• 0 Posts
  • 84 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 1st, 2023

help-circle


  • Yes. Nuclear waste is tiny. That’s the point.

    Nuclear isn’t the only hazardous waste we dispose of burying it.

    We’re disposing of tonnes of hazardous waste daily. Only a tiny percentage of that is nuclear waste.

    Yet for some reason everyone loses their mind about the comparatively tiny amount of hazardous waste from nuclear and no one cares about the significantly larger about of hazardous waste from the eventual disposal of solar panels and 100s of other sources of hazardous waste.


  • For over a century, the standard way we’ve been disposing of hazardous materials that can’t be easily recycled is to permanently bury it. We’re doing it with thousands of tonnes of hazardous materials daily.

    A nuclear power plant only generates about 3 cubic meters of hazardous nuclear waste per year.

    At the typical sizes we’re currently building them, you need 50-100 solar or wind farms to match the electricity output of a single nuclear reactor.

    When we eventually dispose of the solar panels from those farms we literally end up with more toxic waste in heavy metals like cadmium than the nuclear power plant produced.

    No solution is perfect.

    But contrary to the propaganda, nuclear is one of our cleanest options.





  • Oh please.

    The evidence for Szabo is circumstantial at best. I’ll give you he has the skills and experience and was working on digital currency at the time.

    But Szabo was just one of hundreds of people working on different ideas related to digital currency around the time Bitcoin was released.

    And how many hundreds of people developed their own cryptocurrency after getting the idea from the Bitcoin whitepaper? Clearly he not the only “person on earth who had both the skills and experience”.

    Not to mention Szabo has repeatedly denied being Satoshi.



  • I’m not defending Microsoft… but if we’re going to go after a tech company for leveraging their other assets to give themselves an unfair advantage can we also go after Google?

    In the first releases of Edge, Microsoft tried to build a new web browser from scratch to compete with Google Chrome. By google kept changing YouTube’s code so that videos would playback janky on Edge. Microsoft eventually gave up trying to fix for YouTubes ongoing changes and now Edge is based on Chromium (the same open source web browser maintained by Google, that chrome os built on). Google leveraged YouTube to prevent completion from Edge.

    And now Google is blocking ad blocking extensions so that users are forced to see more google ads in their browser.

    Microsoft’s has leveraged their unfair advantage to get a little over 5% market share.

    Google’s leveraged their unfair advantage to get 66% of the market.

    Both companies need a hard smack down, but I want to see Google taken down too.



  • They call it jailbreak because this is an issue of freedom

    I support your position and the right to repair, but that’s not the origin of the term jailbreak in the context of computing.

    The term jailbreaking predates its modern understanding relating to smartphones, and dates back to the introduction of “protected modes” in early 80s CPU designs such as the intel 80286.

    With the introduction of protected mode it became possible for programs to run in isolated memory spaces where they are unable to impact other programs running on the same CPU. These programs were said to be running “in a jail” that limited their access to the rest of the computer. A software exploit that allowed a program running inside the “jail” to gain root access / run code outside of protected mode was a “jailbreak”.

    The first “jailbreak” for iOS allowed users to run software applications outside of protected modes and instead run in the kernel.

    But as is common for the English language, jailbreak became to be synonymous with freedom from manufacture imposed limits and now has this additional definition.






  • Such an incredibly misleading article.

    1 GW of nuclear capacity generates several times more electricity than 1 GW of PV capacity.

    Nuclear power plants run at almost full capacity pretty much 24/7/365. With the occasional shutdown every few years for maintenance and to replace the fuel rods.

    PVs only generate electricity during the day, and only hit their maximum capacity under ideal conditions. The average output of PVs is 15-25% of their capacity.

    Globally we generate more electricity from nuclear than we do from all PVs together.

    At the typical sizes we’re building them you need dozens of PV farms to match the energy output of a single nuclear reactor.


  • dgmib@lemmy.worldtoMemes@lemmy.mlI hate the rich
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    It depends on the jurisdiction, but in most cases if you have a salaried position with say 3 weeks of PTO but you only take 2 weeks of it. The employer is usually required to pay you over and above your salary for working during your “vacation time”.

    If there’s an unlimited PTO policy, they don’t have an obligation to pay you extra for working during vacation time.


  • dgmib@lemmy.worldtoMemes@lemmy.mlI hate the rich
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    It’s a lie.

    By making it “unlimited” they don’t need to pay you out of you don’t use all of PTO days.

    If you use it more than they think you’ve earned you get terminated.

    Employees end up afraid of taking their PTO days and typically end up taking even less time off than if they knew there was a expectation of 3 weeks or whatever.