pec...@gmail.com <peceed@gmail.com> schrieb:
> The free market is based on the notion of voluntary transactions.

> Every valuation is totally subjective, there is no theory of
> objective value. They are subjective so they can be different.

> That is the reason transactions happens: valuations of goods are higher for every side after transaction.
> The market mechanism sets the price at a level that maximizes the
> value of the transaction. In this way, we can universally maximize
> subjective value gains. Whenever something interferes with this
> mechanism, the performance is compromised.

Another interesting aspect is the enormous compression of a huge
amount of information into one single figure: Its price.

My favourite example of this is an O-ring gasket made of oil-
resistant NBR rubber, which you can buy for a dollar or so,
depending on size and quality.

The supply chain behind this simple thing is amazing. It starts
out with the monomers, Butadiene and Acrylonitrile. For Butadiene,
you need a source of unsaturated hydrocarbons (a steam cracker these
days) and a rather specialized technology to separate the Butadiene
out of the C4 fraction. For the steam cracker, you need reactors,
catalysts, distillation columns, pumps, electric motors and whatnot.
For the reactors and other metals stuff you need the main materials
to build them (alloyed steels for the most part). You need gaskets,
bolts, welding equipment, ...

Plus, you need sulfuric acid to separate the Butadiene. For this,
you need...

Then, the second monomer, Acrylonitrile, for which you need
Ammonia, for which you need...

Manufacture of the base polymer requires polmyerization starters,
emulsifiers, water, coagulation agent. You need stirred tanks,
extruders, dryers, balers, ...

You then require sulfur, carbon black, antioxidants, extension oil,
vulcanization accelerators, Zinc oxide, and what else... the typical
rubber mixture has around 20 components, each with their own supply
chain.

The rubber machinery needs...

If you really wanted to list what is in one of these rings, and
what is required, you would probably need a Bachelor's thesis worth
of work to chase it all down, so the phrase "Yak-shaving hole"
comes to mind, although I am fairly sure that making an NBR O-Ring
gasket does not actually involve shaving a yak.

My point? It is not necessary for a buyer of an O-ring to consider
all this. Just type "NBR O-Ring" into the search engine of your
choice and select a supplier. All the regulating along this
extremely complex supply chain (or should I say supply tree)
is done via price.

On Saturday, August 7, 2021 at 3:43:00 AM UTC-5, Thomas Koenig wrote:
> pec...@gmail.com <pec...@gmail.com> schrieb:
> > The free market is based on the notion of voluntary transactions.
>
> > Every valuation is totally subjective, there is no theory of
> > objective value. They are subjective so they can be different.
>
> > That is the reason transactions happens: valuations of goods are higher for every side after transaction.
> > The market mechanism sets the price at a level that maximizes the
> > value of the transaction. In this way, we can universally maximize
> > subjective value gains. Whenever something interferes with this
> > mechanism, the performance is compromised.
> Another interesting aspect is the enormous compression of a huge
> amount of information into one single figure: Its price.
>
> My favourite example of this is an O-ring gasket made of oil-
> resistant NBR rubber, which you can buy for a dollar or so,
> depending on size and quality.
>
> The supply chain behind this simple thing is amazing. It starts
> out with the monomers, Butadiene and Acrylonitrile. For Butadiene,
> you need a source of unsaturated hydrocarbons (a steam cracker these
> days) and a rather specialized technology to separate the Butadiene
> out of the C4 fraction. For the steam cracker, you need reactors,
> catalysts, distillation columns, pumps, electric motors and whatnot.
> For the reactors and other metals stuff you need the main materials
> to build them (alloyed steels for the most part). You need gaskets,
> bolts, welding equipment, ...
>
> Plus, you need sulfuric acid to separate the Butadiene. For this,
> you need...
>
> Then, the second monomer, Acrylonitrile, for which you need
> Ammonia, for which you need...
>
> Manufacture of the base polymer requires polmyerization starters,
> emulsifiers, water, coagulation agent. You need stirred tanks,
> extruders, dryers, balers, ...
>
> You then require sulfur, carbon black, antioxidants, extension oil,
> vulcanization accelerators, Zinc oxide, and what else... the typical
> rubber mixture has around 20 components, each with their own supply
> chain.
>
> The rubber machinery needs...
>
> If you really wanted to list what is in one of these rings, and
> what is required, you would probably need a Bachelor's thesis worth
> of work to chase it all down, so the phrase "Yak-shaving hole"
> comes to mind, although I am fairly sure that making an NBR O-Ring
> gasket does not actually involve shaving a yak.
>
> My point? It is not necessary for a buyer of an O-ring to consider
> all this. Just type "NBR O-Ring" into the search engine of your
> choice and select a supplier.
<
And that is because there is a market, a market that needs billions
of these things per year, so the suppliers line up at every stage to feed
the next stage until one finally gets to the O-ring consumer.
<
> All the regulating along this
> extremely complex supply chain (or should I say supply tree)
> is done via price.

On 8/6/2021 1:25 PM, pec...@gmail.com wrote:
> piątek, 6 sierpnia 2021 o 18:29:20 UTC+2 Stefan Monnier napisał(a):
>>> It is not a reason to weaken market forces even more.
>>> Free market happens. The size of the fruit and the amount of nectar are
>>> determined by the biological free market, where different species
>>> collaborate spontaneously. Eating fruit and drinking nectar is
>>> a business transaction.
>> That is an illusion.
>>
>> The free market is based on the notion of "cost". The cost of lives,
>> the cost of ecological impact, the cost of trauma, etc... these aren't
>> inherently quantified, so your "free market" necessarily needs to be
>> built on top of very subjective and politically motivated choices (and
>> often enforced by the threat of retaliation).
> The free market is based on the notion of voluntary transactions.
> Every valuation is totally subjective, there is no theory of objective value. They are subjective so they can be different.
> That is the reason transactions happens: valuations of goods are higher for every side after transaction.
> The market mechanism sets the price at a level that maximizes the value of the transaction. In this way, we can universally maximize subjective value gains. Whenever something interferes with this mechanism, the performance is compromised. The problem is monopoly, but a monopolist cannot force a customer to make a transaction, so even then the system can be quite efficient.

