Readit News logoReadit News
mrDmrTmrJ commented on The West is bored to death   newstatesman.com/ideas/20... · Posted by u/CharlesW
mrDmrTmrJ · 2 days ago
What an insane article. It's almost like he hasn't read Eric Hoffer.

Mass movements arise when populations, that had had large increases in living standards, find their living standards are no longer rising. Hoffer cites something like 30% of the country is now 'middle class' and then depressions etc. set in.

Take the quote, "A society so thoroughly steeped in the work ethic and committed to the pursuit of individual achievement cannot but fail to prepare its members for any other kinds of lives."

The reality is the opposite. When work doesn't pay (i.e. when hard work can't lead to buying a condo/house and starting a family) the original premise of "work hard to get ahead" breaks. And here we are.

Any civilization where two 30 year old elementry school teachers can't buy a 1,200 sq-ft 3bdr/2bath condo for less than 30% of their income - is morally bankrupt. Aka 99% of the bay area, or DC, NYC. So people tern to idleness without the ability for work to result in personal progress.

The solutions are simple: make it easy to build housing. If you're bored, deadlift. Spend time outside. And, most of all, change our national household economics to allow ownership and family formation.

mrDmrTmrJ commented on Electricity prices are climbing more than twice as fast as inflation   npr.org/2025/08/16/nx-s1-... · Posted by u/geox
thelastgallon · 9 days ago
I think the administration's energy density should be extended for all things. Lets take transportation: Can't use federal lands, waterways, airspace or highways unless the airplanes, trains, ships, trucks and cars are powered by the highest energy density (nuclear).

Also, anything that uses airwaves: So, nuclear powered phones, watches, airtags.

This would be the biggest breakthrough for humanity. We have nuclear powered submarines but miniaturization of nuclear stalled since then.

mrDmrTmrJ · 9 days ago
We control nuclear proliferation by making enriched uranium (U235) very, very hard to acquire.

While I'd love to see more nuclear reactors in our society. The "nuclear everything" argument breaks a core tenant of US national security policy, making U235 very hard to get.

mrDmrTmrJ commented on IQ tests results for AI   trackingai.org/home... · Posted by u/stared
ok_computer · 9 days ago
I think that has more to do with our willingness or ability to value labor in a highly abstracted overseas and automated economy. In addition, there has been a complete disconnect between $1USD purchasing power and generation ability based on capital scale. I don't know what financial crisis or tax policy or free trade agreement or visa program that stems from.

I think that in the knowledge worker class, people tend to confuse their learned skills and inherited starting point to their innate abilities. Illusory superiority is best mocked in prairie home companion's Lake Woebegone, where "all the women are strong, all the men are good-looking, and the children are all above average" [0].

Give kids a stable home environment with loving supportive parents, three square meals a day, 9+ hours of sleep and opportunity to pursue their creative or sports interests and you'll have a class of highly functioning humans of different abilities.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Wobegon#The%20Lake%20Wobe...

It does feel like a squeeze just functioning in the current job, housing, and grocery market though. I cannot imagine the stress of being a sole provider. My point is to not conflate genetic superiority to the multitude of factors that go in to making a talented skillful worker, where I think nurture cannot be discounted.

mrDmrTmrJ · 9 days ago
"It does feel like a squeeze just functioning in the current - housing, and grocery market though"

If housing were far cheaper and traded just at the cost of new construction. ($250/sq-ft for new build 6 story, $400/sq-ft for 30 story mass timber, $600/sq-ft steel and concrete). We'd see that people can easily live in the current job market!

The fundamental problem in our economy is the artificial scarcity of housing (through local regulation) in the cities and towns where the economy is booming.

mrDmrTmrJ commented on US vs. Google amicus curiae brief of Y Combinator in support of plaintiffs [pdf]   storage.courtlistener.com... · Posted by u/dave1629
dangrossman · 4 months ago
Almost all the things in this list were acquired from someone else that built them, rebranded, and then given away for free, taking much of the money out of the market that allowed that product to be built. Without Google giving away the one winner they chose to acquire, you'd have options again.

I built my free web stats service in 2004 because I couldn't afford an Urchin license. Google bought Urchin Live and rebranded it as Google Analytics, and gave it away for free. My service barely pays for itself 20+ years later, but I'm still here and would have an offering for that market on day one that Google Analytics shut down. So would dozens of others.

mrDmrTmrJ · 4 months ago
Google maps Gmail Chrome Waymo

Were all built within google. For most people (who do not sell software on the internet) we get a great trade from the current state of things!

mrDmrTmrJ commented on Concrete spheres for energy storage; California plans a 9-meter diameter sphere   farmingdale-observer.com/... · Posted by u/joe_the_user
cosmicgadget · 4 months ago
20-year maintenance intervals for something pumping seawater? Impressive. Way better than a chemical battery.
mrDmrTmrJ · 4 months ago
I don't think you're pumping sea water - I think you're pumping air.
mrDmrTmrJ commented on Concrete spheres for energy storage; California plans a 9-meter diameter sphere   farmingdale-observer.com/... · Posted by u/joe_the_user
mrDmrTmrJ · 4 months ago
Is there any reason to need a concrete sphere? Couldn't a robust, durable flexible bag do the trick?

