For context on cost, SpaceX only charged NASA $3.1 billion for developing the Dragon 2 manned capsule. Boeing charged NASA $6.7 billion for Starliner and has spend at least 1.6 billion more than that so far.
Because the cost is probably closer to $10,000/kWh. Makes sense for a $1,000,000 supercar. Fundamentally all the new battery chemistries have serious underreported problems that make them dead-on-arrival. Either short cycle life (nanowire) or impractical manufacturing (solid state) or middling performance versus LiPo (sodium). Hopefully some of these may find niche applications where their advantages outweigh their problems but don’t expect more than a 50% improvement in density over the next 20 years.
I guess people care more about government abuse in their own countries. Also, do you know what kinds of things people get in trouble for in Russia? I suspect most social media arrests in Russia are related to Isis.
The Russian law was also passed democratically, but liberals dont like it because its going to be used against liberals whereas the “hate speech” laws are being used against conservatives. And yes the conservative party in the uk is anything but.
I think the difference is more whether you can criticize the government. In the UK that's fine, in Russia it causes issues. I assume even if the US if you posted "let's have a progrom in Washington DC tonight, klan outfits and let's kill some jews" you'd have issues with law enforcement over that? I think all countries have restictions on what you can say when it comes to murder and drug dealing. It's more where you draw the line.
The UK laws mix language which bans calls to violence with bans on “offensive” speech. So its not about where to draw the line, its about banning criticism of immigration, which you basically cant do without offending immigrants.
Russia is not a democracy regardless of how far your stretch its definition. Hardly anything democratic happens in Russia. One can argue democracy wasn't ever really a thing in Russia. I have my issues with the UK government, but comparing the Russian legislature with the UK one is laughable.
Ive seen plenty of unpopular and corrupt oligarchs that were targeted by Putin but are there any well-known names of some ordinary people imprisoned for political speech in Russia?
Judging by your comment history, I doubt it's worth engaging further because you're not arguing in good faith. There's a compiled category of russian dissidents on wikipedia if you're genuinely interested.
> The premise is flawed, therefore the conclusion is moot.
Yes but not in the way your dog analogy argues. The reality is that anything humans chose to do is be definition in our nature so strict environmental policy is not a limit on our behavior, it is our behavior.
> holding ourselves back a little (also called restraint) is not a bad thing
Of course, but you have to accept that our desire to preserve nature is selfish or else you end up seeing humanity as a cancer to be destroyed instead of the most advanced part of nature to be promoted.
It's selfish and limiting in the same way that going to the gym and eating well is limiting. Maybe the view of progress that says lazing around and eating sugar (poisoning our water supply, endless pollution, etc) will come home to roost. Ironically enough, we have already implemented lots of anti-progress memes like the EPA and CAA after seeing the fruits of progress!
Right, but like diet and exercise, we protect the environment for our own benefit, including our ability to visit untouched ecosystems. We dont protect nature because it is more important than humanity.
The optimal balance between natural preservation and human expansion is the one that maximizes the sum of human economic benefit from the expansion and the human phycological benefit from natural preservation.
