I agree with all of this as an electrical engineer in the field. Base load is only base load because of the load profile of devices connected to the grid having either an on or off switch. Most of the time this means motors/HVACs, but the world of electronics is coming to that equipment just like how inverters have changed how we export solar PV and wind to the grid. VFDs, soft starters, and the like will make our industrial processes that much more efficient. We just need to spread awareness and ramp up implementation, just as much as for renewables themselves.

Yep, classic fallacy (? Bias?) of consider relative scales/change over absolute.

Here are some sources that speak about the difference between the two, and how different interpreters of data can use either or to further an argument:

• https://dataschool.com/misrepresenting-data/relative-vs-absolute-change/

• https://stats.mom.gov.sg/SL/Pages/Absolute-vs-Relative-Change-Pitfalls.aspx

• https://www.designreview.byu.edu/collections/design-in-data-figures-absolute-versus-relative-scales

You’re either a troll or a dipshit. They introduced an example where both interests of removing information from the public forum and having the monopoly of reporting on that information work to undermine archiving. It is important for the truth and for public trust that we support Internet Archive and other archivists/historians.

Bruh I’m an electrical engineer and I have no clue if y’all are kapping rn or not lmao

I long for the day we can get over culture wars, at least temporarily, and come to agreement on how we’re all getting fucked over by the rich. I always think about ways to get involved but I come up short. I know a general strike is the game plan, but as an engineer my professional has strayed away from unionizing. Need to get more involved there. Change happens slowly until it doesn’t I suppose.

They might not want to give that actress’s identity out out of a respect for privacy. This information could come out in a closed court room, but with the state of viral social media, it might be smart to hold off on unveiling for now.

OpenAI’s actions could just as easily be explained by them seeking to protect their image as much as possible, knowing that if they let the voice stay then bad PR would only grow.

Even if there is no connection to ScarJo in this case, it’s still in OpenAI’s interest to appease the public for the sake of their reputation.

Yeah I thought OpenAI came out and said that they modeled the voice of a different actress, and they don’t want to share their identity out of a respect for privacy.

It could just be a coincidence that Altman tweeted the image from Her, and people made the connection between the voice and ScarJo, especially since she did something extreme similar in that movie.

Could be coincidental. Could not be. We don’t really have the evidence to say either way, but maybe ScarJo’s suit will affect change so that better rights are granted to people and their digital twins.

Same here, Zoomer. My time in high school was filled with AP classes in the normal subjects all meant to prepare me for college. No time left for finance, civics, or other basic life stuff.

And I wonder why I struggle with this stuff as an adult now.

I just downloaded Bandcamp, and after searching for my favorite artists, almost none are on the platform aside from 1-2. Did a search on like 20-25. This is why I use Spotify. Maybe if artists started acknowledging Bandcamp as a legitimate alternative to Spotify, then of course I’d listen there. But right now most stuff by my favorite bands are either covers or remixes.

Don’t forget that subsidies also swing in the other direction to fossil fuels companies. If we want to eliminate subsidies, then why not for both players so the playing field is even again? Otherwise, giving EVs subsidies might actually level the playing field more than not.

Interesting insight. Thanks for the correction. Perhaps the choice of lexeme “conservatism” would best be swapped for a neologism like “hierarchism” or something to better describe the principles of the school of thought. Otherwise, I made the connection like OC that conservatism = no change, whether good or bad.

Unfortunately for any minority group that seeks change within a group led by the majority, this is true. Perhaps the vitriol against vegans is part of the game of realizing change: there will always be resistance and tendency from some portion of the population to keep things the same as they always were, regardless of whether those things are good for the population itself.

Yeah that was a wrong decision on the vegan’s part. Perhaps this sort of behavior might be acceptable in the public commons, but work is a private space where people join a company for specific purposes. Work and philosophy/politics should not intertwine.

And who knows: if she excluded herself from the breakroom during lunch without notifying others, maybe coworkers would notice and be more willing to hear her out out of a desire to socialize. It probably could have helped her effort to do this actually.

Vegans live and learn. We are part of a minority group, and with being a minority comes all of its benefits and detriments. We just need to learn that in situations like these, we often are the only vegan around people and so we need to carry our entire movement on our shoulders, whether we want to or not. Else, you get general, anecdotal sentiments the likes of which you see in this post.

As a vegan myself, I’ve only met a handful number of other vegans in my lifetime irl, being raised omnivore for 23 years until changing.

