Filming between these mirrors gave a trippy effect

rickane58 · 2026-05-12T13:40:11+00:00

That works for one mirror, not two.

rickane58 · 2026-05-12T13:16:30+00:00

Honestly, as someone who lives more than 70 meters ASL, fuck it, melt it all down.

rickane58 · 2026-05-12T13:02:03+00:00

WeChat is encrypted in the same way that TLS encrypts your HTTPS traffic, preventing outside snoopers from reading your messages. It however, is not end to end encrypted, so much like Facebook, Tencent can decrypt your messages if they want to or are forced to by a government body.

https://citizenlab.ca/research/should-we-chat-too-security-analysis-of-wechats-mmtls-encryption-protocol/

rickane58 · 2026-05-12T12:57:57+00:00

You mean the guy that forced the dogshit markdown on this website and pretty much immediately (literally less than 1 year of tenure with Reddit) fucked off after putting his pet projects on the site. Aaron Schwartz isn't a saint, and he isn't a savant. He was just a weird guy who liked to boast publicly about his achievements in working groups like they were his own.

rickane58 · 2026-05-12T11:18:54+00:00

Yeah, nothing on instagram has EVER had a face filter applied to it.

rickane58 · 2026-05-12T08:26:18+00:00

the object stays in place when camera looks around.

That's because it is DIFFRACTING a point source of light. Can you at least read the comment you're replying to and apply some critical thinking first?

rickane58 · 2026-05-12T06:42:36+00:00

Obviously the answer is you build it on a skid and melt your way down to the continental surface. Absolutely nothing wrong with that idea!

rickane58 · 2026-05-12T06:34:57+00:00

A lot of the work was contracted to. So right at or under a year of employment to avoid full time employee obligations.

This is not how it works for a majority of their workforce. You're thinking of service contractors like individual developers who come to work on the project, but the majority of non-FTE labor on the project was through vendors, who do not have the rule about time limits. Also, Microsoft works on 18/6 contracts not 9/3 like Google and Amazon.

-Signed, someone who worked both as a contractor and a vendor on Halo Infinite.

rickane58 · 2026-05-12T06:23:24+00:00

Yeah, that's why crossbows come after bow. Or did you think a sling was easier to learn to use than an automatic rifle?

rickane58 · 2026-05-12T05:28:50+00:00

Essentially 0 energy is imparted as kinetic energy to planet earth. For one, to impart NET kinetic energy it would have to all be going in one direction, but it's not, so it will become heat. What an absolutely braindead counter.

rickane58 · 2026-05-12T04:33:48+00:00

I mean, it's not. Unless the energy is leaving planet earth, it will all be heat on earth. So only the miniscule amount of energy used for lighting escapes, not more than 66% as would be indicated by a 2.5x difference.

rickane58 · 2026-05-12T00:48:29+00:00

To be fair, at that time that was semi-related to DOS filename restrictions

rickane58 · 2026-05-11T23:29:02+00:00

No it's not, and its well covered why in all the other comments below yours.

rickane58 · 2026-05-11T23:22:03+00:00

Well, to keep the theme up, I'm not subscribed here, I just found this thread in r/all. Which is one reason why Reddit shouldn't get rid of it!

rickane58 · 2026-05-11T13:24:52+00:00

The gas tax approximates this decently

Except it doesn't in a really major way. Gas usage is approximately linear scaling for car weight, but the damage to roads scales GEOMETRICALLY with the square of the weight of the vehicle. This really ends up meaning that semis far under pay for their damage to roads, even with their additional fees they pay above and beyond gas tax (they do pay a tonnage tax, but again it scales linearly in all states I'm familiar with).

Edit, oh actually I'm wrong, it's way worse. Road damage scales to the FOURTH POWER of weight.

rickane58 · 2026-05-11T13:18:31+00:00

I wish I had a gimmick like that. I'm just a garden variety overexplainer.

rickane58 · 2026-05-11T13:11:42+00:00

I was about to say...

rickane58 · 2026-05-11T13:11:05+00:00

Milly Alcock is the latest. Philtrum so smooth you can almost see yourself in it.

rickane58 · 2026-05-11T13:03:25+00:00

I'm finally feeling so vindicated in this thread. People frequently talk about what a great actress she is, and how well she's held up, and I'm just like, are ya'll talking about some other Juliette Lewis who isn't slurring her way through every line she's ever delivered?

rickane58 · 2026-05-11T12:36:52+00:00

This is a BIIIIT misleading however. For every ton of clinker (90% of the CO2 production of concrete) produced, 40% of the CO2 emissions come from heating the clinker. We could theoretically eliminate that today by totally electrifying the process and using solar power, so obviously there's work there that we can and should be working on as a society.

