• 1 Post
  • 25 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 23rd, 2023

help-circle
  • Pseu@beehaw.orgtoGaming@beehaw.orgLOL? lol
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    10 months ago

    I played a long while ago and a string of similar incidents eventually made me leave.

    I came back ~6months ago, and it was more chill, but still not great.

    I will say that if you’re in a group of 3 or more non-toxic people, you almost never get toxic players. Not only because you’ve only got 2 chances to roll low rather than 4, but also because they’re more aware that probably won’t get anywhere.




  • So the Stanford post assumes that we continue to consume roughly 2% more energy per year. At that rate, in 1000 years we would go from consuming 1.753×10^13 W to consuming 6.98×10^21 W. This would be 40,000 times the energy the sun puts on the Earth. Because most energy quickly turns into heat, this would heat up the entire surface of the Earth to the point where it is uninhabitable. I feel that tidal locking would be the least of our concerns at that point.

    Professor Liu seems to have made a simple mistake: What his model showed was unsustainable was not tidal energy, but actually his assumed exponential growth rate of energy consumption to ludicrous levels, levels that would spell disaster for the Earth.

    That said, the website’s math checks out. The linear approach is a very basic year 1 physics problem that can be quickly confirmed.

    The values we need for this calculation:

    The mass of the earth (M) is: 5.97×10^24 kg

    The radius of the earth (R) is 6.37×10^6 m

    The angular velocity of the earth (w) is 7.29×10^-5 rad/sec

    The current total worldwide primary energy consumption is 1.753 × 10^13 W. This is pretty close to the article’s assumption

    The equations necessary:

    The moment of inertia of a solid sphere of uniform density is: 2/5 MR^2

    Rotational kinetic energy is calculated by: 1/2 I w^2

    After some very basic plug-and-chug:

    This provides a moment of inertia of the earth (I) of: 9.69×10^37 kilogram meters squared

    And a total rotational kinetic energy of: 2.575×10^29 kg m^2 /s^2 This is pretty close to what the Stanford website calculated.

    So if we used the suggested 1% here, it would take around 5.0 x 10^10 years to tidally lock the earth to the moon with our current energy consumption. But that’s not what was assumed in the article. It was also assumed that we would continue to expand our energy consumption by a constant 2% per year. This requires basic calculus.

    We have energy consumption that starts at the previously mentioned: 1.753 × 10^13 W

    Below, n is equal to the number of years.

    This leads us to a consumption growth formula of: 1.753×10^13 * 1.02^n

    To indefinitely integrate that formula, we simply divide it by ln(1.02), which gives us: 8.85236×10^14 1.02^n (we will drop the +c because it’s not necessary here)

    And now we just need to solve the following equation for n: 2.575×10^29 = 8.85236×10^14 1.02^n

    Solving gives us a real solution of: around 1681 years. This is close enough for me to say that the math checks out, considering that I didn’t start with exactly the same base formulas. But ultimately this is besides the point. The math is right, but the premise of a constant 2% growth is ultimately unsustainable. Short of building planet-scale radiators to shed heat, the earth would become uninhabitable by virtue of the sheer energy consumption alone.


  • Even if the CEO of Wells Fargo loses your money, you will still get at least $250,000 of it back (assuming you had deposited that much) via the FDIC.

    The FDIC will honor their obligations because to do otherwise would be to risk a massive bank run, of the sort that started the Great Depression. This wouldn’t just screw you over, it would screw over the ultra-wealthy too, and we can’t have that.

    At the end of the day, someone can just not take your mattress money and you might be out of luck. Your mattress can burn down and all that money is gone, which is far more likely than Wells Fargo taking your money and then the FDIC not giving you anything.



  • At 16x, you will get 72MB/s read speed. My SSD has a 560MB/s read speed. Because of this discrepancy, loading a game from a blu-ray disc will take roughly 7.7 times longer. A 20 second loading screen becomes a 2.5 minute loading screen. This alone justifies the cost of keeping it on my SSD. Especially because if I want to remove it I don’t lose permanent access to the game, I can download it again in a couple hours.


  • Hmm. I’m in a pretty small town. I think the most annoying thing is that we have two very nice river trails, they’re obviously supposed to connect, but they don’t. Both of them just stop before the highway. There was a planned underpass, but it was put on hold during COVID and our new city council seems uninterested in restarting construction.

    As such, around 1/4 of our population can’t bike or walk into downtown, they must drive. And I can’t bike into work, as turning left on the highway is not gonna happen on a bike.

    With how many people use our paths, we need much more investment into them. They’re great for residents and they’re a tourist attraction: we need to make them as easy to use as possible.






  • Prosperous Universe is quite different from a typical incremental game, but it scratches the same itch for me. The game is very complex, and other players drive the economy, leading to some price/availability unpredictability that is interesting. Gotta keep your bases fueled, but you also want to wait for prices to rise or fall, and potentially use your ships to trade at other markets.

    It’s quite nonlinear in progression and there’s a lot of ways to expand.


  • Well, the typical way of measuring q does measure the energy it takes to get the boulder up the hill, but not the inefficiency of the machine to get the boulder up there and the ineffency in extracting its energy as it goes back down.

    There’s a lot of unsexy research that could make fusion come a whole lot sooner. More efficient powerful lasers, better cooling methods and design for superconducting electromagnetics, more efficient containment methods and more thought on how to extract energy from the plasma efficiently, and then making it cheap enough to build and maintain that we can actually afford to build them.



  • If you have infinite inventory space, then you need a way to navigate through infinite items. Towards the end of the game, a player could easily have nearly every item in the game. For some games, that would be fine, but for many, that would make the list of items prohibitively long. Filtering and searching would help, but if you’re looking for an item that you forgot the name of, a search doesn’t necessarily do much.

    Then there’s balance reasons. Some games use their inventory system to limit the player, making sure they don’t start a level with enough health potions and grenades to cheese every fight.

    In survival games, a finite inventory sets the gameplay loop: you go exploring/mining and then return to base, drop off your stuff and head out again. It makes your base valuable, if only because that’s where you keep most of your resources and moving would be hard. It also gives the player a break from one task. I played a Minecraft mod that gave me an effectively infinite inventory. I went mining for so long that it started to feel like an awful slog. Because my mine shafts went on too long, getting back was itself a hassle. When I reverted back to a more typical inventory size, I could feel how a full inventory breaks up the grind and prevents mining from getting out of hand.



  • The person outright rejects defederation as a solution when it IS the solution

    It’s the solution in the sense that it removes it from view of users of the mainstream instances. It is not a solution to the overall problem of CSAM and the child abuse that creates such material. There is an argument to be made that is the only responsibility of instance admins, and that past that is the responsibility of law enforcement. This is sensible, but it invites law enforcement to start overtly trawling the Fediverse for offending content, and create an uncomfortable situation for admins and users, as they will go after admins who simply do not have the tools to effectively monitor for CSAM.

    Defederation also obviously does not prevent users of the instance from posting CSAM. Admins even unknowingly having CSAM on their instance can easily lead to the admins being prosecuted and the instance taken down. Section 230 does not apply to material illegal on a federal level, and SESTA requires removal of material that violates even state level sex trafficking laws.