Whenever I talk about the reasons why I made the switch to those who are curious, I always keep the militant vegans in mind and try to offer more charity than I otherwise would.

We vegans need to show the world that whether it’s diet or clothing (general use, specific use, etc.) or medicine or society (e.g. slaughterhouse workers contributing to societal psychosis) or climate or species loss or economic transparency, making the change is easy and a socially accepted thing to do.

This absolutely cannot take form as aggression against those that would be considered outside of our “group”. Any means of using coercion or manipulation to change what others do is a violation of their moral capacities. Unfortunately, humans also violate the moral capacities of more than 100 billion animals every year, so the trade-off can seem justified to some.

Every vegan needs to remind themselves that we’re doing this for the animals first and foremost. All behaviors should be guided by that principle: to reduce suffering for them as much as possible. Being militant, aggressive, and shameful to others can result in backlashes where people dig their heels in. A better way of convincing would be to give the science, show moral charity, offer easy alternatives, and illustrate factual evidence of the crimes done against animals. If we respect people to be able to change their minds given the evidence to do so, then they will.

Not all beliefs are good. Veganism seems to minimize suffering for a group of life on this planet that has traditionally been at the whims of humans.

But as another commenter pointed out, people’s egos can’t usually take the claims that they are making bad choices and should change. This kind of pressure shows up in exercise, for example.

Animals dying don’t care about egos though. On the one hand, entire beings seize to exist, while on the other the top predator remains to exist and satiate their taste buds with a steak or pork chop.

If you are concerned about moral behavior in this world, then you can’t not extend that consideration to animals. If you can’t, then you’re morally inconsistent.

Indeed, rip GPM

Charging at home is the way to go. You may be able to refinance your home if you haven’t paid it off, and rope in upgrades for new charging circuits.

Plus, there are programs being developed - note none have been finalized - to allow EVs to give power back to the grid and so you could one day make money back from keeping your car plugged in over night. There are already time of use rates too for many markets in the US and EU. Plus there’s peace of mind knowing that your car will always be fully topped off every morning.

As an electrical engineer that has studied the idea of Plug-in Hybrid EVs (PHEVs) and Battery EVs (BEVs), personally I always try to persuade people to look into PHEVs for personal and societal reasons, but even if you don’t go with Tesla for your BEV purchase I think it’s still worth it to go electric. Maybe consider the Chevy Bolt EUV, Nissan Leaf, or Volkswagen ID.4. On the PHEV side, there’s the Ford Escape Plug-in Hybrid and Jeep Grand Cherokee 4xe. Lots of tax credits out there too for new ($7,500) and used ($4,000) so EVs are definitely still an opportunity!

I wonder what this means this for the SAE and USDOT adopting the Tesla charging network and connector as standard for future EV development.

Yeah it’s an interesting problem.

If we go down the path of ideas in the mind and the representations we create and visualize in our mind’s eye, to forbid people from conceiving of others sexually means there really is no justification for conceiving of people generally.

If we try to seek for a justification, where is that line drawn? What is sexual, and what is general? How do we enforce this, or at least how do we catch people in the act and shame them into stopping their behavior, especially if we don’t possess the capability of telepathy?

What is harm? Is it purely physical, or also psychological? Is there a degree of harm that should be allowed, or that is inescapable despite our best intentions?

The angle that you point out regarding writing things down about people in private can also go different ways. I write things down about my friends because my memory sucks sometimes and I like to keep info in my back pocket for when birthdays, holidays, or special occasions come. What if I collected information about people that I don’t know? What if I studied academics who died in the past to learn about their lives, like Ben Franklin? What if I investigated my neighbors by pointing cameras at their houses, or installing network sniffers or other devices to try to collect information on them? Does the degree of familiarity with those people I collect information about matter, or is the act wrong in and of itself? And do my intentions justify my actions, or do the consequences of said actions justify them?

Obviously I think it’s a good thing that we as a society try to discourage collecting information on people who don’t want that information collected, but there is a portion of our society specifically allowed to do this: the state. What makes their status deserving of this power? Can this power be used for ill and good purposes? Is there a level of cross collection that can promote trust and collaboration between the state and its public, or even amongst the public itself? I would say that there is a level where if someone or some group knows enough about me, it gets creepy.

Anyways, lots of questions and no real answers! I’d be interested in learning more about this subject, and I apologize if I steered the convo away from sexual harassment and violation. Consent extends to all parts of our lives, but sexual consent does seem to be a bigger problem given the evidence of this post. Looking forward to learning more!