Well said!

It seems to me that the unfortunate reality is that hitting people with facts has either already succeeded (that’s most of us reading this thread I would guess), or it will cause eyes to glaze over, and the cognitive dissonance to kick in to high gear; so we do need to do something different to persuade the rest to do something useful.

But, simply “making friends and telling stories” (to trivialise the article) is useless, there are very many resources on ‘nonnormative non-violent’ action and at least one study that confirm that it is statistically effective (dense scientific paper). Here’s some resources:

• Nonviolent Direct Action and the Struggle for Climate Justice: A Perspective from 350 Seattle
• Foreign Policy News Nonviolent action: Why and how it works
• Organising Stories and Lessons from the 350 Organising Story Telling Lab
• International Center on Nonviolent Conflict 198 Methods of Nonviolent Action

Why the down votes on this? I had a quick look at the github repo and it looks pretty neat to me. I must be missing something…

Anyone care to enlighten me?

Fair enough, good point.

We have bifacial panels, cost was comparable, and rated at ~15% additional output. Now almost 2yrs old.

“The carbon dioxide problem is the defining problem of our life, of our existence,” Varanasi says. “So clearly, we need all the help we can get.”

Indeed.

All $hit highly processed “foods” anyway. Better off without them.

Just this: echo 'Suella Braverman' | sed s/S/Cr/

Why I left there decades ago and have never gone back.

I remember bring so hopeful when they first landed it, and were getting it back to port. Remember Elon saying something like ‘it feels like the dog that caught the bus’. Seems so long ago now!

I just finished The Deluge by Stephen Markley (all 900pp!)

It’s basically a US-centric “narrative” of the 2030’s, told from the PoV of about a dozen different characters, with the thread of climate change prominent throughout.

Really it’s hard to describe it as good or bad, an enjoyable read etc. It is certainly well written, and characterisation is exceptionally good and detailed, but for me it was by turns scary, amusing, depressing, profoundly sad and wrenching in its humanity. I have no reason to doubt its accuracy based on the science.

It took me almost a month to read because I had to take breaks to get my “cognitive dissonance” recharged.

I would definitely recommend it.

It would make a good streaming series on Amazon Prime or Apple TV.

Good!

People run around with their hair on fire about the quality of LLMs and fake this and that, and take over the world etc, but IME ChatGPT is actually quite useful if you treat it like a search engine on steroids, and treat the “search” results with the same intelligent filtering.

Thanks, fair enough.

That’s great, but one part I don’t understand is the compelling advantage of growing drug crystals (from the article) in micro-g. I get that maybe they are larger & maybe fewer defects (?) but why is that important for this application?