▲ 637 ▼ Nuclear fusion reaction releases almost twice the energy put in (www.newscientist.com) submitted 2 years ago by throwaway389430@lemmy.cafe to c/news@lemmy.world 344 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] blazera@kbin.social 31 points 2 years ago (5 children) We already got plenty of nuclear fusion output with no energy input on our part. But folks dont want solar panels permalink fedilink source hideshow 10 child comments replies: [–] Zorque@kbin.social 59 points 2 years ago (3 children) What is with peoples insistence that we only ever use one kind of power generation? Wind, solar, fusion, fission, hydro, they all have their uses. Why limit yourself like some kind of console fanboy? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] blazera@kbin.social 16 points 2 years ago That's fair. Im big solar fanboy but if more people were fusion researchers the world wouldnt be a worse place. permalink fedilink source parent [–] ForgotAboutDre@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago (1 child) Fusion is self sustained and highly scalable. If it was practical we wouldn't need the other forms, except for places not serviced by electrical grids. Fission takes a long time to build and finance. It hasn't been invested enough in. We need more green energy to replace fossil fuels faster than governments can get fusion plants up. That's why wind, solar and hydro are and should be the preference. Hydro needs the right geography. Solar and wind need the right local weather. Solar great in a California desert, but terrible in Scotland where wind and hydro are very effective. There some cases where a specific technology is the best and clearest option. But when fission becomes reliable, it will cover the vast majority of use cases in the highly Industrialised nations. Everything else will be niche. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Zorque@kbin.social 0 points 2 years ago Well as soon as I can get a fission reactor in my house I'll give up on energy independence then. permalink fedilink source parent [–] maness300@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) Why limit yourself like some kind of console fanboy? Propaganda by solar bros. It's only the solar bros doing this because you can sell solar to the average idiot. Most people can't own other forms of clean energy generation directly. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago I also have a suspicion that a lot of the renewables vs nuclear debate is stoked by fossil fuel interests permalink fedilink source parent [–] Assman@sh.itjust.works 29 points 2 years ago (1 child) *minus the energy needed to make, maintain, and replace solar panels. I support more solar installations, just calling out it isn't free power. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 19 points 2 years ago (2 children) As more solar is installed, the less power input we need to provide. There will be a point where all solar power required to make a solar panel will be produced by solar panels permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] learningduck@programming.dev 7 points 2 years ago As more solar panels are installed, more material and maintenance are required. They deteriorate over time, and require large physical areas. I guess at that point, each panel needs to be extremely efficient to limit the space, extremely durable, made of cheap materials, easily recyclable into another panel. permalink fedilink source parent [+] Assman@sh.itjust.works -6 points 2 years ago (1 child) Right so No energy input on our part Is clearly false permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 18 points 2 years ago I give the comment a pass because it's pretty obvious hyperbole permalink fedilink source parent [–] mihies@kbin.social 7 points 2 years ago (2 children) True, but that's not reliable source of energy though, specially during short and cloudy winter days when it's most needed. Look what happened in Germany and how they became on if the biggest European polluters. The key ingredient missing is energy storage. Once that's solved, solar panels would become much more useful. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) We could massively subsidize home battery storage and this wouldn't be an issue at all. Microgrids are the future anyway. The only reason why storage is an issue now is because it needs to be centralized. Once we get away from that tons of new possibilities open up. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mihies@kbin.social 3 points 2 years ago Home batteries are expensive and take a lot of place. Also they won't last more than a day. Imagine winter time with short cloudy days. Realistically you need at least a month worth of energy storage and even then you need sun to recharge it. They would distribute energy consumption better though by charging during night. permalink fedilink source parent [–] blazera@kbin.social 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) We have all the technology for energy storage we need, it just needs to be built. Theres gravity storage like pumped hydro, pressure storage, thermal storage, flywheels. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mihies@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Well, no. Sadly we don't. At least not in the range needed. All of these require either specific geographic relief, something really huge, too expensive or combination. Perhaps the most promising is the green hydrogen, but then again, we have yet to see it at such scale. I'd love to be wrong, though. