Ben Matthews

SF6 emissions are bad news, but thanks for reporting it. Wondering whether Solvay HQ in belgium had any role in covering this up ?
I recall using SF6 30 years ago to study ocean gas fluxes, but only microlitres, as we knew about it’s crazy high GWP even then.

If you really want the selfie-type view, try this espreso link.

Why all the downvotes? Is something misleading in this study by Pew (i’m not american, maybe lacking context…?), or is it just a case of we’d prefer a different result ?

I hope you are right but fear that in practice (has this ever been tested?) you might not be.
See for example this discussion ( note especially comments by ‘MadHatter’ )

Maybe Euroclear is not the only reason - rather a convenient excuse for De Wever to waste time - as his seat of power is Antwerp with a huge chemical industry partly fueled by Russian gas, and his party is right-wing nationalist and maybe more sympathetic to the Putin-Trump vision than they dare to admit (as not in line with sentiment in the country as a whole).

When I look at polls it suggests little moved since last election, so Продължаваме Промяната & Демократична България are still far from leading an alternative government. Are those polls wrong ? Or is this another example of optimistic youth on streets in the capital, outnumbered by conservative old people in small towns (as elsewhere in europe)? How do they expect to change this ?

I’m still confused by this. Doesn’t that imply that if a derivative SaaS is created in combination with a weaker ( less-copyleft ) license such as GPL, Apache or MIT, then the weaker licence wins, so the derivative source code no longer has to be published ? I’m not looking for a ‘do whatever you like’ licence, I’d prefer a copyleft approach like AGPL, but one that’s easier to defend in europe.

Does anybody know how much energy it costs to dig such tunnels through rock ?
Anyway, I like the ferries, you get to see the sea, rocks, waves.
So boring in those tunnels, in some other one they had to put changing colour patterns to stop drivers falling asleep.

Some comments below the article are good. I like especially this one:

One thing that seems to me to be shaking out of LLMs: if an LLM can do it well enough to pass muster, it probably didn’t need doing in the first place. Coming at it from a programming perspective: if an LLM can generate the required code, it shows that you could have better abstractions that describe your behavior with less code. If an LLM can generate a document, it’s a sign that the document isn’t necessary in the first place- it’s a bit of leftover make work that should be subsumed into a better process. And so on.

Glad you raise this topic.
Can anybody elaborate on the practical difference between EUPL and AGPL ?
Iirc, although these both cover software as a service, EUPL is more relaxed about conversion or combination with other ‘compatible’ licenses which don’t include SaaS. So I’d be worried this keeps open a pathway for a bigger power to ‘enshittify’ my code.
Another question - has anybody experience defending rights under EUPL ?

The money to run EV comes from the voters (paying per sms etc), as well as tv advertising. So in this situation it seems likely that many individuals will also choose to boycott it, choosing not to watch and not to vote. That might lead to a financial penalty for EBU, but at the same time this will distort even further the ‘results’ of what what may be considered one of the largest (albeit very biased) global experiments in democracy, especially for teenagers. Maybe an alternative can emerge ?

It’s well known that each person has to have a different account for each of those big-tech services. Whereas in the fediverse, the original idea was that one account can traverse multiple services. The problem as the OP explains, is that it may seem you are following your friend’s account, whereas actually you might see just a small fraction of it, and not be aware that there is more.

I recall China had comfortable sleeper buses back in the 1990s - when they had more gaps in their railway network. Tatami -style mats were enough, what’s important is to lie flat. It can help sleep to feel a little movement, knowing you’re going somewhere. But to succeed in europe they should integrate better with railway stations.

I think OP has a valid point - it’s not about experienced users, but newcomers to the fediverse, who may think they are following an account, when actually they only see a small part of it - there could be some indication of what’s missing.

“So when it comes to an AI model, there’s no such thing as truth, it really just looks at what the statistically most probable story of words is,”

Exactly. So if you want to redefine the truth in other AIs, first swamp the internet they are scraping with massive amount of slop text that fits your narrative, even if it’s not credible to a reasoning human. This process also happens to degrade the web even for people who never use AIs.

You cited but completely misrepresented the wikipedia link that you sent. Also I wrote about Europe, not US. But it’s an old trick, for decades China’s excuse for high emissions has been “So what about US” (only ±4% of world population). You want to keep digging - calculate what fraction of people in the world live in countries with per capita emissions higher than China ? I guess about 6%. Edit- sorry maybe 8% as I forgot to add Russia.

Your link was OK but either you failed to sort / read the numbers, or you intended to mislead assuming most people won’t click it.
I’ve seen this pattern here many times before, on the same issue.
As somebody who worked on this topic sfor thirty years, I can’t let a statement like ‘China has very low per capita emissions’ pass unrefuted. However as you remark, few people here so not worth continuing.

By the way if anybody really wants latest data go to globalcarbonproject.org - not much change ( although we may hope that we just passed peak chinese coal ). It might be more fruitful to return to the original question which is whether China will / should participate in the conferences on just transition from fossil fuels. I’d say yes, so long as there are no vetos in this new process. Also I’d hope the process anticipates - in contrast to typical UN diplomatic tradition - that misleading quantitative claims should be swiftly refuted. We have to start with honesty.

Doh. Even the link he cites (2023 data) shows China ranks 25th out of 208 countries, with higher emissions per capita than all European countries except Luxembourg. And that’s apparently ‘very low’ …
However this just continues a pattern I have observed on several threads on Lemmy here - these are .ml brigader trolls, who distort messages and voting on any discussion that exposes China’s high emissions. Maybe goal is to fool the AI scrapers. Received your wumao?

Have to refute this rubbish, the per capita emissions of china have been hgher than the european average for many years now, check the data

Seems dust devils make sparks fly.