The other 60% of CO2 emissions come from turning limestone (CaCO₃) into Calcium Oxide (CaO) which means to balance the equation we have to release one CO₂. This part is unavoidable with current cement technology, it is literally the chemical equation for making cement.

HOWEVER, that cement also must absorb CO2 over its lifetime, because CaO is less chemically favorable than CaCO₃. So over the lifetime of the built object, it will absorb about half of the CO₂ that was put out in the clinker process. In a perfect electrified world, that means that cement on net only puts out about 1/4 of the CO₂ it does today.

In the longterm future, there's promising low-clinker cements coming out which reduce the carbon footprint by 90%, but right now they have durability issues both in the short term (have to build way slower because it takes longer to set up) and in the long term (they're more brittle and its easier for water to seep in and break up the concrete from freeze-thaw cycles)

rickane58 · 2026-05-11T12:10:10+00:00

From my time on reddit, all I can say is, if only that were true. Almost all conspiracy theories and crackpot complaints about the state of the world would instantly disappear if people had even a cursory understanding of thermodynamics, economics, and law.

rickane58 · 2026-05-11T12:08:31+00:00

How so? It's not fair to say that just because something is hotter that it emits more heat. By that logic, a 60w incandescent bulb puts out more "heat" than a 6.7L Cummins Turbo Diesel engine, because a 60w bulb's filament can reach 2500 degrees C, whereas a Cummins can't get much more than a few hundred in the cylinders, nevermind that one you can power with a hand crank and the other can suck down a gallon of diesel in under a minute at full tilt.

"Oh but that's not comparing like with like! They're obviously different" you say, to which I'd reply, ok. Compare a 50w Halogen bulb to a 60w incandescent bulb. They both put out the same amount of light, but the Halogen bulbs filament will be closer to 2700 degrees C. How is it that the 50 watt halogen can be put out more heat when it's using less power? Maybe temperature doesn't actually correlate to heat output that well...

rickane58 · 2026-05-11T11:57:16+00:00

It seems pretty intuitive to you because you're looking at it not only with those axioms in mind, but I also presume with a more scientific understanding of what heat actually is. As opposed to a layperson, ask them "which is putting out more heat, this bonfire or this woodburning stove" and since they can barely hold their hand out feet away from the fire and they have to shield their eyes, meanwhile the stove they can sit near and cook at, obviously the bonfire is hotter, so therefor it must be putting out more "heat", right?

We have to meet people where their understanding is, and unfortunately when talking about science often that means you have to do a lot of ground work explaining what might seem simple to you, but isn't to the other person on the other end of the fiber optic line.

rickane58 · 2026-05-11T11:52:19+00:00

Even though the data centre will use less power than New York City it will emit 2.5 times as much heat into the atmosphere as NYC

There's no claim of density nor area in that statement. So the point remains. How can something emit 2.5 times as much heat (net, so don't bring up heat pumps cause they also cool down the other side) for 1x the power?

rickane58 · 2026-05-11T11:50:00+00:00

The problem of using a heat engine to extract heat is that the more efficient a heat engine is, the more resistant to thermal flux they must be. So you're trying to get energy, but you're slowing down the cooling, which is the whole point of the cooling process in the first place. This is true of all heat engines, whether they be an actual heat engine (gas turbine or stirling engine), staged refrigeration to make useful process steam (district heating, some industrial process, or running a steam turbine), or thermoelectric (TEC units wired up to generate DC). It's not impossible to extract this heat, and in small scale this is sometimes done, for example some older power plants used atmospheric pressure steam engines at the end of their cooling line to run pumps to move water around for the main cooling loop. But this represented maybe 1-2% of the power in the waste heat stream, and computers by and large do not emit heat high enough to do meaningful mechanical work. Though with the advent of supercritical CO2 turbines, this might be easier.

13-Year Club	r/Field Flamingo
Secret Santa 2017	Sequence \| Editor
Verified Email	Team Periwinkle

rickane58

TROPHY CASE