Technology Connections - You are being misled about renewable energy technology.
-
They use the aesthetics of capitalism to intellectualize and explain why we should not question their supremacy.
In reality, capitalism does not in any way justify monopolization of natural resources, or the large-scale destruction of the environment.
Capitalism is the ideology of thr petit-bourgeoisie, not the actual bourgeoisie. They are just social-darwinists.
I do not understand what this adds to the concept of capitalism other than introducing the term "social darwinism".
There is no difference between "the aesthetics" of capitalism and its actualization, and neither base a capitalist's actions in regard to benefitting society beyond "the market". Capitalism is simply the current method of accruing power for someone to push their personal ideology on others. It just happens that the most effective method to exploit capitalism is to reject any sense of empathy or consideration for anything external or internal, especially flesh and blood humans because they are the only real threat to your power.
-
I have watched only a few minutes of this vid so far, as well as the timestamps and I must admit I don't agree with this approach because of something I learned today.
He says around 2 m something like: the strategic US reserve of oil even tho the number of barrels sounds huge, they could sustain the US only a month of our current use. From the context my understanding is that he implies that this is due to casual, everyday-people consumption.
Well, it looks like the Department of Defense is the U.S. government’s largest fossil fuel consumer, accounting for between 77% and 80% of all federal government energy consumption since 2001. So why is this huge percentage missing from this long analysis?
Anyways, if he talks about the US military petroleum consumption, please let me know. Or if I got something wrong with this new info I got about the US military, let me know too.
Cuz the US strategic oil reserve isn't earmarked for the federal government and the share of the military energy usage in the federal energy usage is entirely meaningless tot the oil consumption of the US economy.
-
I do not understand what this adds to the concept of capitalism other than introducing the term "social darwinism".
There is no difference between "the aesthetics" of capitalism and its actualization, and neither base a capitalist's actions in regard to benefitting society beyond "the market". Capitalism is simply the current method of accruing power for someone to push their personal ideology on others. It just happens that the most effective method to exploit capitalism is to reject any sense of empathy or consideration for anything external or internal, especially flesh and blood humans because they are the only real threat to your power.
-
Amazing video by Technology Connections. It's a long one, but don't miss his 30 minute angry rant at the end.
Just when I thought I couldn't like him more, he goes and drops this gigabased rant.
TC for U.S president honestly
-
Fairly uncommon, sadly
-
Cuz the US strategic oil reserve isn't earmarked for the federal government and the share of the military energy usage in the federal energy usage is entirely meaningless tot the oil consumption of the US economy.
Cuz the US strategic oil reserve isn’t earmarked for the federal government
According to a factcheck site it looks like the U.S. Oil Reserve Created for Supply Disruptions, Not Strictly Military Use. So maybe your statement is wrong? Otherwise could you share the source you got this from?
the share of the military energy usage in the federal energy usage is entirely meaningless tot the oil
consumption of the US economyI don't understand what you are saying, could you please explain and/or share a relevant link? Btw maybe I should clarify that by talking about "consumption" I was not talking in economic terms, just in the sense of "utilizing".
-
they'd probably be more wealthy from their heavy investments in renewable energy, which is more profitable than fossil fuels btw
it's the same story as weed legalization, it only happens after the current established powers have given themselves enough time to secure the new playing field.
-
I have watched only a few minutes of this vid so far, as well as the timestamps and I must admit I don't agree with this approach because of something I learned today.
He says around 2 m something like: the strategic US reserve of oil even tho the number of barrels sounds huge, they could sustain the US only a month of our current use. From the context my understanding is that he implies that this is due to casual, everyday-people consumption.
Well, it looks like the Department of Defense is the U.S. government’s largest fossil fuel consumer, accounting for between 77% and 80% of all federal government energy consumption since 2001. So why is this huge percentage missing from this long analysis?
Anyways, if he talks about the US military petroleum consumption, please let me know. Or if I got something wrong with this new info I got about the US military, let me know too.
Because this video isn't about the US military, and all you're doing is bean soup leftism.
-
He hasn't done any videos on computers, AFAIK. His channel covers a wide range of topics, from washing machines, car blinkers, heaters, refrigerators, to christmas lights. You can see his backlog here.
AND HEAT PUMPS!!!!
-
I didn't write "common sense" to imply it doesn't need to be explained.
I wrote it to mean that once explained, it clearly is impossible to refute because it's common sense.
My comment was not adversarial.
Nor was theirs.
Both are very neutral and can be interpreted as dissent or assent if you read the right tone into them.
-
Went from "ehh, its a long video. I'll watch it tomorrow" to "holy fuck..."
I actually stopped watching it at the hour mark because I had to make dinner but then I let it play while I worked and holy shit! This dude for president!
