This is a huge deal if true.

In the last 5 years, one of the constant nagging voices in the public regarding SpaceX was that it’s supposedly so difficult to carry out in-orbit refueling.

anything that invades your focus without your desire for it to happen.

i guess some call that “harassment”

and i guess it’s that much of a problem in today’s time because people are simply exposed to too many signals. that makes signals too much and unfavorable, which we call harassment.

so, in a certain way, the fact that we perceive things as “harassment” is due to the internet, since that’s where the majority of signals come from these days.

i always read it a bit different

all life is suffering means literally that. suffering is just another term for the process of being alive. suffering is the experience of all our emotions and everything that we can do in the world. this is suffering, contrasting it to the coldness and stoicism of death.

every organism is born hungry and needs to fight that constant hunger or die

huh, and i thought hunger was caused by greed which is itself tied to the modern society

I always assumed it’s because clams look like a pussy, somewhat.

With the crack and all that.

I guess they have a fear of a whistleblower from within the FED.

Imagine that an annoyed employee at the fed starts speaking out to the public that the released epstein files are actually fake and releases the actual files instead. that might make for a bigger shitstorm than simply not releasing anything in the first place.

it’s a distraction from the distraction, IMO

the cuts to social spending due to the BBB is what it should be actually about.

the glass lens probably is cheaper than a big solar panel

but the cost of setting up a glass lens in 5-10 meters altitude (because that’s what’s needed to bundle any sunlight) and make it storm-proof is probably more expensive than setting up a big solar panel at hip height.

and considering that labor cost is a significant part (i guess 10% - 50%) of overall solar park cost, i guess it’s probably not worth it.

Yeah, community solar parks are really the best because they remove a whole lot of these soft costs.

These soft costs include:

• bureaucracy (you need 1 permit instead of 100 permits),
• nobody needs to climb on a roof,
• shipping many panels at once to the installation site is much more efficient than only shipping 5-8 modules at a time

additionally, any kind of fixed-cost complexity is spread over a bigger field.

i.e., you should add circuit breakers to make sure the solar panels don’t feed into the grid when the energy prices are already negative. adding that breaker has a fixed and constant price. adding one breaker to a large park is more efficient than adding 100 breakers into just as many households.

i guess a lot of research projects are just there to give the researchers something to do and money, and i’m sure the idea of using lenses has been floated before.

the thing is that it’s not really as good an ideas as it originally seems. After all, you need heavy solid lenses that you have to install above all solar panels, and the cost of that is not negligible. On top of that, there’s other problems that others have already mentioned.

I’m not sure what to think about the Fraunhofer institute in general. They have made some nice discoveries/inventions in the past, such as audio compression algorithms and such. That is why i hyped them for a bit.

But they really disappointed me with their writings on solar panels in the past few years.

They said that the efficiency of solar panels today is too low to deploy them widely in practice, which is simply not true. They tried pushing Perovskite solar cells for no reason.

I’m not sure what to think about this article’s idea. On one hand, adding lenses to solar parks makes them significantly more complicated and therefore expensive to build. Also, if the parks have complicated physical forms, they’re more susceptible to wind, and that could damage them.

On the other hand, yes, adding lenses means you need fewer actual solar panels for the same amount of energy harvested.

I’ll therefore put it in the category of inconclusive inventions, together with the idea of adding a motor to the solar panels so they can track the sun. That would also make the solar panels more efficient, but also more complicated and more prone to mechanical failure.

no i’m just trying to clarify as i’ve never encountered the term before

wait, what do the other 75% do?

deleted by creator

this but unironically. it’s a bit of a trolley problem

every time anybody does some work like building roads, building houses, farming fields, it has a certain chance that it displaces whatever was there before, i.e. wild flowers, insects, wild animals, whatever. that is why doing any kind of work kinda always comes at a price for the environment.

0 1 everything that comes after is simply summarizes as “many”

This is a comedy these days. If human lifes weren’t at stake, i’d just lean back and watch 5 seasons of this comedy that the US is nowadays.

ok, so this is about how you run software, i.e. who owns the server hardware, while free software is about how software is developed, right?

A house is a huge liability. If i lose my job, what do i do about the debt? It’s the job market uncertainty that i fear more than the current pay levels, tbh.

It might work that way in the first life but then when you’re reborn you’re gonna have really poor credit score and that sucks too in its own way.