Subtruth

6.4K posts

Subtruth banner
Subtruth

Subtruth

@Subtruth2

Truth is a matter of the imagination. Analysis for the non-linear age.

เข้าร่วม Eylül 2022
431 กำลังติดตาม143 ผู้ติดตาม
Subtruth
Subtruth@Subtruth2·
@peterrhague Yes. A.I. is pretty much the moonshot at this point.
English
0
0
0
36
Peter Hague
Peter Hague@peterrhague·
Humanity runs the risk of a resource shortage by the end of this century. See how our resources peak and then start to decline?
Peter Hague tweet media
English
17
3
48
3.4K
Subtruth
Subtruth@Subtruth2·
@barrymc0ckner @JohnLeePettim13 They definitely will, but will that occur soon enough? And how much capital can be funnelled toward them in a possible recession and bubble burst scenario? Nuclear is cheap once it's installed and on but nuclear frontloads cap-ex.
English
0
0
0
16
Mike — acc/acc
Mike — acc/acc@barrymc0ckner·
Terrestrial real estate for data centers becomes dirt cheap once small modular reactors that don’t require gas pipeline or electrical transmission infrastructure become an option, and they will. Scaled nuclear fission has always been an inevitability and now capital and politics are behind it. The update-ability of terrestrial data centers is a distinguishing factor
English
1
0
1
13
John Lee Pettimore
John Lee Pettimore@JohnLeePettim13·
Elon Musk vows that solar will dominate future energy generation, but his AI data centers in Mississippi will be powered by 41 natural-gas turbines.
John Lee Pettimore tweet media
English
28
21
87
2K
Subtruth
Subtruth@Subtruth2·
It is, but the world will be short dispatchable energy or capital depending what happens next. Most of the most expensive bit is behind Space X, while data centres aren't cheap realestate (space realestate being in space and thus free), and the sun is free and in solar orbit it's free 24hours seven days. So it's not necessarily a moving target that favours terrestrial data centres...
English
1
0
0
21
Mike — acc/acc
Mike — acc/acc@barrymc0ckner·
Maybe for a niche. The lifecycle of GPUs is too short for it to dominate. And yesterday’s conventional projected demand for compute now seems like a massive overestimate.. There’s no atmospheric fluid in space either so radiative rather than convective cooling is required and this is not trivial as far as cost.
English
1
0
0
11
Subtruth
Subtruth@Subtruth2·
I read claims like this from politicians and I can't help but feel extreme disgust. Do you really think most people are dumb enough not to see you? To not understand the self serving lies? Housing is a political problem in Australia -The politicians keep importing people to the point that since 2000 we have increased our population by ~45% Energy is a political problem in Australia - in 2000 we had 7 oil refineries, the net zero crowd insured our insecurity, and politicians stored our "strategic reserve" overseas... Food is grown by farmers and moves on trucks and it's price is a function of energy prices - The politicians chose to make energy tight, therefore they chose to expose food to volatility... The corporations can do little in the face of demand destruction of oil price shocks except pass what % of the prices they can along before they are crushed. Shame on you.
English
0
0
0
12
Larissa Waters
Larissa Waters@larissawaters·
Every time there’s a war or crisis, the price of petrol, food, energy and housing go up - and so do the profits for the corporations that sell them. That’s no coincidence. It’s the system working as designed. Billionaires sent us to war, and everyday people are paying for it.
English
99
226
685
7.9K
FortWorthPlayboy
FortWorthPlayboy@FWPlayboy·
If you’re a Man who’s extremely intelligent, logical, super serious, and unbending. You’re going to find it challenging to have an easy going love life filled with lots of fun girls. Not impossible, simply far more challenging.
FortWorthPlayboy tweet media
English
280
163
3.2K
162.4K
Sabr
Sabr@_lonedd·
@bassman9000 @LundukeJournal Exactly and it started with Law not with a PR on systemd. You guys are too late, either this get's in or Linux OS's won't be available in those Countries and people will become criminals over night. Fix the root cause not the symptom, attacking symptoms never worked.
English
5
0
0
318
The Lunduke Journal
The Lunduke Journal@LundukeJournal·
Moderators of the r/Linux subreddit are now censoring posts which talk about Age Verification. Not only are posts being removed, but I’ve heard from multiple Reddit users who have been banned from r/Linux for expressing opposition to Age Verification.
The Lunduke Journal tweet media
English
384
1.4K
8.9K
263.7K
Subtruth
Subtruth@Subtruth2·
@verticalc @wintonARK Light sweet crude oils (API gravity typically 31°–45°, ideally >35°, with low sulfur content <0.5–1%) can actually be used in diesel vehicles with very limited processing.
English
0
0
0
15
Brett Winton
Brett Winton@wintonARK·
a barrel of oil can provide as much electricity as a 400W solar panel does annually. a barrel of oil runs $92 and comes with a few minor logistical complications. this year the solar panel should run less than $90; you can order online, ships in a week.
Brett Winton tweet media
English
685
445
5.4K
494K
Subtruth
Subtruth@Subtruth2·
@e_considine @RokoMijic Grids designed with tolerance for bidirectional flow at the scale you need for a mix of mostly renewables across nations emphatically do not exist.
English
0
0
1
15
The Sentient Dog Group
The Sentient Dog Group@e_considine·
@RokoMijic Grids already span entire nations and even cross continents. So that's already there. Wind has decreased in cost as well, not as much as solar but a lot. Storage expensive? What are you using to tweet?
English
4
0
2
101
Roko 🐉
Roko 🐉@RokoMijic·
What Brett isn't telling you is that the power from the solar panel must be used instantly. If you want just 10 days of storage for a 400W solar panel you have to pay about $10,000 for batteries. The barrel of oil is its own battery. And if you have to put that panel in Southern England on land that would otherwise have been used for housing, you are going to pay $12,000 for the land. So: - Panel ($92) - Batteries ($10,000) - Land ($12,000) You can see why oil is still competitive.
Brett Winton@wintonARK

