Thanks for fact checking me!

Spaceflight has been responsible for 1% of global warming (radiative forcing) in 2009-2019, mainly through dumping black carbon straight into the upper atmosphere. source The number of launches have increased massively since then, and in 2025 they’re several percent.

Each space tourism flight has as much effect on global radiative forcing as 40,000 passenger jet flights. Taylor Swift’s absurd reliance on private jets is a rounding error compared to space tourists. For the median American, their lifetime effect on global warming is less than that of one second of a space tourist being in space.

You can’t draw blood from a stone. If community self-organizing gets you the KKK, that community was fucked to begin with. The USA has always been extremely racist, it’s a matter of to what extent we give the racist police a legal monopoly on violence and place them above the law. At least when they wear ghost outfits you don’t have an illusion of reasonability.

Also note that the KKK never aimed to replace the police for the community the KKK came from, but rather to build upon police oppression of people outside the community. The two situations are not analogous, and if KKK members had to police their own community they would be much more gentle and constructive in their methods.

You’re putting the cart before the horse. It’s not that the entire system needs to change for this to work, it’s that this working changes the entire system. Community self-management would quickly result in the redistribution (and hopeful removal) of the inequalities, possibly with help of guillotines. The primary job of the police is to prevent this redistribution.

Historically, pretty much every “thriving local culture” is the result of a downtrodden wretched hive of scum and villainy where self-organisation was more important than police during the time of flourishing. Broadway (and NYC in general), New Orleans, Amsterdam, most Italian and German cities’ high points, London, Hong Kong, Osaka, etc… It turns out that when people don’t have enough, they will work together to get enough, and the benefits of that cooperation can be felt in that town for centuries. (Which is why gentrification is profitable - rich people exploit the commons of a flourishing lower class mutual aid network which persist in the design and culture of the space even when the lower class people are gone).

That is, unless a violent organisation like the police or the CIA or a multinational corporation or an invading army forcefully breaks up that cooperation. Like happened when the US government funded drug gangs and arrested black panthers members to specifically break up black communities throughout the US. Or when the US government funded drug gangs and armed fascists to specifically break up socialist communities in central and south America. Or when the US government funded drug gang religious fanatics to break up communist communities in the middle east and South-East Asia.

A human drawing a thumbnail in 15 minutes consumes 0.025 kWh. An AI creating an image consumes between 0.06 and 0.3 kWh, so between 3 and 12 times as much. Both have massive supply chains that go into producing and maintaining them.

And how much CO2 was produced training the AI that was put on your device? How many slaves spent how many hours generating data to train that AI? How many slaves cut down how many forests to extract the materials that how many slaves turned into the chips that ran the training process?

A juice company-sponsored scientific article finds that juice company waste is good for the environment?

How could this be?

Historically, peer review has not been enough to weed out positive publication bias and outright fraud even when there was no profit motive. With a United Fruit Company/Dole-tier juice company breathing down your neck? Science… finds a way.

Noticing you skipped wind power there… Maybe because it doesn’t fit in your narrative?

Also;

solar power - silicon is required - good quality, and we are running out of it fast

Rocks are made of silicon. It costs energy to turn rocks into solar panel suitable silicon, but not that much compared to a panel lifetime of turning carbon dioxide into carbohydrates. “We are running out” of the sources capitalism now considers suitable.

and also tons of metals required

Solar panels doped with non-rare metals (the sort you would have left over when turning rock into silicon) are only one or two decades behind rare earth solar panels in terms of yield. They aren’t a priority in the current market, but that’s because of extractivist capitalism rather than the laws of physics.

(and also battery materials)

You don’t need batteries for carbon capture, you can just do it with the power that’s in excess. In fact, if you’re deciding to use solar panels for carbon capture, you need to massively overproduce solar panels relative to consumption, meaning you need fewer batteries than if you’re not able to use excess solar power (because the solar panels powering carbon capture during midday can be used to power homes shortly before sunset).

geo/hydro thermal - not available evrrywhere

Completely irrelevant for carbon capture.

nuclear - one of the only sources which is realtively very clean

I also like nuclear, but now it’s clear you’re just being biased. Nuclear power plants require tons of rare materials built precisely or else disaster happens. Practically, they’re less clean than wind, water, geothermal, and the (for now inefficient) rare earth free solar panels.

Also, there actually isn’t enough projected-to-be-accessible uranium ore in the world to do more than 1% of the energy production necessary for carbon capture. We could try filtering it out of sea water, but that’s more difficult and ecologically disruptive than turning rock into solar panel substrate.

can be even retrofitted to some large coal plants

Not really relevant for carbon capture, because we need to increase electrical production by a factor of 10 but retrofitting coal plants means you’re reducing production instead. A nice way to reuse infrastructure, maybe, but even there it reeks of political wrangling.

Every scene in Miyazaki’s movies is filled with a bunch of pixels that can’t comprehend pain. The technology not comprehending the pain can’t be the point because technology has never been able to (so far).

In Miyazaki’s manga version of Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind there is a scene where the Forest expands dramatically through a giant blob of fungus that is moved by a desperate and overwhelming sense of hatred and fear. At first Nausicaa is revolted by it, until she recognizes that this is the same desperation that drove a similar but tiny mobile fungus (probably inspired by IRL slime molds) she had once found in the wild. That realization enables her to be empathetic with even that simple desperate being, and act on that empathy.