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] blazera@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) something really huge yeah, we use a lot of energy, absolutely every form of energy production we have involves really huge things. Massive mines, dams, pipelines, oil rigs, nuclear cooling towers, fossil fuel power plants, oil tankers. They just have to be built. we can excavate dams, build solid weight lifting facilities, molten salt storage, make arrays of flywheels. There's a ton of answers to energy storage already, they dont involve resources with any kind of scarcity, they just have to be built. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Big construction involves environmental concerns, that's why we don't have many new dams nowadays permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] blazera@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Boi i better see you raising a fuss over that infrastructure bill permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago Grrl I don't remember voicing my own opinion on anything permalink fedilink source parent [–] billwashere@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago Or bombs. They have fusion versions of those with a great deal more output than input but they’re not really fond of those either. permalink fedilink source parent [+] SchizoDenji@lemm.ee -21 points 2 years ago (3 children) Solartards don't realise that the problem with solar is storage and sun availability. It's a fantastic idea on paper but unless you're in an tropical country, good luck surviving winters. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] frezik@midwest.social 9 points 2 years ago* WHAT? This is completely new information that nobody has filled journals with papers working out solutions. permalink fedilink source parent [–] blazera@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago we've had grid scale storage for a long time now. storing energy for things like cars needed new technology for weight concerns, but for electrical utilities? You lift a weight upwards with an electric motor during peak times, and let the weight down to spin a generator when you need it. It's been in application with pumped hydro storage for a while. permalink fedilink source parent [–] LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) There are plausible technical designs to make huge batteries out of dirt / dirt cheap materials (e.g. liquid metal battery but there are others). I wonder how that compares to building other power plants. The problem is that humanity is just too stupid to live. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Yes, as evidenced by humans not living permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago Humanity as a global civilization, not individual humans. The latter you can have intelligent conversations with, the former has the rationality of a slime mold - only growing towards where there is energy / food / money. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Zorque@kbin.social 59 points 2 years ago (3 children) What is with peoples insistence that we only ever use one kind of power generation? Wind, solar, fusion, fission, hydro, they all have their uses. Why limit yourself like some kind of console fanboy? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] blazera@kbin.social 16 points 2 years ago That's fair. Im big solar fanboy but if more people were fusion researchers the world wouldnt be a worse place. permalink fedilink source parent [–] ForgotAboutDre@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago (1 child) Fusion is self sustained and highly scalable. If it was practical we wouldn't need the other forms, except for places not serviced by electrical grids. Fission takes a long time to build and finance. It hasn't been invested enough in. We need more green energy to replace fossil fuels faster than governments can get fusion plants up. That's why wind, solar and hydro are and should be the preference. Hydro needs the right geography. Solar and wind need the right local weather. Solar great in a California desert, but terrible in Scotland where wind and hydro are very effective. There some cases where a specific technology is the best and clearest option. But when fission becomes reliable, it will cover the vast majority of use cases in the highly Industrialised nations. Everything else will be niche. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Zorque@kbin.social 0 points 2 years ago Well as soon as I can get a fission reactor in my house I'll give up on energy independence then. permalink fedilink source parent [–] maness300@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) Why limit yourself like some kind of console fanboy? Propaganda by solar bros. It's only the solar bros doing this because you can sell solar to the average idiot. Most people can't own other forms of clean energy generation directly. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago I also have a suspicion that a lot of the renewables vs nuclear debate is stoked by fossil fuel interests permalink fedilink source parent
[–] blazera@kbin.social 16 points 2 years ago That's fair. Im big solar fanboy but if more people were fusion researchers the world wouldnt be a worse place. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ForgotAboutDre@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago (1 child) Fusion is self sustained and highly scalable. If it was practical we wouldn't need the other forms, except for places not serviced by electrical grids. Fission takes a long time to build and finance. It hasn't been invested enough in. We need more green energy to replace fossil fuels faster than governments can get fusion plants up. That's why wind, solar and hydro are and should be the preference. Hydro needs the right geography. Solar and wind need the right local weather. Solar great in a California desert, but terrible in Scotland where wind and hydro are very effective. There some cases where a specific technology is the best and clearest option. But when fission becomes reliable, it will cover the vast majority of use cases in the highly Industrialised nations. Everything else will be niche. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Zorque@kbin.social 0 points 2 years ago Well as soon as I can get a fission reactor in my house I'll give up on energy independence then. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Zorque@kbin.social 0 points 2 years ago Well as soon as I can get a fission reactor in my house I'll give up on energy independence then. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] maness300@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) Why limit yourself like some kind of console fanboy? Propaganda by solar bros. It's only the solar bros doing this because you can sell solar to the average idiot. Most people can't own other forms of clean energy generation directly. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago I also have a suspicion that a lot of the renewables vs nuclear debate is stoked by fossil fuel interests permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago I also have a suspicion that a lot of the renewables vs nuclear debate is stoked by fossil fuel interests permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Assman@sh.itjust.works 29 points 2 years ago (1 child) *minus the energy needed to make, maintain, and replace solar panels. I support more solar installations, just calling out it isn't free power. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 19 points 2 years ago (2 children) As more solar is installed, the less power input we need to provide. There will be a point where all solar power required to make a solar panel will be produced by solar panels permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] learningduck@programming.dev 7 points 2 years ago As more solar panels are installed, more material and maintenance are required. They deteriorate over time, and require large physical areas. I guess at that point, each panel needs to be extremely efficient to limit the space, extremely durable, made of cheap materials, easily recyclable into another panel. permalink fedilink source parent [+] Assman@sh.itjust.works -6 points 2 years ago (1 child) Right so No energy input on our part Is clearly false permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 18 points 2 years ago I give the comment a pass because it's pretty obvious hyperbole permalink fedilink source parent
[–] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 19 points 2 years ago (2 children) As more solar is installed, the less power input we need to provide. There will be a point where all solar power required to make a solar panel will be produced by solar panels permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] learningduck@programming.dev 7 points 2 years ago As more solar panels are installed, more material and maintenance are required. They deteriorate over time, and require large physical areas. I guess at that point, each panel needs to be extremely efficient to limit the space, extremely durable, made of cheap materials, easily recyclable into another panel. permalink fedilink source parent [+] Assman@sh.itjust.works -6 points 2 years ago (1 child) Right so No energy input on our part Is clearly false permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 18 points 2 years ago I give the comment a pass because it's pretty obvious hyperbole permalink fedilink source parent
[–] learningduck@programming.dev 7 points 2 years ago As more solar panels are installed, more material and maintenance are required. They deteriorate over time, and require large physical areas. I guess at that point, each panel needs to be extremely efficient to limit the space, extremely durable, made of cheap materials, easily recyclable into another panel. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] Assman@sh.itjust.works -6 points 2 years ago (1 child) Right so No energy input on our part Is clearly false permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 18 points 2 years ago I give the comment a pass because it's pretty obvious hyperbole permalink fedilink source parent
[–] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 18 points 2 years ago I give the comment a pass because it's pretty obvious hyperbole permalink fedilink source parent
[–] mihies@kbin.social 7 points 2 years ago (2 children) True, but that's not reliable source of energy though, specially during short and cloudy winter days when it's most needed. Look what happened in Germany and how they became on if the biggest European polluters. The key ingredient missing is energy storage. Once that's solved, solar panels would become much more useful. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) We could massively subsidize home battery storage and this wouldn't be an issue at all. Microgrids are the future anyway. The only reason why storage is an issue now is because it needs to be centralized. Once we get away from that tons of new possibilities open up. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mihies@kbin.social 3 points 2 years ago Home batteries are expensive and take a lot of place. Also they won't last more than a day. Imagine winter time with short cloudy days. Realistically you need at least a month worth of energy storage and even then you need sun to recharge it. They would distribute energy consumption better though by charging during night. permalink fedilink source parent [–] blazera@kbin.social 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) We have all the technology for energy storage we need, it just needs to be built. Theres gravity storage like pumped hydro, pressure storage, thermal storage, flywheels. