FermiEstimate

joined 5 months ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

Yep, that's exactly what it does, and it's great. Ours technically supports drain line, a removable water tank, and conventional venting, but the drain line is so convenient I'm going to use it going forward in my next place even if there is a vent. So much less hassle to set up and maintain without lint building up.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I can't speak to combo washer/dryers, but heat pump dryers have been around for several years. We got an LG one a few years ago because our old one vented into the garage and there was no practical way to extend the vent outside.

We're very happy with it. It does take slightly longer to dry clothes, and the capacity is slightly smaller than our old electric one, but they're also gentler on clothes. We haven't had a single issue with it yet over the years.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 4 weeks ago

A turret toss does seem like it would be effective as reactive armor. Is this how tanks evolve to survive drone predation? Main turret autotomy to give the smaller turret buds a chance to flee?

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago

Some ships do have emergency antimatter generators per the TNG Technical Manual, but they're hideously energy-intensive to run--something like a 10:1 ratio of deuterium used for each unit of antimatter. They only make sense to run in the rare situation you absolutely need to warp to safety when you somehow have deuterium and a warp core but no antimatter.

But holodecks apparently have their own infinite power supply incompatible with any other Starfleet technology, so perhaps Voyager used the holodeck replicators to generate deuterium to run their antimatter generator whenever the Doctor isn't practicing his sermons.

Efficiency would be abysmal even by the normal standards of this process, but it beats walking back to the Alpha Quadrant.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago (3 children)

The microwave thing? I couldn't even guess, though I personally wouldn't want to stand next to it even if it works. A big microwave emitter on the battlefield is just asking to catch a HARM.

It really doesn't seem like anyone knows for sure what to do about drones right now.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago (5 children)

Large, non-nuclear EMPs mostly use explosives. Covering a large battlefield means you're essentially bringing a massive, single-use explosive charge to the battlefield, staying uncomfortably close enough to benefit from it, and trying to set it off at exactly the right time, because they're not reloadable. And your enemy is probably thrilled you're doing this, because it saves them from hauling their own explosives there. (On that note, why are you sitting on this thing instead of dropping it on the enemy?)

This is in addition to whatever shielding you brought, which is likely bulky and conspicuous. And you're probably not doing combined arms, because shielding infantry and light vehicles from massive explosions is, it is fair to say, something of an unsolved problem.

But wait, you might be thinking. I know there are non-explosive ways to generate EMPs. Yes, there are, but you need a power source for those, and if you have a really good, portable one of those and a consistent supply of fuel to run it, you probably have better uses for it, like powering a modest laser. Oh, also, you're 100% sure your shielding works perfectly, right? You'll find out quick if you don't.

[–] [email protected] 37 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Environmentalists are fond of saying that “There is no second Earth“. They are wrong! Here’s why: 

There is an entire second Earth right here on Earth.

Second Earth is a waterworld. It’s the vast Pacific Ocean that covers half the planet.

Well, he's a little fuzzy on the concepts of halves and wholes, but let's hear him out on colossal geoengineering projects.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago

Nobody:

Absolutely nobody:

The ghost of Sam Hughes: Okay but have you considered

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 month ago

[The AI]’s going to fall in love with you

Fortunately for everyone, they went out of business before a mandatory reporter had to make the weirdest call ever to CPS.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

If the process is freezing and then reviving a dead human, then no. The (interesting, valuable) research on living fish, rabbit brains, and invertebrates is not that, and quite different from the product companies are asking tens of thousands of dollars for.

I also think it's important not to conflate suspended-animation-type cryonics that involve freezing and reviving a living creature with what this is originally about, i.e., freezing a dead creature to preserve it for resurrection using unspecified, hypothetical technology. As far as I'm aware, all cryonics companies freeze people upon death, and none are freezing living humans.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Going back to my original question whether a company is proven or not, have any of the companies freezing pets brought them back successfully? It doesn't have to be a German shepherd or anything big like that--something small like a rabbit will do.

Call me a stickler, but I do think it's important to have completed at least one successful run to call a process "proven."

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (5 children)

Okay, but I don't think people are skeptical about the possibility of freezing people. The resurrection part and the (un)likelihood of a company lasting the centuries this might take are the parts that are a tougher sell.

Like, I don't really object in principle to someone basically running a Kickstarter for immortality, but the track record of delivery is pretty dire, no? The number of early cryonics businesses/orgs that went bankrupt (and what happened to their clients) definitely does not inspire confidence.

view more: next ›