OnionQuest

joined 2 years ago
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

It's an estimate of premature deaths based on CO2 emissions.

"Pearce and Parncutt found the peer-reviewed literature on the human mortality costs of carbon emissions converged on the "1,000-ton rule," which is an estimate that one future premature death is caused every time approximately 1,000 tons of fossil carbon are burned.

"Energy numbers like megawatts mean something to energy engineers like me, but not to most people. Similarly, when climate scientists talk about parts per million of carbon dioxide, that doesn't mean anything to most people. A few degrees of average temperature rise are not intuitive either. Body count, however, is something we all understand," said Pearce, a Western Engineering and Ivey Business School professor.

"If you take the scientific consensus of the 1,000-ton rule seriously, and run the numbers, anthropogenic global warming equates to a billion premature dead bodies over the next century. Obviously, we have to act. And we have to act fast.""

[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 year ago

Like any subject matter that is complex it requires someone to have specialized training to understand and navigate. We all have a working understanding of the legal system, but sometimes we need expert opinion. Few people are willing/able to master the subject matter so supply relative to demand is low.

The legal system is complex because our world is complex. We are constantly expanding human endeavors (Space law wasn't an issue until Sputnik) and changing current laws (Marijuana laws have changed in many states). It's not just a matter of learning the law once - it is constantly changing and requires an expert to be always up-to-date.

You're paying $.25 for the piece of paper and $199.75 for the lawyer's knowledge of how to file it.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

I'm thinking it means workers of that time would not have that physique.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

I think there is going to be a greater push for KYC for social media as we are going to soon be inundated with comments and online activity by bots that is indistinguishable from humans and hyper taylored to its audience. All the stuff Russia pulled with election interference is going to be child's play.

There is also going to be an explosion of content. The same recipe page that took a human a day or two to create will be made in a second. Billions of recipe pages, billions of sports blogs, billions of comments...

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Downfall of the West relative to who? The whole world is impacted by climate change and the West is best positioned to manage its effects.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Totally worthless with no actual analysis.

I'll save you a click: guy learns about compounding growth and extrapolates that in 10,000 years there aren't enough atoms to sustain the compounding growth.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

It means it's not as simple as saying 1950 home = 2023 home and therefore any differences in price are due to inflation.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Honestly not really when compared to the alternative. Our net payout through alternatives was closer to 60%. We experienced a bot attack one month where we actually lost money due to generating massive transaction fees on bogus chargebacks.

I thought Google shifted to a flat 15% anyway (especially for small app developers). It's really a no brainer for app developers then.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 2 years ago (3 children)

My company tried transitioning app subscriptions to alternatives outside the app stores and it was not worth it. Credit card fraud was a massive issue. It got so bad the payment networks (Visa, MasterCard) threatened to ban us from their networks.

Google and Apple aren't totally rent seeking.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

To be fair society benefited along with the companies. We should institute a carbon tax on all transactions - not just punish the energy companies.

Insurance rates should be higher in high risk areas. This is the most straight forward way to keep people from building in high risk areas. I really don't think we should subsidize Joe shmoe's insurance on the third rebuilding of his house.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Who are the companies then reselling the houses to?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago

I can't wait. I typically drive to the grocery store, but this one'll be within walking distance. Can that be added to the environmental impact study?

view more: ‹ prev next ›