spankyspangler

6 ms·

1.
by spankyspangler 5y ago
The communist party has conspired to cover up worse, genocides perpetuated by their dictatorship for example. The people who claim it's an outlandish suggestion they might have covered up a lab leak are uninformed or CCP apologists. It
2.
by spankyspangler 5y ago
> Given the state of factory farming and our understanding of neurobiology, moral catastrophe is a perfectly reasonable assertion. No I don't think it is reasonable at all. > Animals suffer immensely, Untrue. Eating chicken or co
3.
by spankyspangler 5y ago
I reject the flimsy assertion that eating beef or chicken is a "moral catastrophe" or even bad at all.
4.
by spankyspangler 5y ago
Not sure if you're editing your comment or I didn't read it entirely before. And your last sentence is not some kind of proof of your belief. Without a dirty cheap producer then a cleaner producer who has paid for the environmenta
5.
by spankyspangler 5y ago
I could well be wrong, sorry I should not have tried to make such a strong statement I don't actually have much knowledge of recent technology nodes. In your first link I'm struggling to see it demonstrate what you say. Actually t
6.
by spankyspangler 5y ago
Of course it does. Not much US oil usage, of course, because US uses oil extracted domestically. And most of China's carbon emissions come from burning coal not oil, and almost all of that coal is mined domestically. But Saudi should n
7.
by spankyspangler 5y ago
> Does this account for the goods exported from China to the US? These should be added to the emissions caused by the US. No they shouldn't, China sells products in the global market. The emissions belong to them, along with the pri
8.
by spankyspangler 5y ago
> I'm not a fan of China's actions but your post is both mis-informative and ironic given that every one of your points apply to the U.S. at various points in time. It is neither misinformative or ironic, and it's clearly
9.
by spankyspangler 5y ago
In this particular case I don't think the market is all that complex. People were valuing bitcoin on the assumption that other people would keep buying it at higher prices before they sell. People didn't cut nearly half a trillio
10.
by spankyspangler 5y ago
Paying that much for a tech worker doesn't mean there is a shortage of them, it means FANG companies are gambling on "rockstars" to try get an edge. Flood the market with very good but not exceptional workers, and the top sal
11.
by spankyspangler 5y ago
The big costs are the variable costs per chip though, which is why technology shrinks have delivered such great cost savings for the end product despite the fact that every shrink has required ever greater outlays in development costs and c
12.
by spankyspangler 5y ago
Ahh, you not only detached the subthread but also crippled my ability to reply. Your intentions to swiftly protect the feelings of your user base and shield them from difficult conversations is laudable, though misguided because you inadver
13.
by spankyspangler 5y ago
Come on. Did you honestly believe I was referring to the concept of a viral reservoir as a conspiracy theory? This kind of obstructive style of conversation is unhelpful and tiresome. Some other poster above already tried that shtick, you c
14.
by spankyspangler 5y ago
> Virus reservoirs are things. Clearly I was not suggesting the concept of a virus reservoir was a conspiracy theory. I don't know if you were being deliberately obtuse, but it does not help the conversation. The parent made 3 claim
15.
by spankyspangler 5y ago
That sounds like a pretty wild conspiracy theory. Any basis for this belief?
16.
by spankyspangler 5y ago
Others have explained better than I could. Here's some a search turned up https://semiengineering.com/dram-scaling-challenges-grow/ https://blocksandfiles.com/2020/04/13/dram-is-stuc
17.
by spankyspangler 5y ago
DRAM scaling has come to an end. Memory prices will only move sharply down again if a different memory technology is developed that can be manufactured with finer features.
18.
by spankyspangler 5y ago
One certainly can be tolerant of different people with different ideas, and one can practice what they preach about to. Having a different personal definition of a word, or a different opinion or thought does not automatically make someone
19.
by spankyspangler 5y ago
No. Be tolerant of other people's own definitions of words.
20.
by spankyspangler 5y ago
I disagree. We need to do better with tolerance and acceptance. Preaching these things when it benefits a favored point of view and then rejecting them when it comes to others is actually the definition of weaponizing, and it does more harm
21.
by spankyspangler 5y ago
I disagree. I think rather that people need to be tolerant and accepting of different peoples' definitions of words.
22.
by spankyspangler 5y ago
Biodiversity is being decimated at an ever increasing rate, oceans are being stripped of life, many minerals will be mined out and become depleted and economically inaccessible within a generation or two, fresh water is running out, antibio
23.
by spankyspangler 5y ago
This? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kxG8uJUsWU Clearly a joke at the expense of the ineptitude of his opponent's campaign. The fact people point to this as their "evidence" is pretty clearly desperation an
24.
by spankyspangler 5y ago
What same evidence?
25.
by spankyspangler 5y ago
No I don't think it did have a reasonable starting point at all. Extra-ordinary claims require extra ordinary evidence, and as it turned out (as explained in Mueller's report), there never was any evidence for it. I'm not t
26.
by spankyspangler 5y ago
Who is "we"? Did you actually read what I wrote before replying?
27.
by spankyspangler 5y ago
> So how do you distinguish between faux "experts" and actual experts? It's not always easy, but in the case of COVID there were a lot of obvious shysters who were slavishly worshipped by the mob. Opening your eyes and thi
28.
by spankyspangler 5y ago
> Have you considered that the "desperate clamor" might just be a clamor to do the best thing ? And just how would we do that? I have considered that, and rejected it. I'm not talking about people who don't really kno
29.
by spankyspangler 5y ago
More half cocked rhetorical questions. > The entire thing doesn't include corners? It does. > And you entered the conversation in support of someone that literally said "every corner, nook and cranny"! So reply to that.
30.
by spankyspangler 5y ago
> Just because we have different opinions, there's no need for such cheap tricks. You shouldn't have been the one to start using them then.

More ›