This is fascinating, the sails look quite different from what I would have imagined given the name. Looks more like those ships with the rotating cylinders on them visually, even though of course those operated on a very different principle.
Excited to see how well this works. Would be amazing if they could slash fuel usage significantly, I remember reading even those oversized kites already did a fair bit.
The Pyxis Ocean’s maiden journey, from China to Brazil, will provide the first real-world test of the WindWings - and an opportunity to assess whether a return to the traditional way of propelling ships could be the way forward for moving cargo at sea.
Enabling a vessel to be blown along by the wind, rather than rely solely on its engine, could hopefully eventually reduce a cargo ship’s lifetime emissions by 30%.
It was developed by UK firm BAR Technologies, which was spun out of Sir Ben Ainslie’s 2017 America’s Cup team, a competition sometimes called the ‘Formula One of the seas’.
“This is one of the most slow-moving projects we’ve done, but without doubt with the biggest impact for the planet,” its head John Cooper - who used to work for Formula One team McLaren - told the BBC.
“Wind power can make a big difference,” says Dr Simon Bullock, shipping researcher at the Tyndall Centre, at the University of Manchester.
He said new cleaner fuels will take time to emerge “so we have to throw everything at operational measures on existing ships - like retrofitting vessels with sails, kites and rotors”.
The original article contains 881 words, the summary contains 193 words. Saved 78%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
I don’t have any issue with that, the less toxic people I have to interact with on here the happier I’ll be. I encourage anybody who finds my comments and posts upsetting to block me and move on.
Don’t feed the troll. He’s an actual professional troll who will try his hardest to drag you into a debate. I like to just keep editing my comments with new links that refute his claims, and that’s when he totally loses it and gives me -30 and himself +55 updoots on a post with a grand total of 18 votes. He’s really aggressive but he’s not very good at his job.
Edit: I can see he has gone through my post history and downvoted everything so I have 0 or negative karma or whatever it’s called… and he did it a week afterwards. He’s a spiteful little troll, isn’t he? I don’t care about updoots. You can’t silence the truth, you dumb fuck.
Most notably, they will not actually engage in any real discussion on these topics. They only want to shut down discussion by calling everyone brainwashed. They will offer not a single critical word against China or Russia, past present or future. Obviously this analysis is very noteworthy, and the conjecture that these societies are above reproach makes for a very good faith argument. Especially when combined with the intellectually honest strategy of removing their opponent’s agency by calling them brainwashed. Truly a master debater.
I have no idea where you get that idea from. I have tons of praise for China - the culture, the people, the food, the history. I speak ok Mandarin, have family in China and visit once a year typically. I probably have more direct experience with China than anyone on lemmygrad. Unlike those folks, I’m not just here to troll and disrupt conversation. I want to have real conversations about the good as well as the bad. It’s the tankie trolls who will never actually engage in good faith. It’s the surest sign someone is, in fact, just a troll imo.
You’re changing the question, I mean the Chinese government and so did you in your previous comment. I’m sure you’re aware that “tankies” don’t just give a blanket endorsement of, for example, patriarchal social norms in China, and believe there are many cultural elements which must be the object of struggle. One must conclude that you didn’t include that because it was beyond the scope of your claim when you said “China”.
The tankies on Lemmy absolutely give it a blanket endorsement. Trust me I’ve tried many times to seek a real discussion on this topic. Specifically with regard to the hukou caste system and lack of public trials. I think this is very low hanging fruit tbh.
You are pushing in the direction of “he said/she said”. If I made a thread over on lemmygrad and actually asked about this, would you accept that as evidence?
Of course, that would be super interesting. I’m left-lib and every interaction I’ve had with them so far has led me to believe they are the most ridiculous kind of ML extremists
That’s a little heartening. Lemmygrad is aware of this thread, but I’ll try to word the post to not tip my hand too too much, and then I’ll link it back here and you can watch it (actually, you can post in it if you want since you’re on a lemmy.ml account, but that’s up to you).
Let me tell you from experience that sometimes people only look ridiculous because of prejudices we are bringing into the interaction (though some people are ridiculous).
Should I include Russia or is that too easy?
As an aside in the meantime, what do you make of the fact that I am quite willing to talk about negative elements despite being a “tankie”?
Eh, I’ve seen errors here and there (and called them out, as you can see) but I think they are generally putting forward decent arguments with better evidence. The Yuri Gagarin stan for example is very well-read and intelligent, you just need to demonstrate good faith (and maybe catch him in a not-bad mood). Anyway, here’s the thread that I just made. Feel free to upvote for visibility, we’ll see how it goes.
We got at least a couple of takers, and I expanded a little on some of my views. What do you think?
I should mention that one thing that probably skews matters is a prevalent thought (that I mostly agree with) among communists that the criticism of rivals of one’s state to appease liberals is not a good use of time. The reasoning goes that you aren’t really in a position to correct those problems, so spending time on these things when speaking publicly is only going to support the basis for a “left opposition” to those foreign states even if that’s not your personal aim. A version of this has been used by the FBI.
Because of this, I think your sampling might have been sabotaged by people operating on that principle, because convincing a liberal to be an anarcho-bidenist [someone who claims to be a radical but supports US foreign policy and/or the Democrats] isn’t really a useful effort.
Nah, just people who uncritically regurgitate propaganda, and screech about everybody who disagrees with them being a Russian puppet and a tankie whatever that means.
My friend, I would like to remind you as gently as possible that brainwashing does not exist and was in fact an orientalist lie popularized to explain away why US soldiers would support China.
Yeah, that’s a fair point. It’s important to keep in mind that people are accepting the propaganda because they want to believe it and they understand that it serves their selfish interests.
