I don’t see why any level would go “Oh furries are going to love this, and we can’t have that” and change the design.

Hydro is kinda awful for the environment.

Thanks for catching the typo.

Maybe in the UK where each plant is basically unique instead of having improvements from all the previous iterations. In the US it’s around 93%. I don’t know how to search China or France’s numbers, but I suspect they’re similar or better.

A MW of solar averages out to about .2 MWh per hour. A MW of nuclear averages about .9 MWh per hour.

But even so as the UK does it, nuclear power isn’t worth it. France and China are better examples since they both picked a few designs and mass produced them.

China’s experience indicates you can mass produce nuclear relatively cheaply and quickly, having built 35 out of 57GW in the last decade, and another 88GW on the way, however it’s not nearly as quick to expand as solar, wind, and fossil fuels.

Beauty fell in love with “The Beast”, who the fuck is this “prince” guy?

People elect representatives to represent them, not to compromise and pass the opposition’s agenda.

It’s forgivable if the representative failed to obtain enough power, but if they have literally any means at their disposal and don’t use it, an unwillingness to use all the power the people gave them to do what they elected them to do is a betrayal of those people.

Even so, I’m not sure I can agree that the best solution to dealing with the right is to fight the centrists first

We aren’t able to use electoralism to fight the right as long as the political platform and messaging of the democratic party is 95% the same as the republican’s.

The criticisms of the dem party don’t amount to “let the right win”, they amount to “the DNC prevents any political resistance to the right, they either need to be coup’d or destroyed if we want to stop the right from winning”

deleted by creator

IQ only measures how good you are at taking IQ tests. They recalibrate score every year to maintain the same distribution of scores within a year. (they change what each question is worth so every year 50% of tests get above 100, 40% of tests are between 85 and 100, 40% of tests are between 100 and 115, etc.)

The impact is that they have to make the tests harder every year. If you applied modern standards to 1920, the average score would be ~70.

What makes more sense to you, that 8/10 people today would be considered near-geniuses 100 years ago, or we got much better at taking IQ tests?

That’s a damn lie. Oysters being hollow give them a perfect crunch, crackers you crush just instantly turn to cardboard

How strong were particle accelerators back then?

The only case I know of a dude sticking their head in a particle accelerator was in 1978. His head became quite swollen and he had radiation burns. He’s still alive at 82.

There’s also the Therac-25, that was pretty noticible.

It should, but it absolutely isn’t.

Where do you see frequent trash cans and people regularly throwing trash out in the street?

Typically trash in the street means you don’t have enough trash cans, or a bunch of youth or homeless people whom society is failing.

Lotta scratched liberals around these days.

No not at all, hence why I’m not antidemocratic. Democracy didn’t give us Trump, the dictatorship of capital did.

Apparently it’s too subtle for anyone who didn’t interpret it as antidemocratic.

The joke is how unfortunately prophetic it is.

Do you think the US is meaningfully democratic? When’s the last time any leader did something that favored the people over capital?

It implies that the people are too dumb to govern themselves; that as they get get closer to a perfect democracy, the choose dumber leaders.

It states that in a perfect democracy, the masses would elect morons because they themselves are morons.