Korkki

joined 1 week ago
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

That is just not what the article means when it talks about carbon capture

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 day ago

Money spent=/=production or productive capacity or performance.

Everything in the west is just really fucking expensive, because defense industry is a racket meant to make profit not weapons.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago (16 children)

Eu doesn't have the weapons to replace the US, much less do anything more. All action by EU and European Nato is at best a political stunt to make US and Trump to change their minds.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 days ago

I mean since we are, then aren't we more likely to be part of a trend than just a singular fluke? Like some people think they are special, but in reality most likely the totality of their attributes are average because that is how averages work.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 days ago (6 children)

Hydrogen at least has it's uses in stuff like planes.

[–] [email protected] 65 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Water is wet, researchers find

Like basic thermodynamics can tell you that carbon capture sucks efficiency wise. It's more work to pour water on the floor and then mopping it up and putting a back into the bottle, than just not not spilling the water in the first place.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

I would think, in the US, antitrust laws would apply.

ARM is brittish

Is this different from Intel and x86 architecture? (Genuinely asking)

yes the ARM architecture is it's own thing, licensed by ARM.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 3 days ago (6 children)

It can be really bad for the industry if ARM is both a producer of chips and the gatekeeper within the ARM ecosystem. I don't know if there are laws against this or loopholes through them, but what is going to prevent them from just withholding license or technologies to push competition out?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

I mean US sanctions will force companies to use it, if it ever becomes real. Think like Huawei wanting to sell stuff to Russia, but US threatens to kick any bank out of swift that trades with Russia. So then they would have this Brics-$ to circumvent that. That's the whole point. US is sanctioning so many countries that there is a need for alternative, not that USD/swift is bad system for those using it. USD needs replacing because it has become a Washington's geopolitical sledgehammer and a chokepoint to free flowing world trade. Even Putin said that only reason they have been reduing dollar usage, because they have been barred from using it, not because they are particularly eager to do it by itself.

Companies would want it because it would a one way to secure their profits and nation's would want it because it frees them from the unilateral sanction sledgehammer.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

It's really difficult to even start to build even an Keynes' Bancor like global reserve currency, much less some "Brics Euro" to be used within the countries (which was never in the cards to begin with btw). However this American sanction obsession is very much creating the need to replace the dollar worldwide. Under Biden one set of countries were sanctioned, and now Trump is sanctioning pretty much everybody else that Biden didn't sanction. US itself is the main driver of de-dollarization, not Brics. Who the hell even wants to live with a US gun on their temple anyway, even if you are so called "US ally". Now Canada and Europe are getting slapped punitive tariffs on, because the administration changed, countries therefore can't have just one main way to do global trade.

view more: next ›