The free market works incredibly well - except when it doesn't. :-(

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_failure

--
- Stephen Fuld
(e-mail address disguised to prevent spam)

Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> wrote:
> On 8/6/2021 1:25 PM, pec...@gmail.com wrote:
>> piątek, 6 sierpnia 2021 o 18:29:20 UTC+2 Stefan Monnier napisał(a):
>>>> It is not a reason to weaken market forces even more.
>>>> Free market happens. The size of the fruit and the amount of nectar are
>>>> determined by the biological free market, where different species
>>>> collaborate spontaneously. Eating fruit and drinking nectar is
>>>> a business transaction.
>>> That is an illusion.
>>>
>>> The free market is based on the notion of "cost". The cost of lives,
>>> the cost of ecological impact, the cost of trauma, etc... these aren't
>>> inherently quantified, so your "free market" necessarily needs to be
>>> built on top of very subjective and politically motivated choices (and
>>> often enforced by the threat of retaliation).
>> The free market is based on the notion of voluntary transactions.
>> Every valuation is totally subjective, there is no theory of objective
>> value. They are subjective so they can be different.
>> That is the reason transactions happens: valuations of goods are higher
>> for every side after transaction.
>> The market mechanism sets the price at a level that maximizes the value
>> of the transaction. In this way, we can universally maximize subjective
>> value gains. Whenever something interferes with this mechanism, the
>> performance is compromised. The problem is monopoly, but a monopolist
>> cannot force a customer to make a transaction, so even then the system
>> can be quite efficient.
>
> The free market works incredibly well - except when it doesn't. :-(
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_failure

What a load of neo-Marxist Club of Rome bullshit typical of Wikipedia.

Companies that fail are replaced by companies that succeed. Temporary near
monopolies like General Motors and Intel are displaced by smaller companies
over time.

Earth has infinite resources, every year the cost to extract resources goes
down as technology and knowledge increase. This includes oil as witnessed
by the fracking revolution. And in a hundred years everyone will drive
electric cars, followed by flying cars AKA personal self flying
helicopters.

Markets can only fail if a leftist government in search of “equity”
destroys the markets as happened most recently in Venezuela. You can also
have lack of markets like in Cuba which result in a frozen economy stuck in
the 1960’s. This is the only way that can lead to resource depletion, as
technology fails to advance in frozen economies.

Tragedy of the commons is also another failure of government, not
companies, as those companies themselves will lobby for restrictions to
keep the market alive. Only fools and governments kill golden gooses.

And pollution peaked in the 1960’s when the clean air act passed. Our
cities are now cleaner today than they have ever been in world history.
Just look at old pictures of horse drawn carriages in cities, have you ever
been around a horse shitting in the street?

Brett [2021-08-07 22:28:38] wrote:
> Earth has infinite resources,

'nough said,

Stefan

On 08/08/2021 00:28, Brett wrote:
> Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> wrote:
>> On 8/6/2021 1:25 PM, pec...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> piątek, 6 sierpnia 2021 o 18:29:20 UTC+2 Stefan Monnier napisał(a):
>>>>> It is not a reason to weaken market forces even more.
>>>>> Free market happens. The size of the fruit and the amount of nectar are
>>>>> determined by the biological free market, where different species
>>>>> collaborate spontaneously. Eating fruit and drinking nectar is
>>>>> a business transaction.
>>>> That is an illusion.
>>>>
>>>> The free market is based on the notion of "cost". The cost of lives,
>>>> the cost of ecological impact, the cost of trauma, etc... these aren't
>>>> inherently quantified, so your "free market" necessarily needs to be
>>>> built on top of very subjective and politically motivated choices (and
>>>> often enforced by the threat of retaliation).
>>> The free market is based on the notion of voluntary transactions.
>>> Every valuation is totally subjective, there is no theory of objective
>>> value. They are subjective so they can be different.
>>> That is the reason transactions happens: valuations of goods are higher
>>> for every side after transaction.
>>> The market mechanism sets the price at a level that maximizes the value
>>> of the transaction. In this way, we can universally maximize subjective
>>> value gains. Whenever something interferes with this mechanism, the
>>> performance is compromised. The problem is monopoly, but a monopolist
>>> cannot force a customer to make a transaction, so even then the system
>>> can be quite efficient.
>>
>> The free market works incredibly well - except when it doesn't. :-(
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_failure
>
> What a load of neo-Marxist Club of Rome bullshit typical of Wikipedia.
>
> Companies that fail are replaced by companies that succeed. Temporary near
> monopolies like General Motors and Intel are displaced by smaller companies
> over time.
>
> Earth has infinite resources, every year the cost to extract resources goes
> down as technology and knowledge increase. This includes oil as witnessed
> by the fracking revolution. And in a hundred years everyone will drive
> electric cars, followed by flying cars AKA personal self flying
> helicopters.
>
> Markets can only fail if a leftist government in search of “equity”
> destroys the markets as happened most recently in Venezuela. You can also
> have lack of markets like in Cuba which result in a frozen economy stuck in
> the 1960’s. This is the only way that can lead to resource depletion, as
> technology fails to advance in frozen economies.
>
> Tragedy of the commons is also another failure of government, not
> companies, as those companies themselves will lobby for restrictions to
> keep the market alive. Only fools and governments kill golden gooses.
>
> And pollution peaked in the 1960’s when the clean air act passed. Our
> cities are now cleaner today than they have ever been in world history.
> Just look at old pictures of horse drawn carriages in cities, have you ever
> been around a horse shitting in the street?
>

This is one of these "Poe's Law challenges", isn't it? I can't tell if
you really are a rapid fanatic who views Elysium as a film about a
inevitable Utopian future, or if you are mocking such people by writing
the most extreme parody you can.

