TLDR: it would be very hard, perhaps next to impossible to create one, and then you'd still have the issue how to convince people it's real, given that the existing ones are pretty well documented and accounted for.
If anyone wants to have this style but in an actually usable keyboard, you can buy (at great expense) these keycaps and put them on whatever cherry-mx-compatible keyboard you like:
Here in Germany, the somewhat paradox situation is that the right-wing party AfD has been pro-diesel and anti-ev for a long time, while it's usually the more progressive and/or left-leaning people who have been buying EVs.
But now that Musk has done something which looked very much like a Nazi salute on stage and also meddled in German politics by endorsing the AfD, nobody on the left wants to be seen in a Tesla anymore, while the right-wingers still prefer German diesel cars.
I was thinking the same looking at France's numbers. Who's more likely to buy a Tesla and who's more likely to hate Trump and Musk? (Also taking into account that some of France's very right wing politicians were invited at Trump's inauguration) Probably more overlap than Tesla would like... Especially now that you can buy something totally alien to this alleged ideology like a Volkswagen EV...
That's the risk when getting into politics while running a business.
Yeah, and this might make first-person shooters and some strategy games play a lot nicer if (big if) it works well. Perhaps the next iteration of Mario Maker might also make use of it.
They had it right with motion controls on the Wii. I could headshot on the Wii edition of Resident Evil 4 so effectively it was cheating.
The Switch also has motion control for fine aiming in some games (Zelda, Borderlands 2). Joysticks for gross movement then motion controls for smaller adjustments. Much better scheme than Xbox or PS.
Resi 4 on the Wii was so good. It was a good game anyway, but the aiming was precise and a hell of a lot of fun. I think about it a lot. I'm hesitant to play the remaster on my steam deck because I doubt it's possible to be as good
I wonder whether the active ingredient in the betel nuts is the same substance that also causes the cancer? Because if not, maybe the problem could be solved by extracting or sythesizing the active ingredient.
It has been synthesised. It's a mild stimulant but has a not-so-great toxicity profile. Probably best to leave it with the fibre you need to chew through.
Let's see... nuclear power is super expensive, relies on finite uranium resources and there is no safe solution to store the waste. Do we really want to rely on this?
That is debatable, nuclear power can be really cheap when managed correctly. See for example Ontario, Canada or France during the 70s-90s.
Many nuclear power plants can have life times of more than 8 decades and only the initial build and licensing is the expansive part, so if you average the cost over the total life time it is rather cheap.
If its so unsafe, why has there not been a single major accident with used fuel from civilian nuclear power plants? We have been using hundreds of NPPs for decades, yet not a single fatality.
The truth is, nuclear waste can be and is managed safely.
“Super expensive” for who builds them, or "super expensive" for the end user paying their electricity bill?
Also, there are safe solutions to store nuclear waste. They are not 1.0e31% secure, but many other kinds of power plants carry significant risks [1] [2] [3]
It's either expensive to the person paying the bill or to the person paying tax to subsidize it.
That's what "super expensive" means.
And yeah, most of it comes from the cost of building them. But they are barely competitive with solar + batteries if you count only the costs of operating them.
Keep in mind that we should be comparing "super expensive" with climate adaptation consequences, as well as factoring in that e.g. Europe could collaborate and drive down reactor costs with economies of scale where we don't all need to independently reinvent how to build these things
I'm happy for any energy (not just electricity) mix that ends up with a reasonable total cost, adding up current investments needed and future adaptation measures. The problem with ruling out a clean and safe energy source for irrational fears is that it delays net zero (higher future adaptation costs) and requires spending more on alternative solutions to guarantee a steady power supply (higher current investments)
Wind and solar are currently much cheaper per kWp (opportunistic production) and so it seems like the quicker way to net zero, and during the first bit (where we are currently at) that's definitely true. The problem shifts when we want to actually stop using things like gas to make up the difference. Afaik we need to go quite a way beyond what cost-effective pumped hydro locations can supply in most of Europe, so we need to look beyond 2030 and think what power sources we need to have ready by, say, 2040 or 2050, start making specific plans, and break ground on whatever solution is the best compromise
(I'm expecting some people to object to saying nuclear is not rationally dangerous. Please, prove me wrong! I'm happy to update my opinions based on non-cherry-picked data. I've previously looked into the cost in human health (not just deaths) of different energy sources, including dependencies such as uranium mining which is among the worst aspects. The only reliable data I've been able to find shows fission on par with renewables — iirc tending towards being safer, but probably not beyond the error margins due to the low percentage of nuclear energy)
Edit: on the other hand, I'm afraid that this nuclear discussion (especially with germans, I say that as a foreigner living in Germany so I've heard different perspectives) only serves to divide the people who at least understand there is something we should be doing about climate change. I'm happy to compromise if that lets us finally settle on a concrete plan that'll land us in a place we want to be
Not necessarily. USA certainly had bigger guns in Vietnam and Afghanistan, and yet they eventually had to retreat from both.
reply