soumerd_retardataire

Yet, correct me if i'm wrong, but in my memories ~90% of the redditors used "social justice warrior" as a.n insult/criticism(, against someone who's acting excessively nice in defense of someone when there's no need, like the expression "white knight" for those men on the Internet excessively defending other women, underlining that "social justice" deals with psychological "injuries" and not real injustices, the correct term should have been "societal justice" though since it never dealt with socio-economic matters), while nowadays only conservatives use "woke" as an insult towards other people, sometimes with a larger focus than the previous SJW, targeting everyone believing that some things ought to change in order to make a better world(, while conservatives generally don't think that such things should improve/change[1]).
Well, i.d.k., not that it matters but would you agree with this impression that "social justice warrior" was used all over the political spectrum ~ten years ago ?

[1] : Far-right political parties want some things to change b.t.w.(, as well as parties unaligned with left//right such as separatists, ~ecologists, ~democrat{for a direct democracy with referendums}, ~royalists, ~theocrats, ...).
If conservatives are only defined with their unwillingness to change the current direction, then centrists are the real conservatives. Center-left and center-right bourgeois political parties were elected everywhere in the west(&'most of the world') for the last decades(, and had disappointed a hundred years ago in Germany leaving only two alternatives).
We(sterners) saw a lot of societal changes in the last 70 years though(, not so sure for socio-economic changes however, once the productivity increase and its expected consequences for the workers are taken into account).
If people don't vote(, in the primaries in the u.s.,) for "extremist" parties that's because we'll vote for whom we're being told to vote, and won't stop trusting our (billionaires-owned )medias as long as we're personally satisfied with the current situation.
The problem is that our consent isn't real/informed/enlightened, and we don't use our collective intelligence, so we may collectively 'agree with falsehoods'/'make mistakes', and it doesn't feel like our republics represent the will of their population.
If our government represented the will of the people then they wouldn't hesitate before putting any important decision through a referendum, and having 3-4 of them every year(, emerging from the population instead of the government,) wouldn't make our "representatives" afraid(, and if we're realising our mistakes afterwards then there's usually nothing that another referendum can't fix).
Beyond direct/real democracy, we'll still say that it's our duty to "democratize" the rest of the world, otherwise dictatorships would bloom everywhere and freedom would die, chinese people are happy but we(sterners) have to save them and paint a dystopia instead of rejoicing and teaching mandarin in american schools as a second language.

They're also saying that these talks about inclusion are racist because positive discrimination is still discrimination. However, when you end a race second-to-last with weights around your feet you probably have more merits than the one ending in third place. Moreover this is about ending social reproduction more than rewarding personal merit, apparently India is the example of a long&successful experimentation of positive discrimination for their castes, of course that rich kids are better at school but that's not justice.
And while black neighbourhoods have the same results as white urban neighborhoods of the same level of poverty(, or arabs in France, etc.), and that the main reason is that they were raised by poor parents with friends of the same mentality, in a school for children like them, in a neighbourhood and an environment very particular, and while it isn't genetic since their lives would be totally different if they were adopted, i could envision like 1-5% of their situation being related to a collective psyche, like you don't want to do a shitty job for a white country, in comparison to asians who are excited to seize the occasion to rise again while it seems possible, it's a different mindset but this kinda stupid/'outrageously wrong' racial explanation is marginal if it ever exists, and makes much less sense in my eyes than the environmental determinism that made peasants of the past engender peasants, and nobles engender nobles.
Which would be good news since we could give everyone the same education as such nobles and that'd be good in theory.
Minorities and people considered abnormal can be disliked and unjustly oppressed, perhaps not a lot in some cases ; in comparison normal people are privileged(, perhaps not a lot but, relatively, they are).
Well, i don't really care about these questions and there's no point in talking about that here/'with people that'd agree'. Woke seems like the new term for SJW

with a 1W battery planned for 2025

I don't know if you have the answer but, if i understood correctly, such 1W "battery"/generator would produce/refill 24Wh every day ?
If we put 10.000 BV100 in parallel(, to obtain 1W at the same 3V), that'd theoretically be 10 000 * 1125mm^3 = 1,125.10^7 mm^3 = 11L for 24Wh and 110L for 240Wh filled per day ? Ah well, w/e 🤷‍♂️. (edit : thanks for your answers though !)