I suspect the former. What a sad, misinformed little life you must live.

On Sat, 7 Aug 2021 22:28:38 -0000 (UTC), Brett <ggtgp@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>Earth has infinite resources ...

Hardly. But the problem currently is not a lack of resources, but
rather that so many of them are being badly mismanaged.

On 8/7/2021 3:28 PM, Brett wrote:
> Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> wrote:
>> On 8/6/2021 1:25 PM, pec...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> piątek, 6 sierpnia 2021 o 18:29:20 UTC+2 Stefan Monnier napisał(a):
>>>>> It is not a reason to weaken market forces even more.
>>>>> Free market happens. The size of the fruit and the amount of nectar are
>>>>> determined by the biological free market, where different species
>>>>> collaborate spontaneously. Eating fruit and drinking nectar is
>>>>> a business transaction.
>>>> That is an illusion.
>>>>
>>>> The free market is based on the notion of "cost". The cost of lives,
>>>> the cost of ecological impact, the cost of trauma, etc... these aren't
>>>> inherently quantified, so your "free market" necessarily needs to be
>>>> built on top of very subjective and politically motivated choices (and
>>>> often enforced by the threat of retaliation).
>>> The free market is based on the notion of voluntary transactions.
>>> Every valuation is totally subjective, there is no theory of objective
>>> value. They are subjective so they can be different.
>>> That is the reason transactions happens: valuations of goods are higher
>>> for every side after transaction.
>>> The market mechanism sets the price at a level that maximizes the value
>>> of the transaction. In this way, we can universally maximize subjective
>>> value gains. Whenever something interferes with this mechanism, the
>>> performance is compromised. The problem is monopoly, but a monopolist
>>> cannot force a customer to make a transaction, so even then the system
>>> can be quite efficient.
>>
>> The free market works incredibly well - except when it doesn't. :-(
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_failure
>
> What a load of neo-Marxist Club of Rome bullshit typical of Wikipedia.

Name calling doesn't help your argument.

>
> Companies that fail are replaced by companies that succeed. Temporary near
> monopolies like General Motors and Intel are displaced by smaller companies
> over time.
>
> Earth has infinite resources, every year the cost to extract resources goes
> down as technology and knowledge increase. This includes oil as witnessed
> by the fracking revolution.

Earth doesn't have infinite resources. If it had an infinite amount of
oil, that oil would have infinite mass, and that mass's infinite
gravitational force would cause the earth to crash into the sun (and
much worse). But you are right that the cost of extraction is going
down. That just means we will run out sooner.

> And in a hundred years everyone will drive
> electric cars, followed by flying cars AKA personal self flying
> helicopters.
>
> Markets can only fail if a leftist government in search of “equity”
> destroys the markets as happened most recently in Venezuela. You can also
> have lack of markets like in Cuba which result in a frozen economy stuck in
> the 1960’s. This is the only way that can lead to resource depletion, as
> technology fails to advance in frozen economies.
>
> Tragedy of the commons is also another failure of government, not
> companies, as those companies themselves will lobby for restrictions to
> keep the market alive.

This argument is falsified by your next paragraph.

> Only fools and governments kill golden gooses.
>
> And pollution peaked in the 1960’s when the clean air act passed.

Precisely! The government's action in passing the clean air act (over
many company's objections) resulted in a few years in much cleaner air.
Pollution is an example of a market failure (externality) that
government (or some other non-market) intervention is required in order
to fix.

> Our
> cities are now cleaner today than they have ever been in world history.

Well, at least for a along time.

--
- Stephen Fuld
(e-mail address disguised to prevent spam)

