

Stable bindings doesn’t mean open source, so I don’t see how that tells you it’s still on the table
Stable bindings doesn’t mean open source, so I don’t see how that tells you it’s still on the table
It doesn’t make sense for an internal library for an open source application, it that case it’s not open source.
To be fair? Nowhere are they even suggesting they would release the SDK as FOSS, but they do say their password manager is open source. It seems like they just want a FOSS shell so they can claim it’s open source for but keep their business logic closed source.
It says the build error is a bug, not the inclusion of proprietary code.
I think that can be explained, but tell me how someone can be in favor of the death penalty but be against assisted suicide.
We have this:
and this:
Yes, just solar. Hydro is bigger now, but it doesn’t have the growing potential. Wind is currently also growing exponential, but I don’t see it doing that for 20 more years. And even if it does, it doesn’t really make a big difference since exponential + exponential is still exponential. If it grows as fast as solar that would mean we’re just a few years ahead of the curve.
Here you go, you’ll need numpy, scipy and matplotlib:
from scipy.optimize import curve_fit
from matplotlib import pyplot as plt
# 2010-2013 data from https://ourworldindata.org/renewable-energy [TWh]
y = np.array([32, 63, 97, 132, 198, 256, 328, 445, 575, 659, 853, 1055, 1323, 1629])
x = np.arange(0, len(y))
# function we expect the data to fit
fit_func = lambda x, a, b, c: a * np.exp2(b * x ) + c
popt, _ = curve_fit(fit_func, x, y, maxfev=5000)
fig, ax = plt.subplots()
ax.scatter(x + 2010, y, label="Data", color="b", linestyle=":")
ax.plot(x + 2010, fit_func(x, *popt), color="r", linewidth=3.0, linestyle="-", label='best fit curve: $y={0:.3f} * 2^{{{1:.3f}x}} + {2:.3f}$'.format(*popt))
plt.legend()
plt.show()
Here’s what I get, global solar energy generated doubles every ~3.5 (1/0.284) years.
Exponential, it fits the curve very nicely. I can give you the python code if you want to. I got 2 decades for all energy usage, not only electricity, which is only one sixth of that.
I just took the numbers for the whole world, that’s easier to find and in the end the only thing that matters.
The next few years are going to be interesting in my opinion. If we can make efuels cheaper than fossil fuels (look up Prometheus Fuels and Terraform Industries), we’re going to jump even harder on solar and if production can keep up it will even grow faster.
The mistake you make is that you assume the law works the same in China as in countries that have rule of law. China doesn’t have rule of law, they have ‘rule by law’. The Communist Party isn’t just above the law, the law is a tool for them to use how they see fit. If you are undermining the Communist Party then that is by definition misinformation.
Remember, this is the same country where one day the minister of health aplauded a journalist’s effort to combat pollution with a documentary called under the dome, and the next day it was gone from the internet as if it never existed. Whenever they have internal issues they stir up some hatred for the USA or Japan, only to be forgotten somewhat later.
They took 1984 not as a warning, but as a manual
Then look at the total TWh from renewables, and rate it has been growing Y-o-Y and extrapolate until it reaches the number needed to eliminate fossil fuels.
You’ll find it will take decades to build enough renewable capacity to replace fossil fuel based electricity generation.
I get ~2 decades when I extrapolate these numbers (from 2010-2023) to get to 2022 total primary energy usage for solar alone.
Energy usage will grow as well, and keeping that growth is ambitious, but it the future doesn’t look that bleak too me if you look at it that way.
I’ve never had UHT milk go bad in less than a week. Longest I’ve had it in my fridge and passed the smell and taste check was over a month, but at that point I didn’t trust it anymore.
You guys don’t have UHT milk?
How would it be displaced by SARS-CoV2? Wouldn’t that require cross immunity?
Yes someone gave the green light, someone shot at them. Nowhere it’s said those were the same people, nor that the people giving green light knew that the other people were going to shoot.
The most likely thing is that they forgot to inform one group of soldiers, or that they misunderstood, or some other fatal miscommunication. Miscommunication is common in war. Deliberately baiting an ambulance is both extremely evil and stupid.
I see no evidence that they deliberately baited the ambulance? Bad coordination is the most likely explanation.
To be clear, even in that case it’s still a war crime to shoot an ambulance.
I thought flat earthers claim the earth is a disc (which has no corners)?
The Nazis actually did try to exterminate the Jews as humane as possible. They used gas showers so the victims didn’t know what was coming and didn’t have any any visual indications of harm on their body.
Whether it was out of some perverse sense of humanity, to make the executioners sleep better or simply to improve efficiency I’m not sure.
(To be clear, I don’t condone genocide whether you try to do it humane or not)