Uber says the majority of drivers don't want this, which I'd call bs on, but has anyone heard from actual drivers what they want?
Readit Newselgfare commented on Uber must employ its drivers, Dutch court rules nltimes.nl/2021/09/13/ube... · Posted by u/jsiepkes
elgfare commented on I’ve had the same supper for 10 years theguardian.com/lifeandst... · Posted by u/pumpkinhead
A man living in the same place all his life has no basis for comparison. I would be more convinced that your great-grandfather's village is something special since he experienced elsewhere yet still returned.
There is no need for comparison when there is no need for improvement. He is content, he doesn't need anything else. I wish I was that content.
elgfare commented on Librem 14 begins shipping puri.sm/posts/librem-14-b... · Posted by u/nathancahill
It looks nice. But if you ask me to describe what a "linux dream laptop" would have, a 16:10 screen would definitely be up there.
What I'm looking for in a laptop has also evolved, it's no longer (just) raw power but battery life, how noisy the fan is, how hot it gets under load, etc... Not sure how the intel chipset handles all this. I'll wait for more in-depth reviews.
I had such trouble getting Ubuntu to run in 1920x1080 in my VM, which I found absolutely puzzling, but maybe this is because linux people find 16:9 passé.
elgfare commented on A CO2 capture solvent with exceptionally low total costs of capture pubs.rsc.org/en/content/a... · Posted by u/phreeza
That's true, but then it is surely better to cut out the middle-man and just not use fossil fuels for static generation in the first place.
The energy needs which are hard to meet with renewables (aviation, other large-scale transport) are the same places where CCS is non-viable due to the efficiency hit.
The best we can do is decarbonise as quickly as possible, and live with the fallout of our failure to act this far - unless a significant use for captured CO2 is identified, atmospheric capture technology will always struggle with commercial viability.
The best we can do is to do everything we can.
It might also be interesting to start burning biomass and capturing the CO2, which would be net negative.
Maybe it's viable for cement production as well.
elgfare commented on A CO2 capture solvent with exceptionally low total costs of capture pubs.rsc.org/en/content/a... · Posted by u/phreeza
>I feel like CO2 sequestration is second only to nuclear in the amount of unfounded concerns
The problem with CO2 capture specifically (specifically from the atmosphere as opposed to at the source) is that CO2 comprises a very small part of air. This means you have to move huge amounts of air through a capture device to capture a very small amount of carbon. How is that ever going to make sense?
I guess the low hanging fruit is to attach this to a power plant or some other CO2 emitting process.
elgfare commented on 400-year-old Greenland shark ‘longest-living vertebrate’ (2016) bbc.com/news/science-envi... · Posted by u/milanandreew
I first thought they tested live sharks, which would mean they came from above, abducted them, probed ther eyes before releasing them.
I’m writing about this topic here: https://www.satishmummareddy.com/blog/definitive-guide-to-im...
The path that works for me is journaling. I start with naming my emotions and then what actions trigger those emotions and then what is the best/worst case, what can I do right now (options), pick best action item.
This process takes me from understanding my emotions to clear next action.
Unless I have a clear next action my mind can’t let go.
Cool, I saw your site in the new page.
Do you have an example of what a "next action" could be?
But I wonder what "behaving poorly" is. There is legal and illegal stuff.
Companies give jobs to people, not only Google. It is natural, yes, natural, logical, to want to pay less to people. It is also natural that people want to be paid more. A salary is never high enough for an employee. A salary is never low enough for an employer. I do not say this from an ethical point of view, I say how humans act.
Also, with all these regulations, unfortunately, government-company collusion is also there, not only among companies. I wonder if markets were more free than they are if the collusion among companies (given that governments cannot regulate as much) would be as effective. I just wonder, because I am not sure, but I am confident it would be better than what we usually see in the media, which much of it is the consequence of disproportionate power for regulating.
About behaving "poor" each person has her own ethics. Things that look ok to someone can look bad to others. And many look bad to most of us, especially when it is someone else who does it... which is curious. Companies are greedy, when it is not our company. Companies are bad, when it is not our company... our neighbor does not deserve what we deserve, because we are better.
So the only measure by which we should measure companies is by law (even I find some laws absurd, but that is another topic). If some laws and regulations give power to make excuses that favor corruption via favoring friends, then maybe the problem is the capacity to regulate.
I do not think an independent company would work for a government in "unethical" terms (as for many of our mostly accepted definition of unethical, like helping military research or giving surveillance tech to governments) if that government cannot give them something in exchange. We see the pattern? The problem is that exactly. Do not look further.