On Sunday, August 8, 2021 at 10:07:24 AM UTC-5, Stephen Fuld wrote:
> On 8/7/2021 3:28 PM, Brett wrote:
> > Stephen Fuld <sf...@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> wrote:
> >> On 8/6/2021 1:25 PM, pec...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> piątek, 6 sierpnia 2021 o 18:29:20 UTC+2 Stefan Monnier napisał(a):
> >>>>> It is not a reason to weaken market forces even more.
> >>>>> Free market happens. The size of the fruit and the amount of nectar are
> >>>>> determined by the biological free market, where different species
> >>>>> collaborate spontaneously. Eating fruit and drinking nectar is
> >>>>> a business transaction.
> >>>> That is an illusion.
> >>>>
> >>>> The free market is based on the notion of "cost". The cost of lives,
> >>>> the cost of ecological impact, the cost of trauma, etc... these aren't
> >>>> inherently quantified, so your "free market" necessarily needs to be
> >>>> built on top of very subjective and politically motivated choices (and
> >>>> often enforced by the threat of retaliation).
> >>> The free market is based on the notion of voluntary transactions.
> >>> Every valuation is totally subjective, there is no theory of objective
> >>> value. They are subjective so they can be different.
> >>> That is the reason transactions happens: valuations of goods are higher
> >>> for every side after transaction.
> >>> The market mechanism sets the price at a level that maximizes the value
> >>> of the transaction. In this way, we can universally maximize subjective
> >>> value gains. Whenever something interferes with this mechanism, the
> >>> performance is compromised. The problem is monopoly, but a monopolist
> >>> cannot force a customer to make a transaction, so even then the system
> >>> can be quite efficient.
> >>
> >> The free market works incredibly well - except when it doesn't. :-(
> >>
> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_failure
> >
> > What a load of neo-Marxist Club of Rome bullshit typical of Wikipedia.
> Name calling doesn't help your argument.
> >
> > Companies that fail are replaced by companies that succeed. Temporary near
> > monopolies like General Motors and Intel are displaced by smaller companies
> > over time.
> >
> > Earth has infinite resources, every year the cost to extract resources goes
> > down as technology and knowledge increase. This includes oil as witnessed
> > by the fracking revolution.
> Earth doesn't have infinite resources. If it had an infinite amount of
> oil, that oil would have infinite mass, and that mass's infinite
> gravitational force would cause the earth to crash into the sun (and
> much worse). But you are right that the cost of extraction is going
> down. That just means we will run out sooner.
> > And in a hundred years everyone will drive
> > electric cars, followed by flying cars AKA personal self flying
> > helicopters.
> >
> > Markets can only fail if a leftist government in search of “equity”
> > destroys the markets as happened most recently in Venezuela. You can also
> > have lack of markets like in Cuba which result in a frozen economy stuck in
> > the 1960’s. This is the only way that can lead to resource depletion, as
> > technology fails to advance in frozen economies.
> >
> > Tragedy of the commons is also another failure of government, not
> > companies, as those companies themselves will lobby for restrictions to
> > keep the market alive.
> This argument is falsified by your next paragraph.
> > Only fools and governments kill golden gooses.
> >
> > And pollution peaked in the 1960’s when the clean air act passed.
> Precisely! The government's action in passing the clean air act (over
> many company's objections) resulted in a few years in much cleaner air.
> Pollution is an example of a market failure (externality) that
> government (or some other non-market) intervention is required in order
> to fix.
> > Our
> > cities are now cleaner today than they have ever been in world history.
> Well, at least for a along time.
<
I am not sure the air in NYC is better today than it was in 1400 AD.
<
Indians refused to live in the LA basin due to its poor air quality circa 1000 AD.
<
I am sure that if we don't do something about Co2 emissions, that bad
things will happen to essentially everyone on the planet.
> --
> - Stephen Fuld
> (e-mail address disguised to prevent spam)

"pec...@gmail.com" <peceed@gmail.com> writes:

> Tim Rentsch wrote:
>
>> Dell is no longer shipping energy-hungry gaming PCs to
>> certain states in America because they demand more energy
>> than local standards allow.
>>
>> Customers seeking to purchase, for example, an Alienware
>> Aurora Ryzen Edition R10 Gaming Desktop from Dell's website
>> and have it shipped to California are now presented with a
>> message that tells buyers they're out of luck.
>>
>> "This product cannot be shipped to the states of California,
>> Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Vermont or Washington due to power
>> consumption regulations adopted by those states," the
>> website says. "Any orders placed that are bound for those
>> states will be canceled."
>
> It makes no sense to heat the water without making any useful
> computations. We need water heaters that can act as water cooling
> for the hosted electronics. Any high-performance computer / console
> system should be installed there in the racks and use the fiber
> optic connection to the living room. This way the law can be
> circumvented without braking its spirit.
> The ideal system should be a hybrid with molten metal battery.
>
>
>> ...
>>
>> Such concern about energy efficiency appears to be
>> appropriate given the findings of a 2015 Semiconductor
>> Industry Association report that, given a benchmark system
>> of 10**-14 Joules/per bit transition, "computing will
>> not be sustainable by 2040, when the energy required for
>> computing will exceed the estimated world's energy
>> production."
>
> Not really, there is a free market that is the best distributed
> optimization algorithm possible. Every artificial limitation is a
> misallocation of resources, a lesson the neo-Marxists have not
> learned.

All science trembles at the searing logic of your fiery
intellect.

Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes:

> On Monday, August 2, 2021 at 12:29:59 PM UTC+3, Tim Rentsch wrote:
>
>> Michael S <already...@yahoo.com> writes:
>>
>>> On Saturday, July 31, 2021 at 2:14:53 AM UTC+3, Tim Rentsch wrote:
>>>
>>>> (..I thought the group would be interested in this..)
>>>>
>>>> https://www.theregister.com/2021/07/26/dell_energy_pcs/
>>>>
>>>> (..A few paragraphs of interest..)
>>>>
>>>> Dell is no longer shipping energy-hungry gaming PCs to
>>>> certain states in America because they demand more energy
>>>> than local standards allow.
>>>>
>>>> Customers seeking to purchase, for example, an Alienware
>>>> Aurora Ryzen Edition R10 Gaming Desktop from Dell's website
>>>> and have it shipped to California are now presented with a
>>>> message that tells buyers they're out of luck.
>>>>
>>>> "This product cannot be shipped to the states of California,
>>>> Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Vermont or Washington due to power
>>>> consumption regulations adopted by those states," the
>>>> website says. "Any orders placed that are bound for those
>>>> states will be canceled."
>>>>
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> Such concern about energy efficiency appears to be
>>>> appropriate given the findings of a 2015 Semiconductor
>>>> Industry Association report that, given a benchmark system
>>>> of 10**-14 Joules/per bit transition, "computing will
>>>> not be sustainable by 2040, when the energy required for
>>>> computing will exceed the estimated world's energy
>>>> production."
>>>
>>> I am more than a little disappointed by poster's reactions in this
>>> thread. I was expecting to see more of libertarian sentiment,
>>> which was traditionally strongly represented on Usenet . SJWs
>>> took over?
>>
>> Climate change not happening fast enough for you?
>
> Certainly not fast enough for governments to tell me how to use
> electricity, I bought and paid for.
> It never will be fast enough.