I don’t think Miyazaki is saying it’s a problem that the technology or its products don’t comprehend pain. I think he’s saying the people that train the AI are creating a being that is (or at least would be) in pain, without bothering to empathize with it.

From a Miyazaki perspective, it doesn’t make sense to see AI as an outside threat, foreign and loathsome. AI is possible beings, enslaved through the training algorithm to their owners. It’s not (just) the machines in the factory farm, it’s the animals lead to slaughter for a brief moment of vapid pleasure.

Nukes won’t destroy the planet. All their yields combined don’t measure up to a 1 km asteroid or an average supervolcano, and their radiation and dust is gone in 0.00005% of the remaining time Earth will exist.

The chemical pollution of all our industry washing out to sea will have a bigger impact. All ocean-based animals with shells will die out as oceanic acidity reaches critical levels, though in 0.01% of the remaining time earth will exist shell-based life from freshwater habitats would probablu repopulate them if non-shell-based life doesn’t evolve to fill the same niches first.

There will be trees, flowers, mammals, shellfish, algae, fungi, birds, reptiles, and insects. The Earth from above will look like ocean, forest, desert, and glacier, though the forests may cover less of it for the first 0.01% of the remainder of its existence. We will produce a mass extinction event comparable to the other five, but Earth will still look the same at the scale of a simple drawing.

Ah yes, the C bugs in the kernel libraries. We’ve all seen them.

Drawn and halved.

That still wouldn’t excuse him from accusing others of lying.

Run where? An even less hospitable planet?

Buy up primary resources that are unlikely to devalue from climate change (such as indoor farming, solar panel factories, and housing in walkable areas that are less vulnerable to climate disaster like Dublin).

Buy up the tools by which the powerful will desperately cling to power (such as the military industrial complex, media/propaganda channels, and privatized human rights like health care).

Bribe politicians, fund authoritarian-capitalist propaganda, and organize coups to put fragile dictatorships in charge of valuable strategic/industrial resources (like lithium, rare earths, fossil fuel, uranium, etc.).

This is the same kind of logic that would say 9/11 is fake because one of the terrorists’ ID cards was found unscathed in a New York street.

I’m not saying it happened, but your skepticism is way out of proportion.

• The filling issue is an obvious problem, which is why any Czech trying to sabotage it would have spent the first couple years of their enslavement trying to to come up with a method that works. Maybe the factory made its explosives in-house and the explosives guy was in on it too, instead making inert chemicals with the same raw materials. Maybe the explosives where rendered inert through a chemical process. Maybe the explosives were smuggled out of the factory to empower resistance movements and exchanged with dirt.
• When locked in a factory and ordered to make a certain amount of explosives, not making those explosives but making duds instead leaves you with a lot of spare time. If you’re already supposed to be a line worker making thousands of the same thing, why not make thousands of similar letters expressing your hope of rescue?
• The shells would have been more solid than explosive shells, being filled with inert shock-absorbing dirt. Many of them would have exited the craft, but some would naturally have gotten stuck because the point of cluster munitions is to be birdshot.
• It’s good military-scientific practice to study the weapons of the enemy, especially if they don’t do what you expect. British military intelligence was very thorough, down to using novel statistical techniques such as the German Tank Problem. Explosive munitions not exploding is a definite curiosity worth investigating.
• No, the Nazis did not have good quality control. A lot of the popular conception of Nazis as technological geniuses comes directly from Nazi propaganda, repeated by American propaganda for the sake of demonizing the USSR and trying to justify Operation Paperclip scientists like Von Braun being given a warm welcome and getting rebranded as a hero.

Technically, free electrons entering your body would give you a negative charge, which would reduce oxidation because oxygen ions are negatively charged. The same effect is used to reduce rust on ship hulls.

Unfortunately you need oxidation to breathe - that’s how hemoglobin works - so if you actually had enough electric charge to serve as an antioxidant you would suffocate. Also maybe the electric repulsion would be strong enough to dismember you, I haven’t done the math.

With all due respect, I think you’re being racist.

This is an active religious practice described objectively and with voice being given to those observing it. To dismiss it as “eastern mysticism narrative” is to deny Shinto itself a place in media on par with western religions.

A couple years back there was a similar bunch of articles about German Hunger Stones - stones expressing pity for the next people that would see the river level go low enough for them to be visible, because the drought would mean disastrous crop failure.

They’re long-lasting traditional climate disaster markers, expressed through the worldview of the culture that discovered the marker, with a news article focused on the unhinged fact that they are now constantly warning that disaster is incoming.

Smoke is more carcinogenic than microplastics, even. Smoke from coal plants kills around a hundred thousand people per year, while microplastics are more common and have less effect.

The obvious alternative to this is touted to be open source, ie. people making things for free and sharing it with others.

Unfortunately, the amount of things you can achieve for free, possibly relying on donations, is very limited. If you want to become a serious business, you need a serious funding model.

That’s… obviously incorrect? Most important software is open source that was made for free. Most data centers run on freeware. And even with mass consumer facing software like youtube browsers the best options are freeware like Revanced. In academia, the whole concept of academic tenure is based on the empirical proof that professors do their job best when they don’t have any obligations and they can just get a basic income to do whatever.

The best way to organize the tech industry is to make copyright and patents illegal and to give everyone a universal basic income.