site banner
Advanced search parameters (with examples): "author:quadnarca", "domain:reddit.com", "over18:true"

Showing 25 of 8031 results for

domain:nunosempere.com

Also useful if your car has bluetooth but it's janky.

10-15k is a fair bit higher than you really need to spend to get something decent imo, if 'every penny saved helps'. Hatchbacks tend to provide much better value than other body types, and imo for a relatively young person look better anyway. Saloons are very middle aged. Automatics command a premium too as you doubtless know, and after a while driving a manual it really becomes second nature.

Still, even if you do want an automatic it's hard to beat a Vauxhall Corsa for value - yes it's a hatchback, but all the 2010s ones look good. There are automatic versions with <40k miles for less than 6 grand on autotrader.

If you really do want a saloon, a Volvo S40/60/80 might be decent value and pretty reliable? There are S40s with <30,000 miles in the £5-6k range, a handful of them automatic.

Yeah the races=subspecies is a racist talking point and professional geneticists and other scholars do not consider it valid, but all it practically means is that we commit to call human populations, no matter how distinct, only that – populations, at most races, not subspecies. It's much the same construct.

Applied to human races, the genetic differences between human racial groupings fail to stand out against the backdrop of human genetic diversity sufficiently, across the whole genome, to make the cut as biological subspecies, at any threshold of "sufficiently" to be useful across the rest of biology (not that biology has a lot of use for subspecies in general -- species are fuzzy enough already)."

No, there's no solid quantitative reason to say that eg. Australian Aborigines and Germans are that less distinct than two recognized subspecies of Canis Lupus and thus can't be called subspecies. It's simply not a matter of quantity.

Any opinions on Paul John whisky? I occasionally look at it on the menu at my favorite whiskey bar or on the shelf with the other less common countries and want to try it, but have never pulled the trigger.

That's limited by geography.

Very few places could get days of storage that way, without NAWAPA style megaprojects.

https://www.canarymedia.com/articles/energy-storage/texas-will-add-more-grid-batteries-than-any-other-state-in-2024

Texas will end 2024 with 12 GW of battery storage- I guess pumped water isn’t a factor due to geography or technical barriers. I’m not sure if this is an expansive definition of battery or if this is literally just a bunch of lithium-ions.

There's an insane startup promising to crash the methane market with solar powered methane synthesis from directly captured CO2.

No.

Sanity will prevail. There's going to be nuclear reactors everywhere.

Extremely high voltage grids for thousand km transmission aren't cheap.

They're an eyesore to some. I love them though.

You need a lot more of them with a fluctuating grid like you're proposing.

I mean, it's possible but just horribly inefficient. Even just hydrogen is really inefficient.

Look up what Terraform is promising. Methane synthesis from water and captured CO2

I feel like it can't be real, that the numbers don't make sense, that making and running the machinery in a cost effective manner is impossible

I've heard multiple energy-industry insiders say freely that most renewables such as wind exist entirely because of the subsidies and aren't even remotely defensible without them.

The Jumpstart 2020 and 2022 sets are great for beginners. Each booster pack has cards from a single color and theme, and you can shuffle 2 packs together to make something that plays out like strong limited or draft decks. You can get a booster box of 24 packs for ~$100 and treat it like a cube. Highly recommend.

Card Kingdom sometimes puts out ‘Battle decks’, which are a cheap way to get playable 60 card decks that feel strong enough. Nothing too crazy, but good for kitchen table games.

Draft or limited are super fun but very very challenging and not for beginners.

Commander can actually be fun but it very much depends on the play group. If all 4 players are chill and playing decks of similar power then the format can be fun, but it’s often pretty complex and politics plays a big role. It’s definitely the most popular format and the easiest to find IRL games for, and it isn’t too hard to build a budget deck for $50-100 that plays perfectly well in low power pods. All that said, the format allows huge variation, and the experience of playing against a high-powered deck with a budget deck can be torture. If your kid wants to play with others this is eventually where you’ll probably end up but I wouldn't rush there.

You'll need enormous amounts of transmission capacity to take solar electricity from California over the mountains to the East Coast or down from Northern Canada.

Surely something like Texas would make more sense than California here? There's a lot of empty land in the South.

Never heard of her. But I'm the last person you should ask for advice when it comes to liquor, I'd drink pure ethanol if someone gussied it up with soda and a dash of lime.