An interesting statement, considering the massive fires now
burning in several states, the recent heat dome in Oregon and
Washington that killed over a billion marine animals in the space
of about a week, and the severe water shortage occurring in the
western states with no end in sight. Even GOP congresspersons
are starting to wake up to the reality that the effects of
climate change are already terrible and there is no sign of the
pace lessening.

> See, I am old enough to realize the limits of Laissez-faire
> ideology. I accept that government can tax electric companies to
> make my bills more painful. They can even put upper limit on the
> amount of electricity, I am allowed to buy each month. Or in peak
> hours.
> But they shouldn't intervene in how I'm spending what is already
> mine.

So you think you ought to be allowed to buy a car that gets 4
miles per gallon of gas, even though its carbon footprint is
larger than five or six average other cars of today?

> Of course, I think that applying any of above mentioned limitations
> in State of California is ultra moronic.
> Because it's a change money relatively to insane amounts of oil that
> f**ing californians are burning in their f**ing cars.

The state of California has made an effort, and is making an
effort, to raise air quality standards for car manufacturers.
This effort has been disparaged and opposed by various
self-proclaimed libertarians who hold political office.

Contrast with the state of Florida, which in the past week has
set three (!) daily records of deaths due to Covid.

> But that's off topic.

My original post was basically a pointer to an article about some
computers Dell would not ship to certain states - perhaps not
exactly on topic but not too far off topic either. It was your
response to the original posting that veered sharply into the
off-topic realm of political judgments.

On 8/4/2021 12:40 AM, George Neuner wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Aug 2021 21:17:08 -0700, "Chris M. Thomasson"
> <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I am wondering what you think about using a metal hydride to store hydrogen?
>>
>> https://youtu.be/Ytg23mDd1a4
>
> I generally am in favor of much greater use of hydrogen - provided
> that it is cleanly produced using water and electricity.
>
> Unfortunately most hydrogen currently is extracted from natural gas.
> Extracting the hydrogen results in nitrogen for fertilizer, so it's
> not wasted in that use, but natural gas supplies are limited and far
> too much of it is just being burned to generate electricity.
>
>
> Storing hydrogen in solid hydrides is an interesting idea - one I
> learned about years ago in a documentary about Stanford Ovshinsky and
> his NiMH based solutions. [Sorry don't have a link]
>
> What wasn't explained then was how the hydrogen gas could be gotten
> /out/ of solid form fast enough to supply it in bulk to an engine.
> This video about Bob Lazar answers that question at least with respect
> to his LiMH solution.
>
>
> But the problem that remains is that metals that easily form hydrides
> for the most part are toxic ... some of them /highly/ toxic. Which
> takes us back to "batteries are dirty".
>
> A hydrogen vehicle using solid hydride storage won't explode if it's
> in an accident, but it still may result in a toxic mess - one that is
> a lot harder to clean up than a simple gasoline/diesel spill.
>
> YMMV.
>

Oh yeah, it would be a toxic mess. Are there hydrides that can
efficiently store hydrogen that are "less" toxic than others?

On 8/8/2021 11:15 AM, Tim Rentsch wrote:
> Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes:
>
>> On Monday, August 2, 2021 at 12:29:59 PM UTC+3, Tim Rentsch wrote:
>>
>>> Michael S <already...@yahoo.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On Saturday, July 31, 2021 at 2:14:53 AM UTC+3, Tim Rentsch wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> (..I thought the group would be interested in this..)
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.theregister.com/2021/07/26/dell_energy_pcs/
>>>>>
>>>>> (..A few paragraphs of interest..)
>>>>>
>>>>> Dell is no longer shipping energy-hungry gaming PCs to
>>>>> certain states in America because they demand more energy
>>>>> than local standards allow.
>>>>>
>>>>> Customers seeking to purchase, for example, an Alienware
>>>>> Aurora Ryzen Edition R10 Gaming Desktop from Dell's website
>>>>> and have it shipped to California are now presented with a
>>>>> message that tells buyers they're out of luck.
>>>>>
>>>>> "This product cannot be shipped to the states of California,
>>>>> Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Vermont or Washington due to power
>>>>> consumption regulations adopted by those states," the
>>>>> website says. "Any orders placed that are bound for those
>>>>> states will be canceled."
>>>>>
>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>> Such concern about energy efficiency appears to be
>>>>> appropriate given the findings of a 2015 Semiconductor
>>>>> Industry Association report that, given a benchmark system
>>>>> of 10**-14 Joules/per bit transition, "computing will
>>>>> not be sustainable by 2040, when the energy required for
>>>>> computing will exceed the estimated world's energy
>>>>> production."
>>>>
>>>> I am more than a little disappointed by poster's reactions in this
>>>> thread. I was expecting to see more of libertarian sentiment,
>>>> which was traditionally strongly represented on Usenet . SJWs
>>>> took over?
>>>
>>> Climate change not happening fast enough for you?
>>
>> Certainly not fast enough for governments to tell me how to use
>> electricity, I bought and paid for.
>> It never will be fast enough.
>
> An interesting statement, considering the massive fires now
> burning in several states, the recent heat dome in Oregon and
> Washington that killed over a billion marine animals in the space
> of about a week, and the severe water shortage occurring in the
> western states with no end in sight. Even GOP congresspersons
> are starting to wake up to the reality that the effects of
> climate change are already terrible and there is no sign of the
> pace lessening.