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mihies@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Well, no. Sadly we don't. At least not in the range needed. All of these require either specific geographic relief, something really huge, too expensive or combination. Perhaps the most promising is the green hydrogen, but then again, we have yet to see it at such scale. I'd love to be wrong, though. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] blazera@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) something really huge yeah, we use a lot of energy, absolutely every form of energy production we have involves really huge things. Massive mines, dams, pipelines, oil rigs, nuclear cooling towers, fossil fuel power plants, oil tankers. They just have to be built. we can excavate dams, build solid weight lifting facilities, molten salt storage, make arrays of flywheels. There's a ton of answers to energy storage already, they dont involve resources with any kind of scarcity, they just have to be built. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Big construction involves environmental concerns, that's why we don't have many new dams nowadays permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] blazera@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Boi i better see you raising a fuss over that infrastructure bill permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago Grrl I don't remember voicing my own opinion on anything permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) We could massively subsidize home battery storage and this wouldn't be an issue at all. Microgrids are the future anyway. The only reason why storage is an issue now is because it needs to be centralized. Once we get away from that tons of new possibilities open up. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mihies@kbin.social 3 points 2 years ago Home batteries are expensive and take a lot of place. Also they won't last more than a day. Imagine winter time with short cloudy days. Realistically you need at least a month worth of energy storage and even then you need sun to recharge it. They would distribute energy consumption better though by charging during night. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] mihies@kbin.social 3 points 2 years ago Home batteries are expensive and take a lot of place. Also they won't last more than a day. Imagine winter time with short cloudy days. Realistically you need at least a month worth of energy storage and even then you need sun to recharge it. They would distribute energy consumption better though by charging during night. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] blazera@kbin.social 0 points 2 years ago (1 child) We have all the technology for energy storage we need, it just needs to be built. Theres gravity storage like pumped hydro, pressure storage, thermal storage, flywheels. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mihies@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Well, no. Sadly we don't. At least not in the range needed. All of these require either specific geographic relief, something really huge, too expensive or combination. Perhaps the most promising is the green hydrogen, but then again, we have yet to see it at such scale. I'd love to be wrong, though. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] blazera@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) something really huge yeah, we use a lot of energy, absolutely every form of energy production we have involves really huge things. Massive mines, dams, pipelines, oil rigs, nuclear cooling towers, fossil fuel power plants, oil tankers. They just have to be built. we can excavate dams, build solid weight lifting facilities, molten salt storage, make arrays of flywheels. There's a ton of answers to energy storage already, they dont involve resources with any kind of scarcity, they just have to be built. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Big construction involves environmental concerns, that's why we don't have many new dams nowadays permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] blazera@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Boi i better see you raising a fuss over that infrastructure bill permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago Grrl I don't remember voicing my own opinion on anything permalink fedilink source parent
[–] mihies@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Well, no. Sadly we don't. At least not in the range needed. All of these require either specific geographic relief, something really huge, too expensive or combination. Perhaps the most promising is the green hydrogen, but then again, we have yet to see it at such scale. I'd love to be wrong, though. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] blazera@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) something really huge yeah, we use a lot of energy, absolutely every form of energy production we have involves really huge things. Massive mines, dams, pipelines, oil rigs, nuclear cooling towers, fossil fuel power plants, oil tankers. They just have to be built. we can excavate dams, build solid weight lifting facilities, molten salt storage, make arrays of flywheels. There's a ton of answers to energy storage already, they dont involve resources with any kind of scarcity, they just have to be built. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Big construction involves environmental concerns, that's why we don't have many new dams nowadays permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] blazera@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Boi i better see you raising a fuss over that infrastructure bill permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago Grrl I don't remember voicing my own opinion on anything permalink fedilink source parent
