MrEff

joined 1 year ago
[–] MrEff@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Mid 2010's Acer Aspires were the best! I still have mine and it is still going strong. Upgraded hdd to solid state, maxed out the ram only 2 years ago, new battery, and am on my third windows wipe. It is still running strong and hasn't even hit the level of needing Linux to survive. My Trac pad is a little sad to look at and I burned out the USB port on one side. Other than this thing is still doing everything I need a laptop to do, plus some low requirement gaming. I bet it still has another 3-4 years in it, easy. The best sustainable is reducing consumption, and this unsuspecting hero has made it possible for me!

But also yes, when it dies I will probably also be getting a framework...

[–] MrEff@lemmy.world 32 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Two lines from the bottom they are missing:

Discovered DOTA2

[–] MrEff@lemmy.world 12 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

I think they left out the most obvious questions-

Are you super rich?

Can you afford elective heath operations that will potentially prevent life ending illnesses or affliction?

Can you afford expensive lifestyles tailored for your health?

Can you afford to reduce all forms of stress in your life and live with no worries?

[–] MrEff@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago

Yeah, colon/anal cancer will do this as well.

[–] MrEff@lemmy.world 60 points 6 months ago (6 children)

He needs a doctor, and fast. Best case scenario it is ulcerative collitis. Worst case he is getting an MRI of his brain and brainstem to find out it is a central tumor and will only be getting worse.

[–] MrEff@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Seriously. We are talking about tire tread compared to weight. Both use multiple sizes of tire depending on the year/model. There are a few that overlap in diameter to get the closest to comparison but they still have a very different width. We are talking about a 235/35R18 vs a 235/75R18. That is a huge difference in wall height/aspect ratio and changes how the tire gives under power. Those numbers massively change depending on model as well. Something like an f150 raptor could have a 315/70R17, almost a foot wide. So comparing just the weight and saying they are close enough is far from a fair comparison.

[–] MrEff@lemmy.world 23 points 8 months ago

You are on a nuke loving platform and people are going to downvote anything that isn't hard pro nuke. But you are correct. I have had this exact same discussion before. The numbers you are looking for are called the LCOE, or the 'levelized cost of electricity' where the lifetime of the technology cost if factored in. Offshore wind is currently the lowest followed by solar. Nuke is clost to 10x the cost. There is even an international nuke consortium that has several reports agreeing with exactly what you are saying and basically sum it up as: if you invested in nuke early, then it is cost efficient to just keep upgrading. If you didn't invest in it early, then the cost to implement it so high that you are better off going wind/solar. Even if you add in the cost of battery systems, it is still cheaper than building a new nuke plant. And more than that, with these new nuke plants you have to upgrade all your infrastructure because your old wires can't handle the output loads. If you look at the 30+ billion Georgia spent on this plant, they could have simply given out a micro generation grant to everyone to add solar to their roofs, not needed to upgrade the lines, and been far better off. But hey, just like reddit, if you are commenting on lemmy you better be pro nuke only and ignore the other numbers.

[–] MrEff@lemmy.world 172 points 11 months ago (12 children)

Looking passed the absolutely insane answer here, no one has even brought up the whole issue of AC vs DC. Batteries are DC, while your fridge that plugs into your wall running on AC. I know they make DC ones, but it isn't like they are interchangeable.

[–] MrEff@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago

I agree with you as a realist on the situation. We will never stop manufacturing them, at least for the foreseeable future. But we forget that something like recycling is the last stage of the 3R's to follow. We must first look to reduce consumption. We need to find alternatives where possible, and switch away from these forever chemicals anywhere we can. Next, while "reusing" is not the best term here, but we need to find ways to extend the life of the products that we are forced to use and try to use them up in every way we can. Then lastly we need to be recycling it as best as possible before we send it to an incinerator, or more realistically a developing nation landfill.

Reduce -> Reuse -> Recycle is listed that way for a reason. Everyone always just jumps to the final stage then argue about how bad the recycling is while not even considering ways to reduce or reuse throughout the entire process.

[–] MrEff@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

600$

To employ someone at 10$/hr, their actual cost is probably close to 15$/hr when you factor I them coming in to work in the office and all the costs associated with that. At 15$/hr it takes 40 hrs to cost 600$ to thr company. That is one week of work for one employee. This means that they could have a 600$ fuck up every week and still break even over hiring a person. And we are talking about just one person. Chat support is nor.ally contracted out as entire teams and departments.