[...]

Before Humans, how many fires went crazy, and crowned up in the tops of
the trees and burned massive areas?

On Sunday, August 8, 2021 at 2:41:07 PM UTC-5, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> On 8/8/2021 11:15 AM, Tim Rentsch wrote:
> > Michael S <already...@yahoo.com> writes:
> >
> >> On Monday, August 2, 2021 at 12:29:59 PM UTC+3, Tim Rentsch wrote:
> >>
> >>> Michael S <already...@yahoo.com> writes:
> >>>
> >>>> On Saturday, July 31, 2021 at 2:14:53 AM UTC+3, Tim Rentsch wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> (..I thought the group would be interested in this..)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> https://www.theregister.com/2021/07/26/dell_energy_pcs/
> >>>>>
> >>>>> (..A few paragraphs of interest..)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Dell is no longer shipping energy-hungry gaming PCs to
> >>>>> certain states in America because they demand more energy
> >>>>> than local standards allow.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Customers seeking to purchase, for example, an Alienware
> >>>>> Aurora Ryzen Edition R10 Gaming Desktop from Dell's website
> >>>>> and have it shipped to California are now presented with a
> >>>>> message that tells buyers they're out of luck.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "This product cannot be shipped to the states of California,
> >>>>> Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Vermont or Washington due to power
> >>>>> consumption regulations adopted by those states," the
> >>>>> website says. "Any orders placed that are bound for those
> >>>>> states will be canceled."
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Such concern about energy efficiency appears to be
> >>>>> appropriate given the findings of a 2015 Semiconductor
> >>>>> Industry Association report that, given a benchmark system
> >>>>> of 10**-14 Joules/per bit transition, "computing will
> >>>>> not be sustainable by 2040, when the energy required for
> >>>>> computing will exceed the estimated world's energy
> >>>>> production."
> >>>>
> >>>> I am more than a little disappointed by poster's reactions in this
> >>>> thread. I was expecting to see more of libertarian sentiment,
> >>>> which was traditionally strongly represented on Usenet . SJWs
> >>>> took over?
> >>>
> >>> Climate change not happening fast enough for you?
> >>
> >> Certainly not fast enough for governments to tell me how to use
> >> electricity, I bought and paid for.
> >> It never will be fast enough.
> >
> > An interesting statement, considering the massive fires now
> > burning in several states, the recent heat dome in Oregon and
> > Washington that killed over a billion marine animals in the space
> > of about a week, and the severe water shortage occurring in the
> > western states with no end in sight. Even GOP congresspersons
> > are starting to wake up to the reality that the effects of
> > climate change are already terrible and there is no sign of the
> > pace lessening.
> [...]
>
> Before Humans, how many fires went crazy, and crowned up in the tops of
> the trees and burned massive areas?
<
I am going to go with:: "Nobody knows".

On 8/8/2021 1:17 PM, MitchAlsup wrote:
> On Sunday, August 8, 2021 at 2:41:07 PM UTC-5, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>> On 8/8/2021 11:15 AM, Tim Rentsch wrote:
>>> Michael S <already...@yahoo.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On Monday, August 2, 2021 at 12:29:59 PM UTC+3, Tim Rentsch wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Michael S <already...@yahoo.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Saturday, July 31, 2021 at 2:14:53 AM UTC+3, Tim Rentsch wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (..I thought the group would be interested in this..)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.theregister.com/2021/07/26/dell_energy_pcs/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (..A few paragraphs of interest..)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dell is no longer shipping energy-hungry gaming PCs to
>>>>>>> certain states in America because they demand more energy
>>>>>>> than local standards allow.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Customers seeking to purchase, for example, an Alienware
>>>>>>> Aurora Ryzen Edition R10 Gaming Desktop from Dell's website
>>>>>>> and have it shipped to California are now presented with a
>>>>>>> message that tells buyers they're out of luck.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "This product cannot be shipped to the states of California,
>>>>>>> Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Vermont or Washington due to power
>>>>>>> consumption regulations adopted by those states," the
>>>>>>> website says. "Any orders placed that are bound for those
>>>>>>> states will be canceled."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Such concern about energy efficiency appears to be
>>>>>>> appropriate given the findings of a 2015 Semiconductor
>>>>>>> Industry Association report that, given a benchmark system
>>>>>>> of 10**-14 Joules/per bit transition, "computing will
>>>>>>> not be sustainable by 2040, when the energy required for
>>>>>>> computing will exceed the estimated world's energy
>>>>>>> production."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am more than a little disappointed by poster's reactions in this
>>>>>> thread. I was expecting to see more of libertarian sentiment,
>>>>>> which was traditionally strongly represented on Usenet . SJWs
>>>>>> took over?
>>>>>
>>>>> Climate change not happening fast enough for you?
>>>>
>>>> Certainly not fast enough for governments to tell me how to use
>>>> electricity, I bought and paid for.
>>>> It never will be fast enough.
>>>
>>> An interesting statement, considering the massive fires now
>>> burning in several states, the recent heat dome in Oregon and
>>> Washington that killed over a billion marine animals in the space
>>> of about a week, and the severe water shortage occurring in the
>>> western states with no end in sight. Even GOP congresspersons
>>> are starting to wake up to the reality that the effects of
>>> climate change are already terrible and there is no sign of the
>>> pace lessening.
>> [...]
>>
>> Before Humans, how many fires went crazy, and crowned up in the tops of
>> the trees and burned massive areas?
> <
> I am going to go with:: "Nobody knows".
>

Is there any way to detect absolutely _massive_ ancient fires using geology?

