely because the concept didn’t exist previously is nothing short of dogmatism.

Wait, isn’t she the one who conspired with the US for the position she now holds in the first place?

Edit for those who doubted:

Venezuela’s Delcy Rodríguez assured US of cooperation before Maduro’s capture (The Guardian)

It’s telling that they generated an AI schoolgirl to lure right-wingers further towards extremism…

And then they hit you with the “If you just don’t bother women, then you won’t be accused of harassment!” and the “Believe victims! No one actually weaponizes false accusations in retaliation for petty grievances. Women never lie!”

Emmett Till begs to differ…

Yes, and covert recording by definition is done without the knowledge or consent of the one being recorded. It should be illegal everywhere, but some states have single-party consent laws which allow it.

(imagine applying such a rule to sexual activity, it would be absurd; yet somehow it’s totally legal to broadcast a person’s name, face, and location to the world without them even knowing what’s happening?)

Exactly. But fascists want privacy for themselves, and if they don’t get it then they’ll call people commies. But if anyone else wants privacy, then fascists say they’re acting suspicious and must be guilty of something.

Make it make sense. (Yes I know, conservatives are self-contradictory and have no ideological consistency; rules for me not for thee, we get it…)

I’d say from the huge numbers of people out protesting in the streets against the regime and winding up in body bags by the thousands because the regime is massacring them, that they probably want the downfall of the mullah.

And the reason it’s “difficult to determine” is because the regime cut off their internet access to isolate them from outside observers and increase the fog of war. People saying “it’s difficult to determine what they want” is precisely what the ayatollah intended to happen.

As for what they want to replace it with, that’s what a referendum is for. So I don’t get this “don’t give them a referendum, they’ll just choose wrong” mentality…

I know, I was kidding

That’s not entirely true, he’s read a book of hitler’s speeches…

Maybe it whisks the heat away to space?

Doo itt!!!

This is so fucked up, and the guy who did this needs to be doxxed and have his whole life made hell, but…

Back when the ubiquitousness of smartphone cameras was still fairly new, and the prospect of being secretly recorded and posted online at any given moment was still unthinkable yet real, I tried raising the concern whenever/however I could.

Like, I would tell people “this is fucked up, and we shouldn’t normalize this.” And you know what they told me, nearly without fail? They called me a creep and said if I wasn’t doing anything I wouldn’t want people to see online, then I wouldn’t be worried about being secretly recorded.

It was like this pseudo “women’s empowerment” sentiment where they thought this gives them the ability to ruin men’s lives (often over short clips out of context that only look bad based on how it’s spinned in the caption), thus “protecting” women, and they didn’t think it would ever turn back on them and blow up in their faces.

Unbeknownst to them, one of my main concerns was the danger this poses for women. But of course, no one would believe that, because I was a man, so of course the only reasonable assumption was that I was a misogynist and only concerned with privacy so I could get away with predatory behavior. So of course, if I raise a fuss about this then I must be a creep. Of course.

Well, look what’s come home to roost. Amazing. Who could have predicted this?

And then they’ll call anyone who thinks “smart” devices are stupid a luddite…

“leaders” in this case meaning dictators, corrupt sycophants, and puppets?

Any self-respecting leaders sat this one out.