• 0 Posts
  • 11 Comments
Joined 2Y ago
cake
Cake day: Jun 18, 2023

help-circle
rss

Probably because trains are limited in both weight and volume compared to ships and also less efficient. If you have this short route and know it’ll need this amount of cargo shipped it likely makes sense.

This single ship can carry more containers than any train could be expected to pull, likely by at least one order of magnitude.

All in all I’d guess the advantages are roughly:

  • Reduced staff
  • reduced energy use (land based shipping is less efficient almost by default)
  • no need for infrastructure except ports (if you assume there is no train line or this shipping would move existing lines over capacity building this ship is likely cheaper or at least in line with 300km of rail)
  • simpler logistics (loading / unloading)

Disadvantages:

  • Speed (a train would likely move at 3-5x the speed)

I would also not expect the risk for catastrophic fires to be all that high. This ship has the batteries be containers. So once you’ve designed a container that is a large battery, you’ve already spent so much that a proper BMS including proper battery fire suppression as well as proper breakers/contractors are things you’ve built into it without even thinking about cost. The separation provided by building containers as the battery is the next line of defence if one container fails spectacularly, it also allows the batteries to be maintained on land, much cheaper than if they were part of the ship.


Brother have you heard of both young people, and the concept of ‘having a future’, death might be inevitable, it’s still better to think about and implement things to quell the suffering, as well as to continue living with hope than to revel in the fact that we’re all dying.

Hope isn’t at the bottom of the box of Pandora without reason, it’s both, condemning us to strive and suffer, and the only way to make anything of it.


I listened to the entire and it struck a chord with me, it might be because I’m similarly petite bourgeois as the authors or something. But if you couldn’t get through it I might suggest softly that you read chapter 4 first (or only).

To me the order the book has it in makes sense, but it might be the wrong one for you. It explains the What for 3/4 and then carefully answers the Why with a short story in the last 1/4. It is essentially a manifesto with a reason to believe in it as the last part.

For me the reason it worked is because the walk through philosophy and history sufficiently grounded the authors claims toward the necessity of economic planning and rewilding and in combination with my prior beliefs made the utopia real.

The problem that unfortunately remains with this book is how we get there, but to me it seems reasonable to leave that part out for this book, not just because of the violence and messiness, but also because it seems like the much harder part to coherently write as well.

Edit: I’ve played one round of the game and it’s fun, perhaps a bit easy after knowing the content of the book.


I also read today that there’s a game developer conference organised by the same association around the time here too, so that likely helps a lot. If your team is already there to learn they might as well present stuff and vice versa.


I think one of the main draws of Gamescom has always been the community or interactivity, also Köln is in the blue banana of Europe so there’s probably almost 100milion people within a 5 hour drive. I don’t really know why E3 is failing but I can roughly tell you why Gamescom isn’t, for one while there are occasional issues Orga is good generally, half of the German media lives a stones throw away from the fairgrounds, a lot of entertainment is provided besides the fair itself (concerts and other things throughout the city), it’s organised by the German games industry association so the cashflow required could be more easily acquired, it also likely means more stability, the city and potentially the entire country want the event to succeed which likely helps. Most of this is just educated guesswork though so take it with a little scepticism.


I think the fundamental issue left is just that I don’t accept one standard to ever be good enough for all direct message communication, I also hope EU legislation will make the situation better. But I also believe we should know our tech and use it because we have a good reason to.

In the end of the day making good open standards should probably be easier than it is. More generally I think closed tech (IP) shouldn’t exist, but neither good standards nor open tech exists in the real world unfortunately.

So as a consequence I just want people to make informed decisions to exploit what already exists in accordance with their own demands, whether I get them there by bullying or teaching or discussing is mostly just semantics to me. And if a group or person uses what seems from my perspective to be a bad tool, it is in my view a disservice to myself and them not to at least try a little to get them to use it.

Ty for the conversation as well, I had a feeling that you were actually trying to understand what I wanted to get across so I just sorta kept talking…

Generally I often notice people here are closer to me in position which makes for more interesting discussion, but it can also take quite some time to get to the actual disagreements because the disagreement are so slight.


I’m not sure how you come to this staggering conclusion, an honest attempt at teaching is completely impossible without empathy, but yes it sometimes involves conflict, the important thing is to be patient, and invest what you can give into people you actually care about. I would hope that includes your parents, but I understand it might not.


Well if someone is stupid and my bullying gets them a bit out of their stupidity I don’t think it’s too bad. Also this is largely not a problem where I live, my mom asked if we could use signal because she disliked WhatsApp because of privacy, and I just installed signal, my dad still uses WhatsApp, my friends and I use telegram and discord. I’ve actually never had to do any real bullying because in the real world everyone understands the issue enough for us to get somewhere sensible.

It’s neither rude nor pointless to explain software to users who are less adept with software, sometimes it won’t work but, it also sometimes does just work, especially with chat apps, it’s literally just replacing an icon, because on the UI side they are very similar. And I hate to tell you this but not providing tech support if you are good at it also just doesn’t help, it just makes us collectively stupider. Sure don’t burn yourself out on users who can get nothing right, but like teach your parents colleagues and friends some fundamentals that you seem to understand, if only because it makes your life easier.


Yes I can’t do shit about communication systems not being standardized to the degree I’d like and with the features I’d want.

So what I try to do is try to bully people until they use an app that everyone can be relatively happy with, SMS is essentially the only one I don’t accept because it’s 20 years old and doesn’t behave sensibly for the modern area.

I can understand that standards help interoperability but realize that for SMS, obviously that has failed because apple has rejected RCS for now and developed a default experience that is better. I don’t control any of that shit. I can just tell people to install chat apps if they want to talk to me. And I can bully them if they don’t.

The network is a network of communicating software so the standard can be installed by default or after the fact, it doesn’t make a difference if everyone would just install software. Being angry at apple or WhatsApp or whatever for not writing a messenger you like is sorta stupid, they are companies they’ll never do what you want, being a angry at users that refuse to use options freely available to them can at least improve the situation for me because they can install what I, or they want to use.


The thing is it’s a specific standard that just hasn’t kept up, you shouldn’t be married to any software, and you should be able to decide yourself what you use, I can’t change what big tech does with their software, but I can call people stupid for not using the ability of their computers to run custom software.

I despise the trend of people not realizing what they legitimately can do with their hardware, because they were just too scared to install software. I so often stumble upon people who can’t accomplish simple tasks because they are terrified of installing software, and this messaging thing is definitely one of these issues.

Essentially if you are given a library of software, and you have a problem that is solved by installing software, why would you not install software, it’s mostly free, and requires only the briefest thought about what you want and where you can find it.


Because it provides a better experience, weather it’s WhatsApp telegram, Signal threema or even discord or teams, they all provide a significant feature advantage over SMS. This starts with properly handling multimedia, not giving your number up to everyone else, proper groups, your messages living in the cloud for proper multi device functionality, your messages living unencrypted only on your device… There is plenty of real advantages with their associated side effects.

SMS as a standard is simply too old for modern expectations, this doesn’t make modern expectations stupid just because the standard is not being kept up to date. I have not written a single SMS since 2013 or so, and my life is better for it. Also there is definitely open third party chat apps that provide an open standard that can just be installed as one of a few apps, the problem here is that potentially no one is using them.

The main advantage of a computer in your pocket against earlier phones is that you can fundamentally install any software you want, not just what the device manufacturer deems acceptable, so why would anyone not take advantage of this for messaging is beyond me.