This page shows the source for this entry, with WebCore formatting language tags and attributes highlighted.

Title's that whole climate-change thing going?


<img attachment="article-9831-1.jpeg" align="left">The article <a href="" author="" source="Babylon Bee">Biden Wakes Up From The Strangest Dream That He Was Attending International Climate Conference</a> is a joke, it really? It <i>feels</i> true, doesn't it? I am an optimistic man and, yet, we must be realistic. These people at COP26 are nearly literally all of the same people who’ve done nearly nothing since Kyoto. Remember Kyoto? Nah, no-one does. That was <i>COP3</i> in <i>1997</i>. Almost a quarter-century ago. Back then, it was absolutely necessary that <i>something be done</i>. Nothing was done. It's not likely that something will be done this time, although it's long past midnight on this doomsday clock. The article <a href="" author="Lauren Sommer, Connie Hanzhang Jin, Rina Torchinsky" source="NPR">These 4 charts explain why the stakes are so high at the U.N. climate summit</a> does a reasonable job of summing up why something needs to be done. Everyone know it's important. But it's such a big job. It would mean changing how we live in the so-called modern world---it would mean changing capitalism. I'm an optimist, but...I don't see capitalism and technology solving this problem---its incentives drive us (no pun intended) in the other direction. The world has already decided that TINA (There Is No Alternative) because socialism and communism have <i>always failed</i>. Duh. Well, sometimes, you have to hit rock-bottom before you realize how wrong you were. We're not there yet. We kind of know what it will look like; there are plenty of well-sourced books outlining what's in store. Greta is right: <iq>[...] the climate and the biosphere don’t care about our politics and our empty words for a single second.</iq> Once we've wasted all of our planet's resources and remaining carbon budget making Bezos or Musk the richest man on the planet, maybe we'll give socialism a whirl again---in a less-livable, smaller, and emptier world. And here we are, looking down the barrel of a gun and pretending it's not there <i>because we'd rather make money instead</i>. Or, we'd rather pretend that we're going to make money while a handful make real money and fool us into thinking that the gun's not there so that <i>they</i> can make money. I don't know where they think they're going to spend it in a world of climate chaos and refugees, but I'm sure they'll think of something. We are all just <a href="" author="" source="h2g2">Ark B Golgafrinchans</a>. Paris? OMG Paris. COP25 that was. Voluntary reductions. The world did about 1% of the promised reductions <i>combined</i>. They were voluntary, so who cares? There’s no punishment, right? <i>RIGHT?</i> Buckle up. We’re all in for a bumpy ride. In other news, Hertz, a company that was in bankruptcy 10 months ago, has announced that it is buying 100,000 Teslas with $4.2B that they somehow now have. Both Tesla and Hertz were up about 7% on the news. You wanna know what won't affect Tesla's share price? Something silly like this: <a href="" author="Jonathan M. Gitlin" source="Ars Technica">Tesla recalls 11,706 vehicles over Full Self-Driving Beta software bug</a>. I mean, why should over-promising features for years negatively impact a business? What are you---a party pooper? TO THE MOON BABY.<fn> Tesla now has a $1T valuation, more than every other car company on the planet combined. Talk about hopeful! The market is hopeful! It is putting all of its money on a future-facing automotive solution! Good for them! Either that, or people are just trying to get in on whatever’s happening (ignoring the barrel of a different gun). Either way, moar cars is good for the environment, just you wait and see! I can't wait to see what amazing plan they come up with at COP26! I bet that the more amazing it is, the more positively the markets will react to it! I bet that the degree to which it is actually a workable plan to address climate change <i>won't</i> be inversely proportional to the market change. I told you, I'm an optimist! <hr> <ft>OKOKOK maybe Tesla's a bit scammy, what with their beta-testing their car software on actual, paying customers, but SpaceX is OK, right? There's no way that they're peddling snake oil, right? There's that whole Starlink thing that they're doing for the good of unconnected mankind. How's that going? <a href="" author="Jon Brodkin" source="Ars Technica">Starlink nightmare: Moving service location a few feet delays orders until 2023</a>. Sounds good! <bq>SpaceX recently pushed out expected shipment times for new Starlink orders to late 2022 or early 2023 in parts of the US. Based on user reports, it seems that updating one's service address even slightly changes a pre-order's delivery date to one of the later delivery dates that apply to new orders. Separately, SpaceX last week warned that a chip shortage is impacting "our ability to fulfill" orders. There is uncertainty among users about what's going on with address changes affecting delivery dates.</bq> You know what's affecting delivery dates? You've been scammed. They don't have the chips; they don't have the capacity. They're selling you something they can't provide in order to lock up a monopoly, after which they'll be able to take as long as they like to try to deliver the thing they originally promised. At that point, the subsidies will be truly spectacular. That's how Tesla got where they are now. Why change a working system?</ft>