BP, well, it just had connotations personal to me. I've had MUCH more expensive liquor, and tbh I don't care to refine my palate enough to distinguish better. It's an expensive hobby.

Could you share some details? From where I sit it's hard to estimate the land requirements for electrochemical storage because there is so little market for multi-day systems. In particular, long term storage should depend on available volume, not area.

There's one doing the same thing for nuclear reactors too (Valar iirc)

Usually the respondents to his posts pull out a sentence or two and run with it

I don't think this is a bad thing. I think this is a good way of interacting with long posts (so people are able to respond to mega essays without feeling obligated to respond with a mega essay of their own) and it can lead to a lot of productive and interesting discussion. Like, on Kulak's recent post not many of the replies directly addressed Kulak's actual thesis, they just used it as a discussion prompt for sharing whatever thoughts they had on India. I think threads like that are healthy for the forum.

That being said, this particular post did a poor job of explaining to me why I should be interested in FIRST or hyperdunbarism (although admittedly this topic is far outside of my normal wheelhouse to begin with).

Commander's great, I certainly recommend it. (Admittedly, it's almost all I have experience with.)

I like basically all the distinctive features: the multiplayer aspect means it's more of a social experience, that games self-balance (as people will selectively address the most worrisome threats), and increases the threat assessment and political manouvering needed, which I enjoy. It's slower (at least, at casual levels), which means more big splashy plays will occur. You get a creature to build a deck around, which allows for a greater diversity of themes, maybe? It's singleton, so you get more variance and get to run across more weird cards than whatever the staples might be.

I imagine that it could be worse if you're picking up games with strangers instead of a circle of friends, so I don't know if that's where the complaints are coming from? Or maybe people worrying about power level? But power level problems can be managed by having more interaction, players, and just talking to the player to get a more fun time.

Did people have specific complaints about why it's bad?

Also, I've found lifetap the best life app.

What is a hyperdunbarist? Googling the term literally shows only this comment.

Interesting, I wonder if there are emissions besides nox and CO2. Probably a lot of nasty stuff in that trash, but sufficient combustion should break it down.

I can’t tell if you’re trying to be coy or if you think your point should be obvious.

Speak plainly, please.

I'm thinking about joining the Flat Earth movement. Not because I believe in it. It just seems so fun!

This is the video that hooked me: https://youtube.com/watch?v=68YuU2tStoU?si=v2pOJnJQVS7I6HvT

It seems like a nice tight little group, wirking together worldwide. Theyre doing homemade science experiments, but not like real science which is so boring. Its more like medieval science- "let's launch a big steam rocket and see what happens!" Any conflicting evidence can be explained away by grand conspiracy theories. It's fun to think about wacky theories of how this flat earth could actually work. And it's nice to do hands-on science yourself, instead of relying on authorities: "look up some NASA footage" isn't really doing science.

If they actually succeeded, think what an Earthshaking result that would be! But in the mean time they're having a grand time doing fake science, going to conventions, and even their own dating app. My sense is that most of them don't even really believe in it, its just a hobby group like the SCA.

Ze Germans are terrified of nuclear energy and nuclear waste. I don't think they are going to build another reactor ever.

Another aspect is how using technology to automate music production seems to have been more accepted than for illustrations pre-AI, i.e. sampling and stuff like that.

Based on my limited interactions with musicians, they seem to have less of a fetish for authenticity than visual artists do.

Professional commercial art has always been no-rules-anything-goes of course. Even before AI you had photobashing, various digital effects, tracing over 3D models, etc. But there was always a vocal subset of artists (usually on the more hobbyist/indie side) who felt that these methods were "cheating" in a way, and if you couldn't draw something with good ol' pen and paper then it wasn't "real skill". My impression is that this sort of sentiment is largely absent even in indie musicians - they view digital mixing and post-processing as simply a normal part of the process, they never think twice about it.

I think in some sense music is inherently more reliant on technology than visual art is - if you want to create any sort of durable recording of a song, something that can persist even in the absence of the original composer and performer, then you need to rely on technology that's only been around since 1877, whereas people were inscribing paintings onto stone many thousands of years ago. Musicians have just been living with technology longer, they were using electric guitars when most professional illustrators didn't need anything more high tech than ink and oil paints. So I think that's part of the reason why they have a friendlier disposition towards technology in general.