It might have cracks in the silicon crystal that might burn in over time.

But yeah, impressive that it could take this big of hail balls without braking the glass.

About D, you could also be programming robots, PLC’s or thermostats 🤷‍♂️

Small PHEV’s would be ideal for the current generation. Battery advances will come, but we should always try to optimize with the current technology and 10 cars with a 10th the battery of a Tesla would be better for the future.

IMO they should just remove the equality operator on floats.

If they need permission for third party cookies and those are now no longer possible, the popups can go already.

And if a site doesn’t want to serve people that do not accept data hoarding, an account with terms and conditions is the only logical way to go.

Belgium forced facebook to not track users without an account and they reacted by doing this exact thing (requiring an account to even read pages). It made it a lot easier for me to not having to deal with Facebook at all. If some store or organization only had the info on Facebook, I’ll just tell them I can’t access it 🤷‍♂️

Other package managers, like nuget, throw errors if all dependencies on a package cannot be met by a single version.

This is probably the result of it copying all libraries in the same output directory and that .net cannot load 2 different versions of the same library so more an application restriction.

The downside of this is that packages often can’t use newer features if they want to not block the users of that library and that utility libraries have to have his backwards compatibility so applications can use the latest version while dependent libraries target an older version. Often applications keep using older versions with known security issues.

They also couldn’t call it “.Net Core 4” so they called it “.Net 5”

Will they keep skipping numbers or start thinking about not naming everything the same.

Depends on the grid. If the lines and transformers are already used close to their limit, more smaller buffer batteries and smaller solar installations, closer to the user, could be more efficient and not require grid adjustments. The closet to the user, the less grid adjustments are needed.

Industrial roof solar should be standard in any new building by now. Companies need the power in the day and it can be used without even needing to use the grid.

Yes it will probably also mean buying less, smaller housing and less private cars. But it would also make alternatives viable that just can’t exist right now and make less polluting solutions cheaper cause of scale (like what now happens with solar panels) and they wouldn’t even need much subsidies to get them off the ground.

That it will hurt is also why I think it will never happen cause any government that takes big steps will not be in office for 4 years. It can also only happen with:

• Higher minimum wage
• Adorable and risk free loans for energy reduction
• Social adjustments as the lowest wages are the most impacted (can be paid for with the taxes)

Why wouldn’t it help the environment? The only way producers can pollute less is if it would cost less money. It will and can only happen if it pays to produce less co2

This issue was detected when running Firefox on Linux on Apple silicon. Firefox on Mac just identifies as x64.

It’s probably not on purpose by YouTube. It’s stupid they put restrictions on some heuristics to begin with but maybe because otherwise people would think YouTube is not loading properly while it’s the software decoding on the not capable arm PC that can’t handle the resolution.

No tax on emissions mean that companies that try to pollute less can’t compete. Either investments for less pollution or the pollution itself needs to be posted on to customers. And if a less polluting alternative costs more right now, it might become the cheapest with carbon tax.

You’d be surprised. Long trips literally produce tons.

The emissions of this trip, if every passenger flew economy, is >2 ton CO2 per person.

The annual emission of a eu citizen is 4 to 7 ton a year so for a month that’s 350kg, given that he is not living on eu standards it’s quite safe to take the lower bound. The co2 of hitching on cargo ships and trucks is neglectabel, but if he has to catch a bus for most land travel, we can set it to 500kg max.

Taking the plane emissions at the minimum bound and the alternative maximal, it’s still 3x less. And personal emissions I think we could reduce by a lot in the next 10 years with greener agriculture, industry and just consuming less. Plane travel will not improve drastically the coming 20 years

I think it has to be a bit of both. If we ever want to reach any co2 goal, it’ll have to be with both less consumption and less pollution in production. Or a drastic reduction in the population, but let’s hope that won’t happen.

I do feel like the carbon footprint is a campaign similar to the other green washing campaigns.

I don’t think there is any other option than a global co2 tax. It’s not like the economic system is going to change any time soon and ‘evil greedy basters’ are good at minimizing costs so this will have an impact. And this tax will cause polluting product to just cost more so either there use will go down or the tax can be used for other reductions.

There have even been companies that ask for it. They can’t justify heavy investments to pollute less if their competitors don’t have to.

That statement is just completely wrong. The correct statement should be ‘70% of the emissions from oil and cement products can be linked to 100 companies’. And linked means produced here. It also includes the products these companies sell so it also includes: the CO2 of the production of your PC, some of the electricity your PC used, recycling your PC,…

It’s basically the 100 biggest oil companies. They themselves make roughly 12% of this pollution, bit that is only made to produce the oil.

Companies are also not just producing CO2. No one is polluting for fun. It’s all done to create products for customers. Less products=less co2. Ofc it might be possible to reduce emissions in production, but producing less is the easiest and will be needed, especially ppl from the West. Don’t be fooled, even with all the ‘greener’ industry and all heavy industry moved elsewhere, we still produce multiple times the amount of CO2 per Capita than China or India.

Some more info: https://eu.statesman.com/story/news/politics/politifact/2022/07/26/fact-check-do-100-companies-produce-70-of-greenhouse-gas-emissions/65382311007/