> Is there any way to detect absolutely _massive_ ancient fires using geology?

Could be. BTW, I like https://xkcd.com/1732/ as a fun rendition of the
data we know about past temperatures (I'd be interested in comparable
renditions for CO2 levels).

In any case, the explosive nature of exponential processes should make
it obvious to any computer scientist that if we keep doing what we've
been doing for the last couple centuries (with exponential growth in all
kinds of ways) we'll sooner or later hit a major wall. There is
overwhelming evidence in various areas that the human presence on this
planet is not in the "negligible" part of the curve any more, so a wall
is probably not too far off.

Stefan

On 8/8/2021 2:47 PM, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>> Is there any way to detect absolutely _massive_ ancient fires using geology?
>
> Could be. BTW, I like https://xkcd.com/1732/ as a fun rendition of the
> data we know about past temperatures (I'd be interested in comparable
> renditions for CO2 levels).
>
> In any case, the explosive nature of exponential processes should make
> it obvious to any computer scientist that if we keep doing what we've
> been doing for the last couple centuries (with exponential growth in all
> kinds of ways) we'll sooner or later hit a major wall. There is
> overwhelming evidence in various areas that the human presence on this
> planet is not in the "negligible" part of the curve any more, so a wall
> is probably not too far off.

I can see a natural warming cycle, mixed with pollution, equaling a very
dangerous scenario.

MitchAlsup wrote:
> On Sunday, August 8, 2021 at 2:41:07 PM UTC-5, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>> On 8/8/2021 11:15 AM, Tim Rentsch wrote:
>>> An interesting statement, considering the massive fires now
>>> burning in several states, the recent heat dome in Oregon and
>>> Washington that killed over a billion marine animals in the space
>>> of about a week, and the severe water shortage occurring in the
>>> western states with no end in sight. Even GOP congresspersons
>>> are starting to wake up to the reality that the effects of
>>> climate change are already terrible and there is no sign of the
>>> pace lessening.
>> [...]
>>
>> Before Humans, how many fires went crazy, and crowned up in the tops of
>> the trees and burned massive areas?
> <
> I am going to go with:: "Nobody knows".

Charcoal fossil record

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_record_of_fire

On Sunday, August 8, 2021 at 4:11:39 PM UTC-5, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> On 8/8/2021 1:17 PM, MitchAlsup wrote:
> > On Sunday, August 8, 2021 at 2:41:07 PM UTC-5, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> >> On 8/8/2021 11:15 AM, Tim Rentsch wrote:
> >>> Michael S <already...@yahoo.com> writes:
> >>>
> >>>> On Monday, August 2, 2021 at 12:29:59 PM UTC+3, Tim Rentsch wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Michael S <already...@yahoo.com> writes:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On Saturday, July 31, 2021 at 2:14:53 AM UTC+3, Tim Rentsch wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> (..I thought the group would be interested in this..)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> https://www.theregister.com/2021/07/26/dell_energy_pcs/
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> (..A few paragraphs of interest..)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Dell is no longer shipping energy-hungry gaming PCs to
> >>>>>>> certain states in America because they demand more energy
> >>>>>>> than local standards allow.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Customers seeking to purchase, for example, an Alienware
> >>>>>>> Aurora Ryzen Edition R10 Gaming Desktop from Dell's website
> >>>>>>> and have it shipped to California are now presented with a
> >>>>>>> message that tells buyers they're out of luck.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> "This product cannot be shipped to the states of California,
> >>>>>>> Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Vermont or Washington due to power
> >>>>>>> consumption regulations adopted by those states," the
> >>>>>>> website says. "Any orders placed that are bound for those
> >>>>>>> states will be canceled."
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> ...
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Such concern about energy efficiency appears to be
> >>>>>>> appropriate given the findings of a 2015 Semiconductor
> >>>>>>> Industry Association report that, given a benchmark system
> >>>>>>> of 10**-14 Joules/per bit transition, "computing will
> >>>>>>> not be sustainable by 2040, when the energy required for
> >>>>>>> computing will exceed the estimated world's energy
> >>>>>>> production."
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I am more than a little disappointed by poster's reactions in this
> >>>>>> thread. I was expecting to see more of libertarian sentiment,
> >>>>>> which was traditionally strongly represented on Usenet . SJWs
> >>>>>> took over?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Climate change not happening fast enough for you?
> >>>>
> >>>> Certainly not fast enough for governments to tell me how to use
> >>>> electricity, I bought and paid for.
> >>>> It never will be fast enough.
> >>>
> >>> An interesting statement, considering the massive fires now
> >>> burning in several states, the recent heat dome in Oregon and
> >>> Washington that killed over a billion marine animals in the space
> >>> of about a week, and the severe water shortage occurring in the
> >>> western states with no end in sight. Even GOP congresspersons
> >>> are starting to wake up to the reality that the effects of
> >>> climate change are already terrible and there is no sign of the
> >>> pace lessening.
> >> [...]
> >>
> >> Before Humans, how many fires went crazy, and crowned up in the tops of
> >> the trees and burned massive areas?
> > <
> > I am going to go with:: "Nobody knows".
> >
> Is there any way to detect absolutely _massive_ ancient fires using geology?
<
Burned forests covered by rocks and sediments.