[–] blazera@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) something really huge yeah, we use a lot of energy, absolutely every form of energy production we have involves really huge things. Massive mines, dams, pipelines, oil rigs, nuclear cooling towers, fossil fuel power plants, oil tankers. They just have to be built. we can excavate dams, build solid weight lifting facilities, molten salt storage, make arrays of flywheels. There's a ton of answers to energy storage already, they dont involve resources with any kind of scarcity, they just have to be built. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Big construction involves environmental concerns, that's why we don't have many new dams nowadays permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] blazera@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Boi i better see you raising a fuss over that infrastructure bill permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago Grrl I don't remember voicing my own opinion on anything permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Big construction involves environmental concerns, that's why we don't have many new dams nowadays permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] blazera@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Boi i better see you raising a fuss over that infrastructure bill permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago Grrl I don't remember voicing my own opinion on anything permalink fedilink source parent
[–] blazera@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Boi i better see you raising a fuss over that infrastructure bill permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago Grrl I don't remember voicing my own opinion on anything permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago Grrl I don't remember voicing my own opinion on anything permalink fedilink source parent
[–] billwashere@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago Or bombs. They have fusion versions of those with a great deal more output than input but they’re not really fond of those either. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] SchizoDenji@lemm.ee -21 points 2 years ago (3 children) Solartards don't realise that the problem with solar is storage and sun availability. It's a fantastic idea on paper but unless you're in an tropical country, good luck surviving winters. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] frezik@midwest.social 9 points 2 years ago* WHAT? This is completely new information that nobody has filled journals with papers working out solutions. permalink fedilink source parent [–] blazera@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago we've had grid scale storage for a long time now. storing energy for things like cars needed new technology for weight concerns, but for electrical utilities? You lift a weight upwards with an electric motor during peak times, and let the weight down to spin a generator when you need it. It's been in application with pumped hydro storage for a while. permalink fedilink source parent [–] LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) There are plausible technical designs to make huge batteries out of dirt / dirt cheap materials (e.g. liquid metal battery but there are others). I wonder how that compares to building other power plants. The problem is that humanity is just too stupid to live. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Yes, as evidenced by humans not living permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago Humanity as a global civilization, not individual humans. The latter you can have intelligent conversations with, the former has the rationality of a slime mold - only growing towards where there is energy / food / money. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] frezik@midwest.social 9 points 2 years ago* WHAT? This is completely new information that nobody has filled journals with papers working out solutions. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] blazera@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago we've had grid scale storage for a long time now. storing energy for things like cars needed new technology for weight concerns, but for electrical utilities? You lift a weight upwards with an electric motor during peak times, and let the weight down to spin a generator when you need it. It's been in application with pumped hydro storage for a while. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) There are plausible technical designs to make huge batteries out of dirt / dirt cheap materials (e.g. liquid metal battery but there are others). I wonder how that compares to building other power plants. The problem is that humanity is just too stupid to live. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Yes, as evidenced by humans not living permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago Humanity as a global civilization, not individual humans. The latter you can have intelligent conversations with, the former has the rationality of a slime mold - only growing towards where there is energy / food / money. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Yes, as evidenced by humans not living permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago Humanity as a global civilization, not individual humans. The latter you can have intelligent conversations with, the former has the rationality of a slime mold - only growing towards where there is energy / food / money. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago Humanity as a global civilization, not individual humans. The latter you can have intelligent conversations with, the former has the rationality of a slime mold - only growing towards where there is energy / food / money. permalink fedilink source parent