aevaif I were a physicist I would simply not become death the destroyer of worlds
I can't believe someone replied to argue that am becoming death the destroyer of worlds was necessary, good even. "FOSS" in bio, go figure.
Being a pacifist leads to a lot of tedious conversations because I'll say something like "man I feel like we'd have fewer problems if there was less violence", and then a violent person will immediately reply with a contrived hypothetical situation that they think is a witty takedown that proves the necessity of violence, and it's just like, an example of yet another problem that was caused by violence. Or something like that. Like, cool beans man.
I'm just as excited to hear that as I am your genius proposal for cutting back on fossil fuel emissions by ramping up coal production
This is not a challenge. You're just going to end up on my block list.
Efi (nap pet) 🦊💤@aeva im tempted to count how many forget they're ultimately quoting bahavda ghita as oppenheimer himself said when he quoted it
MikeWas about to tell you my batshit fossil fuel reduction idea, then remembered that my batshit idea doesn't involve ramping up coal production.
@aeva also I think my batshit idea would require a more pacifist world than we have now.
Plus it probably ignores a bunch of physics.
I'll spill it anyway (not like I was going to make money by keeping a bad idea secret).
If we connected most of the world's power grids (connecting Eurasia to the Americas via a Bering Strait bridge), then there would be sunlight somewhere on the grid for more of the day for large parts of the world.
Unfortunately that Bering Strait link is ... a bunch of things about the world have to change to make that work.
Also even HVDC loses 3.5% of power every 1000 km
@aeva
Oh wait, these exist!
