GreyEyedGhost

joined 2 years ago
[–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 year ago (7 children)

You're right, words do have meaning. Just because there is a transition from one dictator to another without bloodshed or death doesn't mean it isn't a dictatorship. Just because the dictator of the week is chosen by a committee doesn't mean it isn't a dictatorship. One-party systems are commonly accepted to be dictatorships because of the lack of ability by the people to choose their leader, rather it is chosen by the party (usually the party elites).

[–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 year ago (9 children)

In this case, China is coming into its own as a regional hegemon, assuming their relatively new status as an outright dictatorship doesn't fuck that up.

China has been an outright dictatorship for a while now, it's just the lifetime leader that was recent.

[–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

As terrible a person as Nygard is, our justice system doesn't function without someone to provide vigorous defense, and holding it against people who are essential to the proper functioning of our justice system seems a little flawed. If that's a problem, then perhaps they should explore an alternative to the adversarial justice system, rather than vilifying members of that system.

[–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The first company with reusable, commercial rocket stages, who will likely have the most space launches of any organization ever, has already done more launches than any other organization per year, and has brought the cost to orbit down by at least one order of magnitude, and you claim hype? I get the hate for Elon, but I think your feelings might be blinding you to easily verifiable facts. Just like the fact that in order to get anything passed, the US space program has to engage in some of the most inefficient manufacturing practices imaginable, which leads to the inflated costs I referred to in my previous comment. Again, easily verifiable facts. After all, whose shoulder did NASA tap on to resolve the problem of some stranded astronauts?

[–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago

We lose thousands of tons of mass every year in the form of gases and gain a lesser amount in material from asteroids over the same period. The mass gain appears to have been quite dramatic, back when the earth was formed. Chaos would have reigned for a significant period after that, then we would likely have had a constantly diminishing amount of asteroid impacts. When exactly the earth went from a net annual gain of mass to a net loss is hard to say, but if you were to ask if the mass of the earth-moon system maintained an annual net zero mass change at any point, the answer would probably be "We don't know for sure."

[–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Scientists say "We don't know for sure" when they definitively can't say the odds are zero. "Will flinging satellites out of the solar system change the orbit of the earth, causing it to plunge into the sun." "We don't know for sure." "Will setting off a nuclear bomb ignite the entire atmosphere?" "We don't know for sure." "Will running the Large Hadron Collider create strange matter that will annihilate the entire universe?" "We don't know for sure." The first question was asked by you, the other two were asked by senior officials at some point in the last 100 years. Even before they were asked, scientists were fairly certain that wouldn't be the result, but there was some small chance that it could, and scientists generally don't say "No" unless there is absolutely no chance something will happen.

[–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca -1 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Estimates for Starliner are currently at about $2.5 billion, with multiple test flights. Costs for the first launch of SLS was close to $5 billion. NASA is not where you go to see how little something could cost.

[–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago

Which is the point. Voting third party won't fix the system, certainly not at the presidential level. So work with what you have now, and work towards something better in the areas where it's actually possible.

[–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

A reasonably safe, fairly effective pipe bomb is easy to make with the some basic theory and high school chemistry knowledge. A moderately safe, highly effective pipe bomb requires only slightly more knowledge and a deeper understanding of high school chemistry. This stuff was easy enough that people were using it over half a thousand years ago to good effect. If you can't figure it out now with a couple weeks effort and the breadth of knowledge at our disposal, that's on you.

[–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca -1 points 1 year ago

Doing something that demonstrably doesn't work isn't how you get what you want. If you want an option besides Democrats and Republicans, voting for someone else where those two options have a lock on winning does nothing besides vent some spleen.

I'm not saying doing nothing is the solution, or even voting for the two main parties is the solution, but doing something that has been shown to be completely ineffective is not the solution.

[–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

Massive changes have been happening in the battery field for decades, they just aren't fast. Our rechargeable batteries are smaller, more energy-dense, longer-lasting, and cheaper than they were 40 years ago. They aren't magical, last forever, infinite power, instant recharge batteries, though, that's correct.

[–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

And absolutely HUGE pockets!

view more: ‹ prev next ›