My hydroflask, when compressed, will push water out :)

mrDmrTmrJ commented on NYC home prices rise 10% in early 2025   qns.com/2025/04/home-pric... · Posted by u/geox
filoleg · 4 months ago
That link you shared is counting the number of units build per 1k existing units.

Given how dense and populated NYC is (aka how many existing units there are), this metric isn't as meaningful. I believe the grandparent comment was talking about the raw number of units.

Actually, go to the bottom of the page you shared and look at the section titled "Full results", then sort by "Total new housing units authorized". Sadly, you will need to do some quick manual work to parse the results, because it sorts numbers as strings rather than as actual numbers. But you can clearly see from there that NYC is #1 in terms of raw numbers of new housing units. And that's data from 2021, and afaik NYC only increased those numbers significantly in the past 4 years.

mrDmrTmrJ · 4 months ago
"# of new homes / # of people"

Is the only way to access if new home construction will affect prices. NYC is chronically underbidding.

mrDmrTmrJ commented on Fossil fuels fall below 50% of US electricity for the first month on record   ember-energy.org/latest-u... · Posted by u/xnx
Paradigma11 · 4 months ago
But how much more expensive would it make the power for the last 15% of global power generation?

What is the total cost for both scenarios?

mrDmrTmrJ · 4 months ago
In the US Nuclear gives about 19% of total generation and hydro another 6%. So you don't have to go beyond 75% renewables to start with.

Long term, we need a combination of the following technologies to get to 100% carbon free electricity with 80% renewables: 1. Long distance transmission lines. 2. Some type of "clean, firm, dispatchable" power. Examples include: Nuclear fission, fusion power, deep geothermal, and space based solar power.

We can certainly use the cost savings from getting to 80% renewables to finance figuring out how to scaling production of one (or more) of the later technologies to lower cost. Simply reducing the regulatory burden on Nuclear Fusion can accomplish that if a society chooses this path.

Lot of work to do. And many economic powers would loose out from this transition (e.g. Exxon or Russia) but totally feasible to accomplish.

If you want to do a deep dive into cost scenarios look at the work of Christopher Clack or Jesse Jenkins.

Example: https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate2921

mrDmrTmrJ commented on First ice-free day in the Arctic Ocean could come before 2030   gu.se/en/news/risk-of-a-d... · Posted by u/geox
vouaobrasil · 9 months ago
It's not surprising but very sad, how we have traded the stability of the biosphere for developing way more technology than is necessary to make us comfortable. Probably about 1% of all of what we produce would be necessary to get us to the same level of comfort. The other 99% is just technology for the sake of consuming technology. It's a shame that en masse we have no global central means to collectively decide to be more sustainable. Not surprising given that all changes must be made within the ulta-efficient system of global capitalism whose value placed on nature is effectively zero.
mrDmrTmrJ · 9 months ago
I can't give you a different economic system than global capitalism. But we know exactly what it will take to dramatically reduce emissions.

Globally, people want electricity, power, cars, hot water ect. When we can provide those goods and services, in a carbon free way at a lower cost than a carbon intensive way - everyone globally will adopt the low carbon technology.

There's great reason for hope. In 1975 solar cells cost $115.3 / watt. Today in China they're available for $0.09 / watt or a price drop of 99.9%. There is no magic, we simply need the low carbon technology to be cheaper.

Now ecosystem collapse and habitat preservation? That's not as simple, but I ask that you lobby your local representatives to build dense housing near parks and public transit. Let's leave nature to the animals and build beautiful cities

mrDmrTmrJ commented on As much as you ever wanted to know about 155M artillery shell production   roblh.substack.com/p/as-m... · Posted by u/jseliger
Tuna-Fish · 2 years ago
One of the less intuitive results found in RAND wargaming is that no ship needs more than 4 anti-ship missiles when fighting against a foe that's roughly matched in quality. Either you have sufficient advantage that by the time you've spent 4 everything on the other side is sunk, or the enemy has sufficient advantage that you don't get to spend 4 before being sunk. The Navy took a look at these results, and doubled it to set the allocation of missiles per ship to 8.

Similarly, ships carry more defensive missiles than they can expect to be able to fire. No defensive system anyone uses has a 100% effectiveness; Burkes have sufficient stock of ESSM and Standard that you can expect there to be leakage and the ship to be taken out before they run out.

But all this assumes a fairly mirrored matchup, with both sides using weapons of similar quality. If one side uses a lot of cheap, attritable munitions, it might not work out the same.

mrDmrTmrJ · 2 years ago
Can you link to a .pdf of the report?

u/mrDmrTmrJ

KarmaCake day695January 7, 2014View Original