Solar panels in space are 5 time more expensive to build than on earth (not talking into account launching them to space), while being 5 to 10 time more efficient. They also degrade 5 to 10 time faster, not accounting for solar flares. Deorbiting solar panels (and satellites) is also a huge environmental issue, as I dislike heavy metal in my food (and you should too). It isn't a real issue yet because we didn't send enough up there for the quantities to be an issue, but idiots seems persuaded we should increase the quantity of heavy metal sent in orbit without fixing this issue first.

Honestly, I don't see (sea?) it. Every advantage of space are found in oceans/seas, especially if we use dead zones where aquatic life is already dead. The cooling is cheaper, tide+wind+solar is cheaper than space solar (I know someone who worked on a lens to observe the sun, the satellite was launched but due to being cheap on the solar panels, the sunlight and radiation chipped away the coating that found itself attracted to the most massive object in the area, the lens). Anti-corrosion is cheaper than light radiation protection, and servicing is way easier and cheaper.

No, China military (or rather, navy+airforce), while less corrupt than Russia contrary to what GP claimed (or gggp?), is still way inferior to the US in a direct conflict (mostly because of the US air dominance + OTAN submarines and radar tech). The truth is that they don't need an army anyway, they just need to wait an economic slump and will get Taiwan politically/economically.

Thales land radar systems always perform as expected, sometime better than expected, in land conflicts. If this is the same for their naval radars, they are far ahead of the competition.

China killed less US citizen than both Israel and Russia in the last 10 years.

First, read the post you linked before. Second, the "but the other side is bad too", even if true (and i am sure it will be true for some) is the most birdbrain take. Do you think the democrat will suddenly have 6 supreme court judges authorizing this kind of shit?

I like like the discourse changed over my lifetime from "climate change does not exist, those scientist are catastrophists" (200X) to "climate change is not primarily anthropogenic, those scientist are catastrophists" (201X) to "Climate change is real and caused by us, but the consequence won't be as hard as predicted, those scientist are catastrophists" (202X).

Truly a wonder. It's always the same people too.

Yeah, he falls in the categories "is able to underline the issues" + "Explain why you are beeing bullshitted", but also in the "Snakeoil salesman", and that made him hard to trust. Basically i listen to him to talk basketball and that's basically it.

Yeah, no, i disagree. Frontier models were almost untouchable 6 month ago, but now i can get 90% of Opus 4.5 with any chineese model, or even with Mistral. The only thing i'm missing is the chain of thought that help me understand the "how" and "why" when AI fails at its task. For the "general purpose" AI, it's even worse, any free model i can run on my Intel Arc (yes, sorry, it was discounted an very cheap) i get like 80% of a frontier model, at virtually no cost, and i suppose Deepseek/Mistral are like 95% there.

> Every year farmers cut down a bunch of trees and plant new ones in response to costs and market demand

I'll admit my experience is more with vineyard than orchards, but at least for grape, this isn't true. You only cut down old, unproductive vines, and market demand is not a factor. You never know how much you will produce YoY, so basically you try to only produce what your domain can handle. (The english translation for the following will be rough i realize).

On the "planting" side, you're wrong: a limited stock of "rootstock" (if this is the correct translation of "porte-greffe") is produced each year. As those are specific to a certain type of soil and take time to grow, you don't produce a ton each year. And vines "rootstock" are _a lot_ easier to grow than other trees (you have a mother-vine that you don't prune, you bury its branch in the soil, and over a year it will develop roots). My guess is that for orchards, your rootstock should take 3-4 years, so it isn't that easy.

Grape vines have a longer productive lifespan than most fruit trees so I don't know what point you're trying to make. Lots of wine grape vines are being torn out in California. Competition is intense, we're well past "peak wine" (consumers aren't drinking as much), and honestly a lot of it was kind of garbage anyway.

Ever wondered why there are few merlot vineyards in Napa these days? Dozens of vineyards are uprooted and replanted each year in that tiny valley alone in response to market demand.

This is because the law should say "The only circumstances in which you can get your users PII is when they willingly give them to you, as clients/subscribers. The only circumstances you can sell that data or track your users is never".

Instead we tried something that look like a punt, and even then tracking/adtech ghouls aren't happy. I say we should lobby hard to get my version at least examined in the EU parliament (or in any parliament in a EU country, really), that will probably scare them into removing the cookie banners.