It'd be very interesting to think of an hybrid system in which the betavoltaic cells are coupled with lithium batteries to give them some kind of natural regeneration over time(, a phone or computer could recover go from (50, or 20, or )0 to 100% overnight/'when it's not used')

This current model only gives 8.64 joules per day, but that's because 86400 is the number of seconds in a day, so if i divide 8.64 per 86400 i obtain 10^-4 W(, P=E/Δt), and the official/rounded number is 100μW.
Its volume is 1125mm^3 (15*15*5mm)

So, to drive 100km in an hour(, without the need to take into account accelerations for now), we'd need 100*200W=20kWh, or 2.10^4 Wh.
Most electric cars would only enable 4 hours at this rate with an 80kWh battery, but since this nuclear "battery" needs to be able to deliver 24h a day, we'd need 24 * 2.10^4 = 4,8.10^5 Wh

Hence, if we need 4,8.10^5 Wh and we have 100.10^-6 Wh for 1,125.10^3 mm^3 , a rule of three would give us 4,8.10^5 * 1,125.10^3 / 100.10^-6 mm^3 , that's 5,4.10^12 mm^3 , which is indeed 5400m^3 and not realistic.

Even a 200Wh computer would still need 54m^3 , and a 10Wh phone would need 2,7m^3 , the size of a car.

If the output was mutliplied by a thousand(, 100mW instead of 100μW,) then it'd be 2,7dm^3 , the size of a bottle and still a bit too big for a phone, but a "free" energy for 50 years, and if i'm keeping the thought above of an hybridation as a self-regenerative battery it'd refill 240Wh every day(, 24*10Wh,) but that's only if the output was multiplied by a thousand, which is unlikely.

Thank you very much for the correction, i didn't know that.

I wonder if i haven't made a mistake somewhere though, does it make sense that i'm obtaining 100μW by using seconds, and then comparing it with Wh ? If i had to multiply by 3600 before making this rule of three then that would change the conclusion.
8,64J/day would give 0,36J/h = 0,36Wh ? And would also give 100μJ/s = 100μW ?
I.d.k. anymore, but if i'm right this time then we'd need a 75cL bottle to refill 240Wh every day(, and for electric cars only 75L to refill 24kWh). I wouldn't be surprised if i made mistakes elsewhere so tell me what you think.

You're probably right but(, the energy density being a hundred times better than hydrocarbons, we'd roughly need the space for 6 months of fuel(, 50 years divided by 100), and) if your only argument is knowing how to get rid of the excess heat then i can hardly see that as more than a moderate security hazard towards users removing the protection(, and it could even generate money by connecting it to something while unused !)

Furthermore if this technology encounters enough success then we'll probably find a way to have an impact on the rapidity of the reaction chain, as we do with nuclear reactors, but on a microscopic level, perhaps with a material that can emit the equivalent of carbon atoms, i.d.k., it doesn't seem impossible.

But yeah, once again you're probably right, we'll see 🤷‍♂️

Oh yeah, i wouldn't advise anyone to take this breakthrough as a promise for the future(, as someone who used to read futurism.com i'm well aware of that).

But i could counter your objections if you're interested :

• it can already be done currently : David Hahn built a nuclear reactor with the radioactive material extracted from clock hands. The nickel-63 is already present elsewhere(, armour plating, boat propeller shafts, ...), as well as many other radioactive materials ;
• but it's probably not feasible : A stronger argument is that the radioactive material is composed of a layer only 2µm thick, in between two layers of diamond, i don't know enough about the subject to confirm or deny that such extraction would be too difficult/expensive ;
• and even if it were other materials would be a better choice : Finally, at first sight and in my ignorant opinion, i don't think it'd add much to a bomb, it seems like it'd only infect people in the vicinity, and is only described in the first scenario here(, see the article titled "Terrorism: Nuclear and Biological Terrorism"), which considers it more useful for polluting water reserves for instance, contrary to ^137 Ce, ^131 I, ^32 P, or ^67 Ga. It'd be cheaper/easier and possibly more effective to steal such materials from hospitals rather than extracting it from batteries.

You'd probably have to drill through more than a few of them to have enough radioactivity leaking, at this point the number of people dying because of their stress testing would probably be equivalent to those dying because of chemical batteries explosion. It'd be up to the authorities to estimate the risks correctly and, as you said, we'll see how much a battery made to last 50 years will cost.

Since it's already in use for decades with pacemakers i don't think that the radiation is that hard to stop, no need for inches of lead.

