Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)F
Posts
4
Comments
162
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • They didn't do it for that purpose, I am saying they used the opportunity of cars becoming more digital to make them less repairable outside of "certified dealers"

  • Nice! I didn't find anything. I consider buying it even overpriced, it's mainly about avoiding buying another one just because if this

  • As far as I know, home quality 3d printing is never food safe?

  • I have a super common type (in EU) of Philips water kettle. It's a reliable machine. Unfortunately the little filter "screen" for the pouring sprout is starting to break now, after many many years of use. I can't find a replacement. It's a super easy to manufacture part, must be a very common "breaking thing" on this widespread device... Nope.

    Philips HD4646 if anyone knows a source 🙈

  • Car manufacturers screwed over consumers the last 10-15 years big time! Cars used to be the big thing many could fix a lot on by themselves and were proud to do so. Then they basically just said incrementally to the DIY'ers "it's all computers now, not your cup of tea", purposely made cars less and less self repairable and got away with it! It's infuriating.

  • The EU ones will become a lot more valuable on second hand markets...

  • Poop decomposes and becomes greenhouse gas. Fancy new filtration plants capture some of that gas and produce electricity with it. Most is not captured.

    Fertilizer mainly helps 1year crops grow, aka food. Not forests that will bind carbon for hundreds or thousands of years. The typical large scale agricultural industrial operations cause more release of carbon than they bind it.

    A very large part of the produced fertilizer is used to, often on land where there used to be carbon binding forests, grow soy, corn etc to feed enormous amounts of livestock. Which we then eat. It is a manyfold less efficient way for humans to consume animal protein rather than plant proteins. Producing and using lots of artificial fertilizer is for sure not a positive effect on global climate change.

  • it's still putting energy into pumping it up. And what happens with the fertilizer, or plastic, or whachamacallit? It gets consumed.

    The fertilizer best case becomes plant, gets eaten, pooped out yada yada eventually it becomes the greenhouse gasses. Worst case it's spilled into the environment as overfertilizing runoff, where it offsets soil balance which helps to release... greenhouse gasses.

    The plastic: after use: what happens with it? It gets burned best case, which will release greenhouse gasses. Or it end up in the ocean, not greenhouse i guess, but also not that fun.

    When we extract fossil carbon from deep down to the surface, there is a very high chance it will become greenhouse gas. Some of it becomes greenhouse gas almost immediately, some of it only after a few decades, but it's still offsetting the balance of the globe and adding to climate change.

    Fossil fuels are not evil by themselves (how can anything without consciousness be evil?), but many other uses than burning it to go vroom vroom also pose problems to global environmental systems, many uses will also end into processes that will also have negative influence on greenhouse gas situation. Plastic is a miracle material with many very good uses, but the way it is still mostly used now (use once, throw out, burn) is still adding greenhouse gasses.

  • most people at this point chosing fuel over electric, the main motivation is best case "habit" or worst case political statement, it has very little to do with money or the technical limitations of the vehicles anymore. They just don't like change, they're scared of it. They have driven a fuel car all their lives and they will continue their habits as long as they are allowed to. The range on EV's is crazy now. For christ's sake, an electric bicycle has a reach of 100km! How far out away from what they need do the average 90% of people live... less than a few kilometers.

    It's really not that hard to put a price on societal collapse and the end of humanity: the money it costs to try to mitigate that is infinite and every decision every person makes right now should be made in that light of exponentially higher costs later if bad choices which now seem slightly less expensive are made now...

  • Neither were the heatwaves supposed to be so severe here right now already. Climate predictions were low side estimates, it's happening faster and consequences of major tipping point influences (ice free arctic) are extremely hard to predict.

  • While I was in full survival mode, I saw plenty of people in the midday 40°C heat running their daily half marathon 🤦‍♂️

  • Sure.

  • I just half guerilla planted some shrubs in front of a nearby garage box wall that i don't own on land that I don't own. Take That, urban heat island!!!

  • I do. But in the next heatwave the local lake water might reach 38°C or water became so scarce from the drought...: now what?

  • Can always put on more clothes, but can't undress more than naked...

  • Until some elected twat does it innit

  • The contribution from bicycle tires is peanuts by comparison. The weight of the vehicle is a fraction, the forces starting and braking are a fraction. It's not zero, but compared to that from a 2000kg EV: that from a +-28kg EV bicycle or <15kg non-electric bicycle is pretty dang close to zero, especially when adding to the equation a regular speed of 50-120kmh <> 10-25kmh...

  • Except you won't rake in billions. It's Brexit all over again: whatever you gain with putting tariffs on shipping and shouting how powerful and important and independent you are, you'll lose manyfold in general trade benefits... Everyone loses, and EU freight will find another way, rail to Genova and sail through Gibraltar or Suez, for example.

  • It's not the same.

    Datacenters are rather few single points of massive consumption. Charging hundred million cars requires millions of points of high consumption.

    The grid to charge an enormous fleet of EV really is more difficult and expensive to build than supplying a few dozen data centres. On top the EVs need charging in urban environment, while data centres are located in industrial environment. It is easier to lay a few massive cables from a nuclear power plant to a datacenter, than to lay millions of kilometres of mediumthick cables to every neighborhood in a country.

    I'm not justifying the enormous energy usage of data centres, but this is a bit like comparing apples with oranges.

  • Ask Lemmy @lemmy.world

    Best HTPC distro?

  • Selfhosted @lemmy.world

    Splitting comic books into panel

  • Ask Lemmy @lemmy.world

    Why do you dump your trash in the streets?

  • Selfhosted @lemmy.world

    saving albums from Android newpipe to Jellyfin server