On 8/8/2021 2:47 PM, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>> Is there any way to detect absolutely _massive_ ancient fires using geology?
>
> Could be. BTW, I like https://xkcd.com/1732/ as a fun rendition of the
> data we know about past temperatures (I'd be interested in comparable
> renditions for CO2 levels).

https://earth.org/data_visualization/a-brief-history-of-co2/

--
- Stephen Fuld
(e-mail address disguised to prevent spam)

Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:
>> Is there any way to detect absolutely _massive_ ancient fires using geology?
>
> Could be. BTW, I like https://xkcd.com/1732/ as a fun rendition of the
> data we know about past temperatures (I'd be interested in comparable
> renditions for CO2 levels).
>
> In any case, the explosive nature of exponential processes should make
> it obvious to any computer scientist that if we keep doing what we've
> been doing for the last couple centuries (with exponential growth in all
> kinds of ways) we'll sooner or later hit a major wall. There is
> overwhelming evidence in various areas that the human presence on this
> planet is not in the "negligible" part of the curve any more, so a wall
> is probably not too far off.
>
>
> Stefan
>

Earths climate is about to leave the brief interglacial cycle and suffer an
8 Celsius temperature drop, that is 46 degrees Fahrenheit.

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/abrupt-climate-change/Glacial-Interglacial%20Cycles

Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8/8/2021 1:17 PM, MitchAlsup wrote:
>> On Sunday, August 8, 2021 at 2:41:07 PM UTC-5, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>>> On 8/8/2021 11:15 AM, Tim Rentsch wrote:
>>>> Michael S <already...@yahoo.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On Monday, August 2, 2021 at 12:29:59 PM UTC+3, Tim Rentsch wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Michael S <already...@yahoo.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 31, 2021 at 2:14:53 AM UTC+3, Tim Rentsch wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (..I thought the group would be interested in this..)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://www.theregister.com/2021/07/26/dell_energy_pcs/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (..A few paragraphs of interest..)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Dell is no longer shipping energy-hungry gaming PCs to
>>>>>>>> certain states in America because they demand more energy
>>>>>>>> than local standards allow.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Customers seeking to purchase, for example, an Alienware
>>>>>>>> Aurora Ryzen Edition R10 Gaming Desktop from Dell's website
>>>>>>>> and have it shipped to California are now presented with a
>>>>>>>> message that tells buyers they're out of luck.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "This product cannot be shipped to the states of California,
>>>>>>>> Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Vermont or Washington due to power
>>>>>>>> consumption regulations adopted by those states," the
>>>>>>>> website says. "Any orders placed that are bound for those
>>>>>>>> states will be canceled."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Such concern about energy efficiency appears to be
>>>>>>>> appropriate given the findings of a 2015 Semiconductor
>>>>>>>> Industry Association report that, given a benchmark system
>>>>>>>> of 10**-14 Joules/per bit transition, "computing will
>>>>>>>> not be sustainable by 2040, when the energy required for
>>>>>>>> computing will exceed the estimated world's energy
>>>>>>>> production."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am more than a little disappointed by poster's reactions in this
>>>>>>> thread. I was expecting to see more of libertarian sentiment,
>>>>>>> which was traditionally strongly represented on Usenet . SJWs
>>>>>>> took over?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Climate change not happening fast enough for you?
>>>>>
>>>>> Certainly not fast enough for governments to tell me how to use
>>>>> electricity, I bought and paid for.
>>>>> It never will be fast enough.
>>>>
>>>> An interesting statement, considering the massive fires now
>>>> burning in several states, the recent heat dome in Oregon and
>>>> Washington that killed over a billion marine animals in the space
>>>> of about a week, and the severe water shortage occurring in the
>>>> western states with no end in sight. Even GOP congresspersons
>>>> are starting to wake up to the reality that the effects of
>>>> climate change are already terrible and there is no sign of the
>>>> pace lessening.
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> Before Humans, how many fires went crazy, and crowned up in the tops of
>>> the trees and burned massive areas?
>> <
>> I am going to go with:: "Nobody knows".
>>
>
> Is there any way to detect absolutely _massive_ ancient fires using geology?

There are lots of black mat layers of continental or global burns.

https://cometresearchgroup.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/7-BLACK-MAT-1.pptx.pdf

Brett [2021-08-08 23:29:02] wrote:
> Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:
>>> Is there any way to detect absolutely _massive_ ancient fires using geology?
>> Could be. BTW, I like https://xkcd.com/1732/ as a fun rendition of the
>> data we know about past temperatures (I'd be interested in comparable
>> renditions for CO2 levels).
>> In any case, the explosive nature of exponential processes should make
>> it obvious to any computer scientist that if we keep doing what we've
>> been doing for the last couple centuries (with exponential growth in all
>> kinds of ways) we'll sooner or later hit a major wall. There is
>> overwhelming evidence in various areas that the human presence on this
>> planet is not in the "negligible" part of the curve any more, so a wall
>> is probably not too far off.
> Earths climate is about to leave the brief interglacial cycle and suffer an
> 8 Celsius temperature drop, that is 46 degrees Fahrenheit.
>
> https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/abrupt-climate-change/Glacial-Interglacial%20Cycles

Even if that happens to be right, it just pushes one of the oncoming
walls, there are plenty more on the horizon.

Stefan

Chris M. Thomasson:

>
> Before Humans, how many fires went crazy, and crowned up in the tops of
> the trees and burned massive areas?
Fire is a frequent natural process, there are trees that evolved toward high resistance that requires fire to survive. For example cones are vehicles that protects the seeds from fire and release them soon after.
The only negative human activity is firefighting, it allows to accumulate higher amounts of combustible materials. In "protected" areas fires are less frequent but more intense.

Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/abrupt-climate-change/Glacial-Interglacial%20Cycles
> Even if that happens to be right, it just pushes one of the oncoming
> walls, there are plenty more on the horizon.
By the end of the 20th century, the amount of horse shit will make cities uninhabitable.