Yes, thank you for being understanding. I think it’s better to avoid calling people brainwashed because – as one liberal in this thread pointed out – it denies agency which our interlocutors plainly do have which makes them much more responsible for their bad epistemology than the theory of “brainwashing” allows for.
If we want to persuade people – and I’ve seen that you have incredible enthusiasm for that cause! – we must do our best to meet them where they actually are rather than where we imagine them to be.
I’ll get off my soapbox here, I just wanted to mention it. I wish you all the best in your efforts!
Damn. I remember looking at a book at the Grand canyon rim souvenir shop that documented all the hundreds of people who have died by falling into the Grand canyon over the many decades. It’s kind of a sobering reality when you stand right on the edge and look down hundreds of feet and realize that it wouldn’t take much for your life to end right then and there.
Somewhere a photographer from 20 years ago has a photo of me standing right at the edge probably of this exact same cliff. I still can’t believe I did that as I have a severe fear of heights, lol.
Hope the kid gets better and gains a healthy fear of heights after this.
Over the Edge: Death in Grand Canyon. Maybe it should be required reading—or at least required skimming—for anyone walking around out there. So many dumb-dumbs with cameras trying to get selfies on the edge, or just wanting to look over…
I remember reading that book. My takeaway from it was that if I go hiking in there, I’m taking a friend.
One of the major risk factors for dying out there was if you were a guy going out there by yourself. I’d bet they would all be alive today if they just had someone else there to tell them their idea was stupid, and sometimes you just need to say it out loud before you realize its dumb halfway through explaining it
I always have this harrowing thought every time I was there (I lived in AZ, it was a once-every-few-years sort of affair). I have a memory of my Dad posing for a picture there, right where there’s an ankle-high wall leading to certain doom. He didn’t fall, but it wouldn’t take much and it gives me such Call of the Void vibes looking at that photo.
What’s even funnier is trying to explain the rules of American football to brits and they think that the QB gets fired when he is tackled with the ball.
Probably out of an abundance of caution, and the police never get to actually use their hazmat response kit.
I’m guessing it was one of those toy uranium samples from a previous resident left in the house, and when the new residents found it, they called to find out what to do with it.
What country don’t deal with violent threats against their politician seriously? Are you suggesting people should act as if threats are protected speech
I’m gonna throw this out there: if we’re gonna have freedom of speech, it has to include advocating for the violent overthrow of the government.
The people are supposed to be in control, not the government and if the people have the rhetorical means to take their government down taken away in such a manner, they’re not in control anymore. And we see where that kind of thinking leads us
I honestly always thought free speech was a dumb idea that in execution almost solely benefits people who wanna use hate speech and shit anyhow. When was the last time someone actually said something that needed to be said and didn’t get torn a new asshole for it?
At the very least, the American conception’s total trash and we’re still expected to act like it’s the best thing since sliced bread despite it mostly being used to stick up for people that’d get kicked off any self respecting IRC channel in minutes.
Here’s the problem: everyone is fundamentally misinterpreting free speech. It doesn’t mean what people think it does: it’s not about stopping government oppression, it’s about enforcing fundamental respect for human beings, which means hate speech is banned regardless – because bigotry and hate speech by its nature censors other human beings, because it creates an environment where people are discredited and shunned by their peers for stupid reasons, denying them their right to be respected and heard. Hate speech isn’t speech, it’s censorship, and needs to be treated as a censoring act and not as speech since it’s not speech, it’s an action done with intent.
When people adopt that definition of free speech, we can go back to having our cake and eating it too and we’ll start to get back on the right path.
this explicitly not the text of the first amendment, but that document is garbage anyway so it doesn’t matter. I agree with you, but with an additional point: money is not speech and any attempt to use it as such must be squashed if democracy is to have any meaning.
Yes. Until the person takes an action like bringing a rifle to within range of the president and actually attempting to assassinate said president, then it’s free speech and you should stop being a fascist.
Making threats with intent to carry them out and ability to do so is not protected speech. The tricky part is proving intent to actually carry out the threat like having written plans.
Mate if I made violent threats about the king or prime minister here in the UK I’d get someone politely knocking on my door and giving me a solid talking to. lmao
It is fucking wild that yanks just think this is normal behaviour. You live in a country that will kick down your door and execute you for posting something stupid on the internet and think that’s what happens everywhere else?
Did the FBI came kicking down his door or did they come to talk to him only for him to refuse and demand a warrant. How would you be treated in the UK if you acted similarly?
Are you out of your mind? They would go away and get a warrant, for a gun thing they wouldn’t even show up without one.
There have only been 80 fatal police shootings in the UK since 1990. In 32 years.
In the USA there have been 8,694 since 2015.
You live in a fascist jackbooted police state where the cops kick down people’s doors and execute them mate. Your failure to recognise this is simply a matter of seeing it as normal when it is completely fucking INSANE by the standards of literally every other country in the world.
Just like they did here. For all we know, there was a shootout that resulted in his death. We don’t have enough info to know what actually happened on during the raid.
The fact that people in the US have more guns than the UK is a major reason there are more police shootings in the US. If more criminals possess a gun, of course it is more likely that they would start a shootout that results in death.
Who’s living in a police state? Why are you assuming I’m from the US? Can you not make baseless assumptions about other people when arguing. I feel like you’re not even talking to me but to an imaginary strawman.
Your last argument is literally useless since I also think the US is insane when it comes to police killings. I just don’t assume everytime that it is simply police brutality because the US has more issues than just that. The amount of guns among the public also contribute to those stats.
“For all we know” is a cop out. You’re giving american cops the benefit of the doubt when they have explicitly demonstrated that you should never ever do that.
No shared land borders doesn’t mean they don’t have borders. They have sea borders to the north and customs at international airports are technically borders too
bbc.co.uk
Active