a barrel of oil can provide as much electricity as a 400W solar panel does annually. a barrel of oil runs $92 and comes with a few minor logistical complications. this year the solar panel should run less than $90; you can order online, ships in a week.

English
244
65
1.3K
100.2K
Subtruth
Subtruth@Subtruth2·
Sure. There is some scope for that, but the majority of the 70% non-electrical fossil fuel use isn't easily changed, as much of the low hanging fruit which is efficient as electrical, has been made to be. The biggest chunk is going to require as I said an order of magnitude more generation to soak the chemical energy shortfalls implied, which is not amenable to change without fundamentally completely different scales and processes of an completely different scales of plant, not simply simple substitution. What is economic with the petrochemical industrial stack looks nothing like what will be needed for an electrical based chemical economy. And at core still chunks of industrial heat simply aren't easily electrified...
English
0
0
0
25
Hey Dan, it's me!
Hey Dan, it's me!@HeyDanitsme·
@Subtruth2 @JessePeltan Right now, electricity is being used in the margin instead of natural gas. Right now, different types of plant equipment are being considered & gas is looking like a worse option than it did a month ago. The sum of these marginal decisions is gas use will decline.
English
1
0
0
16
Subtruth
Subtruth@Subtruth2·
"Electricity for heat". At the moment there are no Arc furnaces in South Australia that can take advantage of that. Currently Coal is required for that process. Worse than that while you can replace Blast furnaces eventually with Arc furnaces (at for steel we likely will) most industrial heat applications are not efficient with electricity. You can make steel with an Arc furnace but there are a thousand other processes, and several thousand inputs which are in and of themselves fossil fuels. One does not simply replace the chemical feedstock which fuels our entire chemical industry with electricity, as if you did you would need orders of magnitude more electricity to make up the chemical energy shortfall. No one is creating the sort of energy infrastructure that requires.
English
1
0
0
26
Hey Dan, it's me!
Hey Dan, it's me!@HeyDanitsme·
@Subtruth2 @JessePeltan Half the time, electricity for heat costs nothing in South Australia. At the moment, gas is US2.6c per thermal kWh, & it's only that low because the government has put their thumb on the scale. So a lot of industrial heat will go electric, even if the Strait opens again.
English
1
0
0
23
Subtruth
Subtruth@Subtruth2·
Your camp probably shouldn't have spent the last three decades telling people we would all be drowned in ten years if they didn't revolt. It created significant doubt. You probably also shouldn't have villianised and hounded descenting voices. It created significant doubt. You probably shouldn't be lionising people like Paul Ehrlic who advocated coercive sterilisation. It created significant doubt as to who's priorities you serve.
English
0
0
0
5
René Duba
René Duba@ReneDuba·
We are being inundated by posts from people paid by the fossil industry that aim to create doubt. Science is clear though. Bookmark this one! Recommended:
Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research PIK@PIK_Climate

Only a small fraction of greenhouse gases is needed to create most of the greenhouse effect, because these gases absorb specific wavelengths of the heat the Earth emits, states PIK scientist @rahmstorf in new explainer on climate change myths👇Full video: youtube.com/watch?v=0mla1i…

