

But climate change does not pay SS officers dressed in ICE uniform to knock on your doors and bring your parents to a San Salvador prison.
It is potential versus actuality here.
Techno-utopist. Sounds like a tech-bro who wants to see capitalism end.
Robotics. Open Source. Machine learning. Self-improving algorithms. Self-building robots. Hackerspaces.


But climate change does not pay SS officers dressed in ICE uniform to knock on your doors and bring your parents to a San Salvador prison.
It is potential versus actuality here.


A/C is indeed not a solution for solving climate change. It’s merely a solution to survive the transition that we are trying to do. The solution is in how you produce the electricity, among others, to feed the A/C.
Additionally A/C worsense the heat outside of your house
There is some additional heat that an AC system will create, but the heat that goes out of the external block is not heat that was created by the system. It’s heat that was displaced and that would otherwise come through other ways in the atmosphere.
A theoretical perfect heat pump would not heat the atmosphere at all, despite having a heating part. The heating would be perfectly balanced by the cooling part.
It is a bit counterintuitive when you think about machines as creating heat or creating cold. A better way to look at it is in terms of energy evacuation.
A house without any AC will radiate heat because humans inside, machines inside, they do produce heat. So that heat goes out in the atmosphere through the walls and through the windows when the inside is warmer than the outside. An AC creates a sort of channel for the heat to go all through the external block and it blasts hot air at a specific place. But what you don’t see is that as a result your colder house radiates less heat and actually may to some extent cool the atmosphere around it.
Both effects balance each other out. There is a difference because a heat pump is not a 100% efficient system. So you do have additional heat that gets there as waste. But it’s not on the same level as what gets blasted out of the external unit.


An interesting philosophical insight is that we do not live inside reality, we live in the model of reality we create with our senses, our mind and… our culture, which video games are part of.
The bleu qualia of the sky is a construction of your mind. The Earth as a planet is something you know but you did not experience directly. Same for the pain of others or neurodiversity. Countries you have never been to occupy a similar place as fictional places in your mind. Normal people sort these things well into “existing” and “fiction” but similar mechanisms exist.
Fill this place of examples of criminality and self-centered egoism, and it brings a vision of the world. Fill it with benevolence and empathy and you get a different one.
It leads to very concrete consequences, like the strategy people would choose in a blind prisoner’s dilemma game.
but how do we encourage people to actually… move through that gateway instead of just staying at the entrance?
You empower them with tools. When I gave someone a cheap servo, a reaction I got was “Hey, it sounds like the robot in that movie”. And there, you realize that the components in that box can be robots.
Games like minecraft or Stardew Valley give a notion of how you can change a place. Or destroy a biome.


What do you mean by “shaded”?
And I think the idea is to have several satellites taking turns at illuminating a given target. Your diesel generator (actually nuclear power plants where I live) will have to turn on anyway without these additional sources, but they lower the need.
Until they reach the endgame of being able to produce continuous illumination all night long.


That sounds like the logical next step for the space industry. Intermittence is a big problem for PV installations, this partially solves it.


When you make an urban park, you have to accept two things though. First, locally the city becomes more expensive. And second, it will occupy more space over potentially natural zones (over suburban area actually, that themselves will grow over peri-rural, that will push these, etc.)
If your goal is wildlife preservation or carbon capture, you probably want one more hectare in a forest rather than an hectare in a park inside a city.
Don’t get me wrong, I wanted more trees when I was living in a city. But the choice is between livable big cities or trying to make the cities as small impact as possible.


And also, water shortages have other causes, much more systemic, that I feel the datacenter scapegoat is a convenient distraction from.
You can cool chips with air, you can cool them with the sea or with non drinkable water. If they really get built in places where water is scarce, the problem is why the hell are they incentivized for that?
Water is plentiful and there should be no shortage of it. Where it is lacking it is either an environmental problem (desert areas should not be supposed to sustain cities) or a public infrastructure problem.


Seeing such a post upvoted on solarpunk gives me hope.
I don’t think the space race and space habitat is the way forward, but there is a future timeline that is sustainable and technologically advanced.
I am happy that some people still believe in it.


and save room for wild nature.
Arguably space habitat is the ultimate way to achieve that goal on earth :-)


Well, if you assume that the air recycling will be done by plants, you are going to have a need for a huge biosphere and probably for a lot of oceanic biome. If you plan on having an agriculture, if you plan on having pollinating insects, you are going to need a huge biomass.
You’re going to have far more nature than you will have humans.
This setting usually assumes that you have a fast transport network built in the core infrastructure. So being spread out is less of a problem, especially if you have free electricity through solar panel. That means that moving stuff around on electric motor is going to be basically free.
There is a reason why education of the working class has always been a concern for the left and why it has always been fought by the right.
You don’t change class when you become educated. You may change income brackets though. College education can turn you into a lawyer or into a doctor, but it is very unlikely to turn you into the inheritor of a multi-million company.
The thing is, too often I meet militants who confuse the different meaning of bourgeois, thinking that anyone with a bit more income than the median person is from the dominating class and an enemy of the working class. That’s a self-defeating mentality.