The number of tech or tech-adjacent people that have completely torched their reputation in the last few weeks is staggering. I hope they get publicly shamed.
Lol the CEO of Palantir said enthusiastically during an investor conference that it's necessary on occasion to kill his enemies, why would you think tech reputations would get torched? If anything it should be a boon when getting hired for big tech. As the government becomes more fascist and more integrated with industry, these contracts will be more and more important and enthusiastically embracing the anti-domestic-terrorist line will improve reputations even more.
I don't even know what a realistic plan to fix this looks like. How do you cult de-program 40% of the population of the most powerful country on the planet?
Nuremberg-style trials for every single person working under this administration is obviously the base minimum to start to get a handle on this. Anyone who is not pushing for that is not being serious about tackling America's problems. Then what? Extreme anti-trust enforcement and implement wealth caps to prevent the harm from recurring and hope most of the population eventually comes back to planet Earth?
Oh, that's easy. You see people vote like this if they don't advance economically. So what you need is to create a decade or so of economic advancement for >50% of the US.
If that doesn't happen, odds are that even if a democrat president gets elected, they won't be much better. This is still the fallout of the GFC, of the decision to bail out the banks back then.
I know that sounds incredible, and I would have bitten off the head of anyone claiming this when I was 20 ... but it's how the world works.
There is a difference between not liking someone for substantive and non-substantive reasons. I have military training that is adjacent to policing because that was one of the objectives of the theater I was in.
Informed by that training I would never:
- shoot someone when they are being detained
- shoot someone simply because they have a gun
- stand next to a vehicle so as to postulate the vehicle as a weapon
When I don't like Kristi Noem it isn't because she's Kristi Noem, because she's a woman, or because she shot a puppy she didn't like. It's because her actions and policy that she defends and writes don't agree with the ethics of the training I received.
You can do this thought exercise across this administration and arrive at the same conclusions of most of the key-holding individuals.
That's not at all what the person you responded to said. I'm not sure if you're intentionally misrepresenting their statement or if you're just reading too quickly or are under-caffeinated or whatever.
That's more or less what heat pump clothes dryers do. They draw in air, heat it, and then blow the humid air back over the cold side of the heat pump loop to condense it. They save tons of energy. I don't think there's anything similar for water (in clothes or dish washers) but the quantities might just be too small to bother with.
a counter current heat exchanger might be more reliable than a refrigerant heat pump and more efficient than peltier heat pumps, but yes in theory you can quasistatically move the water out for almost no energy (only the adsorption / mixing energies). And peltiers can be much more efficient at tiny temperature gradients, so a theoretical frictionless positive displacement pump, and a heat pipe between the condensing compartment and the evaporatig compartment (so keeping the 2 compartments at ambient temperature (so no heat losses).
Compressing humid air releases heat which marginally increases the temperature of the condensing compartment, and marginally cools the evaporating compartment with the wet clothes; thus the heat pipe will quickly equilibrate the 2 compartments.
At that point, who really cares? As scale goes down and economies of scale go away, it just becomes an irrelevant novelty. But the actual question is: how much will industrial applications matter.
Most rooftop install costs are labor. The PV is now a minimal slice of it. Which is why mandating solar on new construction is such an important policy: don't make two sets of laborers clamber around the same roof.
If you're a renter/condo then you're probably getting excess solar generation delivered to you from homeowners with nearby solar roofs. So presumably there is some benefit to you in terms of cheap generation.
Don't be ridiculous. The US alone cannot stand up to China. We can't even build ships anymore. Parity is only possible with an alliance comprising the full economic and manufacturing might of the "free" developed world, which includes Europe and the rest of Asia. Losing Europe as a close military and trading ally is suicidal all by itself, but it has knock-on effects: once you've abandoned Europe, do you think the rest of your allies are going to believe you're there for them? Why should South Korea risk its security building ships for a US military alliance, once we've signaled that the US values its military alliances at zero?
China is restricting purchases of H200s. The strong likelihood is that they're doing this to promote their own domestic competitors. It may take a few years for those chips to catch up and enter full production, but it's hard to envision any "trillion dollar" Nvidia defense empire once that happens.
The population is achieving results. Most of these results are occurring in China, which has begun an unimaginably huge deployment of renewables and nuclear. Europe is also making progress. The rest of Asia will go next, and then (as it develops industrially) so will Africa. Even parts of North America will quickly electrify: for example, Canada just agreed to reduce tariffs on Chinese EVs to 6% from 100%.
For all intents and purposes, Xi is worth far more than anyone in the west could dream of. It may not be reflected in stock certificates and bank balances, but if money is just the potential energy of power, Xi can do more than every US billionaire combined.
The difference mostly shows up in policies. Nobody is saying the top leadership of the CCP isn't enriching themselves. What they're noting is that the top leadership is small enough that this enrichment doesn't (yet) necessitate tilting the entire economy towards enrichment of its elites, at the cost of harming economic growth. The key word there is yet.
You see broadly different outcomes in many authoritarian countries, for example Russia. You might also argue that much of the short-term decision making we've seen from US industry lately is driven by the need to produce returns to stockholders, at the cost of long-term investment.
reply