English
21
8
45
1.9K
Subtruth
Subtruth@Subtruth2·
You won't reach that if the idea is "just replace existing infrastructure with solar and wind..." Most of fossil fuel use is industrial heat, fertilisers, industrial chemicals, gases and plastics. It's a vertically integrated stack that uses waste from all parts, so as you remove parts of it you are actually increasing the cost of things most people would think of as unrelated. Reduce natural gas use? Ballooning plastics, paints and glue prices. Reduce oil use? Ballooning cost in lubricants (heavily used in wind turbines and that'sjust one isolated example). Reduce coal use? No easy industrial heat to make any alloys or do smelting economically at all. If you are using say nuclear, you make up the lack of efficient intergration of chemical energy with scale but that requires nuclear at scale. Molten salt reactors can pull the chemical heat duty done by coal and gas which is actually hard to replace otherwise economically. You can't do that with solar physically and we don't have efficient processes that scale to replace most of the chemical energy that goes into most of our industrial base without orders of magnitude more energy currently.
English
0
0
0
32
Kyle Ferriter
Kyle Ferriter@kyle_ferriter·
@Subtruth2 @JessePeltan Nothing you said matters, and won’t do a while, because we haven’t converted the stuff that can be. After we do that and then are trying to electrify stuff like airplanes that’s harder to do, we can maybe take a break and say okay maybe solar can’t do everything.
English
1
0
1
35
Subtruth
Subtruth@Subtruth2·
@RealPostFolder I'd take this deal. It's a devils bargain. But what is more valuable than time?
English
0
0
0
122
Subtruth
Subtruth@Subtruth2·
Yes but most people will be confused as to why. Intelligence in A.I. will be far more a vector. To clarify, in Humans while intelligence is a vector instaneously Gc or crystallised intelligence is rate limited by fluid intelligence, and fluid intelligence drops off in mid life, so over time intelligence in humans is far more scalar, it's not in absolute terms but in a relative fashion it acts more like a scalar value. In A.I. these restrictions will be far less meaningful.
English
0
0
0
27
Roko 🐉
Roko 🐉@RokoMijic·
@wifiejwn38 Headroom is really only meaningful relative to a task, intelligence is a vector not a scalar
English
1
0
5
884
Roko 🐉
Roko 🐉@RokoMijic·
I think the permanent underclass thing is probably true but it will take longer than people think. You can see this phenomenon historically in places in northern England that lost their industry. Everyone went on benefits and lived in a council house. Okay, not everyone, but there are certain places where this became the modal outcome. Many eventually miscegenated too, so now they don't even have their genetic heritage. And then it's a REALLY permanent underclass.
Liminal Warmth ❤️‍🔥@liminal_warmth

I wish everyone would chill out about the whole “you have X months to escape the permanent underclass” thing. It’s not true. It’s fake. You’re going to be okay. Things might feel stressful for a while but unless everyone actually dies we’ll figure it out.

English
19
4
216
32.3K
Subtruth
Subtruth@Subtruth2·
@ChrisGloninger It would also imply that adaptation is best case given the long and variable lags in such systems, so why are you shrieking? Learn to love the bomb and move on, if it's as you claim the cause you are currently fighting for is a lost one.
English
0
0
0
36
Chris Gloninger, CCM, CBM
Chris Gloninger, CCM, CBM@ChrisGloninger·
The geologic record doesn't say "warming is fine." It says rapid climate shifts cause mass extinctions. Current warming: 10-100x faster than the PETM, which still killed off massive numbers of species over 10,000 years. We're speedrunning that in 200 years with 8 billion people and infrastructure built for a stable Holocene. "It was warmer in the Cretaceous" isn't the flex you think it is. The dinosaurs didn't have coastal megacities.
Peter Clack@PeterDClack

We’re told we’re boiling; Geology says the world's shivering. Earth is still in the Quaternary Glaciation - 2.58 million years so far. Yet for most of the last 500 million years the Earth has been at least 10°C warmer than it is today. There weren't any polar ice caps though. Instead, there were lush biomes from pole to pole and life didn't just survive, it exploded. Pulp fiction's 'hottest years ever' relies on a tiny 175-year window in a geological world of 4.6 billion years. In the context of the late Cenozoic (the last 34 million years) a 1.4°C rise isn't a catastrophe - it’s a minor blip of life-giving warmth in a mostly icehouse world. Why the fear? Because human bureaucracy thrives on fear. By ignoring the 500-million-year baseline of earth's recent geological past, the UN has turned 'natural variability' into a climate sledge hammer for global control. If you only look at the last 175 years, the climate looks like a crisis. But if you look at the last 500 million, it looks like a two-week junket in the Bahamas. We should really be talking about 'Icehouse Earth'.

English
77
58
300
9.6K
Subtruth
Subtruth@Subtruth2·
@mhdksafa Yeah, Because that would be a "duty", not a "right".
English
0
0
0
22
Mohamad Safa
Mohamad Safa@mhdksafa·
When the UN tried to declare food a human right, two countries voted against it. The United States and Israel.
Mohamad Safa tweet media
English
1.3K
23.5K
68.2K
691.1K

ค้นพบ

@peterrhague @barrymc0ckner @JohnLeePettim13 @IterIntellectus @Light695901971 @FWPlayboy @FogLakeside @_lonedd