Thanks. It’s hard for me to judge tactics from video, as I can’t really tell what is accidental collateral damage vs purposeful. The statements by Israeli leadership definitely supports the view that they are purposefully being punitive… which is monstrous.

Your response seems to be equivalent to “never defend yourself against someone holding an innocent hostage.”

To clarify, I’m not sure what response doesn’t result in more innocent people dying.

I don’t really care about this specific conflict more than any other. And morally I don’t care for the lives of one side more than the other. And morally I don’t care who lived in what cities 100 years ago (note: unless those specific people are involved).

My confusion seems to be that the ‘right’ response people seem to want to this is no response.

So I just heard about this whole thing last night. What is the preferred Israeli response to this?

To me it looks like Hamas using occupied buildings as places to attack from, the Israel being told they aren’t allowed to hit back at people using human shields.

I think the issue might be visibility.

Naively, it feels like most of the issue is from a small number of extra sooty vehicles. But that belief is probably just because of how visible it is. The brake/Tyree dust isn’t visible because it is more spread out.

I guess I wasn’t clear where on the surface the storage is. Do they still make a dam type area to store the ‘high’ water, or is it just a different part of the mine which is closer to the surface?

I was able to find some mine numbers… yeah; insane. Especially something like an open cut mine which is functionally already lake shaped.

Can you? To store the energy you need to pump up; to use it you need to flow back down. Where is the ‘down’ or ‘up’ from a mine shaft?

I’d also question if the volume would be worth it.

Edit: maybe you are thinking compressed air?

I’ve worked on payment systems. It is very hard to federate unless something like Stripe is used for actual payment.

Credit card companies simply won’t interface with you unless you prove their data is safe. It isn’t a process that scales well.

Brick and mortar companies get around this by having payment terminals which are insanely locked down. (Which is also why those terminals mostly suck)

Shorter: found out

This is a government mandate for one corporation to pay another corporation to share it’s product. This isn’t ‘helping the little guy’ or anything.

People still have the ability to just go directly to the news site. Or Google. Or the government’s Facebook page. Or the national alert system. And probably lots of other options I don’t know about.

The law (“you must pay for the news you show unless otherwise agreed”) seems reasonable. As does the response of “well it isn’t worth enough to pay for”.

My Dad just last night was complaining about wind farms…

Very few people buy Teslas because of Musk.

I love my Tesla. I have a dislike for Musk. (If he had just funded all the same stuff and shut up, I’d probably love him too.)

I guess, but somewhere between 1/4 and 1/2 of people already use ad blockers. It’s not a small segment of the population. Even more people use some sort of plugin.

I think it is more likely that certain sites require secure mode; just like today. I guess I could be wrong, and most sites will end up doing it. I still suspect there will be a work around; even if it is as complicated as a secure browser being run in a virtual machine and then AI removing the ads to show you the ‘clean’ version.

Peer review is great and all, but they have video. This is either real or outright fraud. I’m don’t know what they’d gain from fraud here, as this is such big news it will be replicated quickly.

I am confused by why everyone thinks this is a big threat?

What stops the FOSS community from just continuing to allow ad blockers and other webpage editing features?

Sending the JavaScript to do this literally uses more electricity than this saves.

He meant used for a hole guys. Just a minor typo.

I guess it depends what the client things the right tool for the job is. When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail

Because the models don’t support your statement.

Billions WILL have worse lives due to this. A very small subset of that will be because they are on the verge of starving.

I think this conflates capitalism with lack of coordination. We could fix global warming today via regulation. Even if our government was socialist, it would probably still not be curbing emissions due to trying to achieve some other non-capital goal.

Second, there isn’t any need to falsely imply our species is going to die because of climate change. No model points at that. Billions of people having crappier lives and dying sooner should be enough motivation.

Male prostitute

/s

(Seriously, agree with you in general though)