He also co-wrote the script.

Again, we'll see what people are willing to say in court.

This was likely done by anti-Semites to stir up antisemitism among Armenians.

I am guessing same people do that too.

If you are on set as an actor. You have a reasonable assumption if you are handed a weapon, and you are told it is cold, that it is in fact cold, because of all the protocols to check it.

The people who did not follow those protocols are at fault. In this case, it loops back around because Baldwin was not just producer, but intimately involved with this production so much, he's in charge, and safety protocols where broken.

The person with most amount of agency to say no is the most responsible. So person in charge.

No, this is the reality of global politics, is taking backing from one super power or another. This isn't a game of who's friends with who, because nations don't have friends, just conveniences.

China and India make sense, share a land border, and being neutral ground between two large hostile powers gives diplomatic leverage.

From what has previously been posted. This is the armorer Baldwin hired, and then ignored because it was more or less his set. From what other people have said. Baldwin didn't let her do her job correctly. She was hired because she was cheap, and new.

No, the person most at fault is the person who set up shitty working conditions.

This is akin to someone dying in a forklift accident in a factory. It sounds like "tragic accident" until you hear how the boss was an asshole and skimped on safety measures, and ignored previous failures that could have resulted in death, but people got lucky, but then never changed anything to prevent it from happening again. Except it did, and then someone died.

And Alec Baldwin is the producer, co-writer of the script, and was responsible for running an unsafe, slipshod set. Its also somewhat infuriating as the man who's rep from his OWN union, was keen on hiring non-union scabs to break a strike.

We'll see what comes out in his trial, but unless people are making shit up, people are saying he violated every safety protocol both as producer and and ignored the safety brief as an actor as well. But again, we'll see who actually says what under oath.

Or it solves some of the issue of "what do we do with the salt after we desalinate" making desalination for drinking water more attractive.

What?

Everyone loves to typecast most of the people in these odd internet subcultures as the stereotype of NEET from middle to lower-middle class households, who are entirely dysfunctional and can't handle even as much as bathing and grooming. Those people do exist.

But if there was one hard lesson I learned on Something Awful: "Beware what big fish lurk in the deep".

You never know who you are talking to.

>ya you break down mercury for component.

So you need to launch a space ship, that can land on mercury, then mine it, then launch that back into space. Then process that into building materials and construct that where?

None of the tech to do that exists.

> functional fusion

Fusion electricity is a pipe dream itself, but that is far far far closer to reality, and 50/50 that winds up working at some point.

It is not, no. Perhaps the individual components are, but to Dyson scale, you'd need more literal material than the earth.

So you'd need to have a feasible way to mine, refine and manufacture in space, at scale. That does not exist. You'd also need advances in spaceship technology for all the mining and hauling materials and machines for processing.

In fact, I think even swarm, you'd need more material than all the rocky bodies in the solar system combined, so on top of being able to just strip all bodies including earth to nothing, which is not feasible with mining tech, you'd need interstellar travel to other worlds, and perhaps a way to harvest stuff off gas planets, etc...

So, the tech does not exist. Just ability to build small parts of it.

Next up, is building a dyson sphere even worth it, considering what other options open up once you have technology for that level of space travel, and resource harvesting needed for production at that scale?

Likely not.

Short answer: no

long answer: Its not remotely feasible. Its a pipe dream at best.

Yeah, its a much better story then some faceless exec with a newly minted MBA.

Fits a lot of checkmarks that make good PR.

Minority

Rags to Riches

Linkedin tier hustle and win story

How much biomass do they use?

Also keep in mind that ICE doesn't translate %100 to Electric use wise.

The infrastructure of gas is you basicly fill it up once a week, at a gas station.

Unless you live out on a farm, you can't have a refueling station in your house. You can't also run a gas pipe, as gas stations need trucks to show up and refill the gas. There is a lot of logistics into fuel processing and delivery that is specific for ICE.

Electric? You just have a high amp 240V circuit installed and charger. for a GOOD charger its about $1k, and another $1k USD to have the line installed. All the infra is already there.

You don't need a week of fuel, only a day.

Also, as noted below, EVs are far more efficient.

>one kilowatt-hour per kilogram

I'll believe that when I see that in a mass production model.

consider:

my Fiat 500E has a 24kWh hour battery, so 24 pounds.

Max energy consumption from my house in a 1 day period is 25 kWh, typical 11 kWh

Plagiarism is exactly how AI chat bots work. All of them.

You input text, it recombines it, and then outputs it with a certain degree of mutation.

Technology isn't a field, but rather a type of fields. It encompasses many things.

Every type of technology has its limits. Yes.

No one can. Because its not public information...

That's a "I have nothing other than pure hype, and I'm a fanboi for Bloomberg"

Stay mad.

Here is a reasonable middle ground:

Why don't you itemize what you've actually done. Perhaps with that 1 billion go start a company. Perhaps you can even make money on it.

And then show some actual leadership done, other than just showing a dollar amount and vauge plan.

Did he?

OK, so itemize where that money actually went.

Or what is in that plan he has?

And how come no one else is getting credit besides bloomberg?

In the actual world, men like Bloomberg, especially his contributions politically, both economic and his positions in office cancel out anything he might have done as charity.

If you want a REAL compare and contrast, I'll go with NJ Gov Phil Murphy. Like Bloomberg, Murphy used to work in finance. Like Bloomberg, Murphy is rich.

Murphy ran on a campaign of not just bringing offshore wind to NJ, but an articulated, public plan on bringing the entire industry along with building the turbines, and put this right on the debate floor and part of his campaign.

Bloomberg as a "plan". What is it? can we read it? he donated $500 million. To what? How was this money spent?

The original statement: "Bloomberg did more than any other person to end the use of coal".

Can you back that up with anything other than "$500 million given to unknown sources" and "just trust me bro"

I am going to say "no he didn't".

Ultimately, its the work of engineers designing the systems, not the financial contributions which make change.

Money doesn't do anything, it just gets other people to do the actual work, while giving credit to people who made billions on, well others hard work.

It doesn't give any details on what this plan is, or how the $500 million was spent, so its a big "we don't know".

Lets say we had a system like Norway, where the oil industry was public and not private, and then used the revenue to pivot away from domestic consumption of oil, we wouldn't need the "charity".

We'd also have more accountability on where that 500 million was spent, and what this "plan" for solving global warming actually is.

But here we are, with this private charity, with no transparency, and a plan that is "just trust me bro", and suddenly he's the greatest person alive? Surely you jest.