-
I have watched only a few minutes of this vid so far, as well as the timestamps and I must admit I don't agree with this approach because of something I learned today.
He says around 2 m something like: the strategic US reserve of oil even tho the number of barrels sounds huge, they could sustain the US only a month of our current use. From the context my understanding is that he implies that this is due to casual, everyday-people consumption.
Well, it looks like the Department of Defense is the U.S. government’s largest fossil fuel consumer, accounting for between 77% and 80% of all federal government energy consumption since 2001. So why is this huge percentage missing from this long analysis?
Anyways, if he talks about the US military petroleum consumption, please let me know. Or if I got something wrong with this new info I got about the US military, let me know too.
You should rewatch the video, because you totally have missed his main point
-
For tech people: You can host Invidious locally... No google, no ads, no popups.
-
Amazing video by Technology Connections. It's a long one, but don't miss his 30 minute angry rant at the end.
I've been connected to renewables for over a year now and am quite satisfied with its performance, although I could be much happier if there were less trees lining the line paths causing outages during winters. That being said, when it does go out the line managers are very quick to fix it.
-
If you haven't already, try out the LibRedirect extension for your browser. It takes a small amount of configuring, but it is able to redirect you to privacy oriented front ends for most social media platforms including youtube. Once set up, it can automatically take you to an invidious instance whenever you click a youtube link.
Also, you can go to inv.nadeko.net (which is my go-to) from your browser and search all of youtube through it. Same thing as using LibRedirect, it's just the manual version.
If you're on android you can use the NewPipe app. Similar idea as Invidious, it's just a self contained app and not a website.
-
As someone not from the US, I can't say how much I appreciate the last part of his video. As much as I understand why YouTubers want to "keep politics out of entertainment", it's disappointing and makes me lose interest in some US content because it seems like they are ignoring what's going on around them.
And about the batteries, that's unfortunately an argument I sometimes hear from skeptics. "What are we going to do with all those batteries?" they ask. I explain that they can mostly be recycled and like to ask what are we going to do with all the CO2 in the air, but apparently it's different. Ironically one of those persons is my father, that has a cabin with a solar system that I installed for him. He originally bought a generator but since it's very noisy to run only for some lights, he prefers using the battery bank powered by a few solar panels on the roof. I'd show him this video but he doesn't speak English and it's probably a lost cause anyway.
We can only hope that at least a few people can be influenced by this video; both parts.
The political discussion taboo only serves 2 purposes. 1, keep the stupid comfortable. To them, politics isn’t about ideas but about identity and is treated like a religion. You aren’t challenging an idea, you are threatening their identity. 2, Don’t upset rich people. Everyone discussion politics openly is a threat to the rich. So if you make it taboo to discuss those things you make it so that only those not bound by that taboo may participate.
-
For tech people: You can host Invidious locally... No google, no ads, no popups.
It's a lot of maintenance. I'm not knocking it, I'm just pointing out how difficult it is.
I hosted a pixelfed server for my city and it cost a few hundred bucks out of my own pocket. It was a test run so I can push my city to move their social media to open-source.
But the constant need to apply spam protection and abuse from visitors, not to mention abuse from users like copyright shit and even CSAM. My expensive side project became a full time job.
-
Amazing video by Technology Connections. It's a long one, but don't miss his 30 minute angry rant at the end.
Fell asleep an hour into his last night, didn't expect it to be that long, but I am looking forward to finishing it.
-
It's capitalism, power is wealth by definition. These are compatible concepts.
By perceived value i mean speculation.
You have less power but more wealth than a Mycenean king. You have a more steady diet that is healthier for you, with better healthcare, better housing, more time for leisure, less chance of being robbed or murdered or killed in battle, etc. etc. But the king could have people killed or tortured; he could send people to their deaths; pass judgment in any moral dispute between hundreds of his subjects; etc.
The capitalist elite gladly loses wealth to gain power. And the power a rich person has over someone who must work for them to eat is incomprehensibly greater than the power a rich person has over someone who can eat regardless of whether they work for them. Thanks to ICE and other anti-immigration laws, rich people can effectively keep undocumented migrants as slaves again. What are they going to do? Complain and get themselves sent to a concentration camp?
What do you think a billionaire would rather have? A hundred mansions, ten private jets, twenty yachts, and a thousand unionized employees; or ten mansions, one private jet, two yachts, and a hundred slaves?
Wealth truly is not equivalent to power.
-
I actually stopped watching it at the hour mark because I had to make dinner but then I let it play while I worked and holy shit! This dude for president!
This dude for president!
Can you imagine what he could do? I mean, if he could focus on the President thing and not use his time in office to take apart washing machines and heat pumps.