And i could have said that it's not a completely novel technology, i used "commercial" in the sense that it's apparently destined for the general public instead of specialised fields, the wiki article says that :

We'll have to see the price before finding such batteries in the supermarket though.

As for reliability, the articles say that another advantage is that it doesn't ignite nor explode, but i suppose that something could happen if you drill through it.

SABC News as well(, not western channels though) : https://youtube.com/@sabcdigitalnews?si=NJVpLshupTA-SkI-

Quite literally apparently, weird : https://twitter.com/dwnews/status/1744900071261458617

And this comment isn't going to be loved, but if they don't want more immigration for w/e reason then they should be allowed to do so.
The nuances are that this desire is artificially built by billionaires who (pretend to )believe that immigration is a more important problem than socio-economic conditions, that everything will be better without immigrants, that our culture(, who has already been destroyed and replaced by a(n americanised) nothingness(, i don't like the modern culture, those who died centuries ago are more interesting than our living idols,) is in danger since their children supposedly don't want to be french/italian/..(, which is apparently incompatible with a dual nationality/culture, you're a better french/italian/.. citizen if you're virtuous, wearing or not a veil/turban/.. isn't going to destroy whatever our culture became, since school the rich/privileged doesn't hang out with the poor, and if other cultures are obviously less virtuous then 'the proximity of our example'/'our contacts' should be enough to let them raise the issue, there's a set of rules that could enable countries to be (almost )as diverse as they want without fearing for their liberty/security, and i hate that we(sterners) know that it's possible, we're not trying to make this world even better(, we're still young hopefully), otherwise we would share a plan/vision and be excited about this utopia), and that we shouldn't help "poor"(impoverished/exploited) countries, just prevent them to seek a better life instead of helping each other to reach an equal standard of living, etc. If immigration was a cultural problem they would try to revive the extinct culture of our past, beginning with greco-roman authors, i don't know what is the french/italian/.. culture they're speaking of, it has disappeared many decades ago, we're euro-american now and that doesn't mean much(, i.m.o.), french poets or painters are dead, if it's movies nowadays then we're not present, same for the internet, getting rid of exploited immigrants ready to give up their life for a future they deserve more than us won't change that.
We'd need more diversity/'french exceptionalism' to have an identity.

Unrelated thought : It is said that with rising inequalities there will be more investments and that this wealth will benefit everyone else, it's inefficient for enterprises because of inequal wages and other money-pocketing practices that would be considered corruption in a state-owned enterprise, but it's even more obvious when these investments are made outside of the company : investments in housing raise the rent and make it more&more out of reach to become an owner ; investments in actions raise the dividends and make it more&more out of reach to gain back the full control of the direction, ... That rents are representing an increasing part of our salary, or dividends an increasing part of the companies' profits(, despite increasing wage inequalities), shouldn't be suprising.

👍

The u.s.a. was already condemned in the case of Nicaragua and nothing changed and nobody knows that, in the very improbable offchance that Israel was condemned, they would just act like Russia when the International Court of Justice ordered them to leave Ukraine.
Let's say that our medias talk about this improbable success and, even more improbable, support the ICJ and condemn Israel, everyone would just forget a month later. Sure, there's nothing to lose by trying, but not much to gain either, it's not the beginning of an effective solution, it'll be the exact same shit as before.
And the ICJ wouldn't even need to be considered the bad guy, the contradiction wouldn't raise an eyebrow, but let's say i'm wrong, have an hope in this if you want.

edit : That's an exaggeration, those who hate Israel won't forget such judgment and would remind us when they got the chance, that's the difference i'm seeing, so you're right to say that it's not nothing to be able to label them officially as genocidal, it'd add a new argument/insult of choice.

That's ~two every three years :

Somalia needs some support with Somaliland, and https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/Biden-Approves-Redeployment-of-US-Troops-to-Somalia-20220517-0003.html

Jamaica doesn't give any certainty either : https://globalvoices.org/2023/10/30/jamaicans-express-disappointment-over-their-countrys-no-show-un-gaza-vote/

And i don't think Brazil would want to expose themselves as much as South Africa did(, nor China for that matter), more to lose than to gain, that's justice. Bolivia probably only supported the case because Luis Arce has forbidden Evo Morales from being reelected and is trying to show that ~'he's not a traitor to the movement' despite that.
Let's say that they have a chance if you want though, it doesn't matter because that's not what would make a change, do they only have the option of a full-scale war with unknown consequences to do what's right ? We're just supposed to watch and then it'll be as if nothing ever happened, ok.