251 karma · joined May 8, 2025
But let's assume it costs you $150 a year. Thats less than $0.50 a day for drinking and cooking water. I doubt you could buy any significant amount of bottled water for fifty cents.
First there has to be bacteria in the municipal water. The city does a pretty good job there,
Second there has to be organic matter for the bacteria to grow. Again, cities are good with that.
But even if you have bacteria in your water, a good RO system's pores should be smaller than a virus (really smaller than a prion) or it won't be able to remove metallic ions.
But let's assume after two years these assumptions fail because the filters get old. Replace the filters and flush the system with bleach.
My fear with RO are bad filters. I once had a Zero pitcher and it tasted bad, acidic. A few weeks later there was a recall that the RO membrane was leaking ionomers.
Moral of the story- trust your senses. If municipal water tastes bad, it's bad. If bottled water tastes bad, it's bad. If RO water tastes bad, it's bad.
Chlorine in water is actually fine and tasteless at the concentrations it reaches at the taps - it's basically extremely diluted stomach acid.
The problem is chloramines caused by chlorinated organics. These give water the swimming pool smell and are bad for you.
The solution is easy - reduce the organics in the water before chlorination, and oxygenate (aerate) the water before delivery. But systems can get overwhelmed by too much rain and runoff.
Because I trust bleach, not my local water authority.
I certainly do not trust them to give me chemically clean water. So I have a $150 under-sink RO system.
Imagine the bus smelled like detergent and was spotless.
Piss, the occasional feces and I have to celebrate profane graffiti calling for cops' death as art.
But this meta question is not why I don't ride the bus. The structural inconvenience of it, and the odors inside are.
If:
- America solved its mental health crisis
- Americans became cleaner
- Americans became better behaved in public
Then Americans who can afford not to take the bus would reconsider it.
PI's rules were hierarchical. It only amended the interpretation of lower rules in conflict with higher ones.
PI is fundamentally unstable as evidenced that Lawerence has to babysit it and PI acknowledges this need by giving him special access with which to fix it.
And this is without getting at the unavoidable entropy problem - already PI was nipping away at the simulation detail of reality to conserve resources for an exponentially increasing population.
It was going to end.
> I don't trust their arguments, these were two extremely warped reactionaries who just happened to have root on the system. The story mentioned that there were people who just opted for pretty normal lives (before they were all exterminated by the protagonists). Nothing was preventing PI from deciding "this was a mistake, no more drugs and ultraviolence, it's making you into monsters" and calming things down.
That very decision is patronizing, therefore dehumanizing and instability inducing.
You see the paradox? For PI to save humans, to the Change parameter has to be > 1. The Death Matches lower it. But if what makes a human human, humanity, is curtailed - freedom - the parameter also drops.
Which is why PI reluctantly allows the death matches.
The book as a work of literature sucks; gratuitous violent sex poorly written. But the logic behind it is far better reasoned.
Death? Hunger? Pain? That's small stuff. It is not Hell.
Hell is loathing your existence forever. The end point of every human is condemned to in that novel.
Let me ask you a question (my answers in parentheses):
Do you fear death (not Death itself, but yes I do)?
What about it (bring unprepared, the pain of the process, fear of cowardice)?
But hey, what do I know. Im the kind of guy who gets to play with TMA and seriously considers purchasing hydrazine for work. What do I know?
You don't teach Haskell to seventh grader.
But 4 bit assembly driving a few LEDs? That works
That's why it's such an important first language! Pedagogically it's the foundation motivating all the fancy things languages give you.
You don't teach a kid to cut wood with a table saw. You give them a hand saw!
The book also addresses this by pointing out that most folks are happy with their overlord, some even worship it.
The point of the book is to prove it is hell.
But the idea is interesting an omnipotent Being that forces you enjoy immortality with it is a tyrant.
Basically when she gets out of her hospital bed she seeks out Anna and not her family because she'd been her only companion. Then it turns out Anna had harmed her terribly.
Also, I think the point is well argued that things like familial bonds don't mean very much contrasted to eternity.
And the book specifically highlights the futile fight against entropy. Eventually human population growth, already in the trillions, would become too large to manage causing the crash.
Finally, their arguments were sound. All humans would enter into despair - either consuming boundless soma or forever playing the death game.
The only two people who survive are the only ones who in five hundred years refused to surrender anything to the machine. Lawrence by his tireless job and the woman by refusing anything that wasn't real.
It needs to get to a jury and for that the prosecutor needs to think he'll win.
I doubt most prosecutors will stake their conviction ratio for a very sympathetic defendant.
(Except in San Fran and DC. There ill take whatever deal Im offered)
I'd probably smash a robot that swore at me or my family.
"Tell your c---t daughter to get off the street"
Will probably result in me looking for a heavy stone.
Swear words are literally fighting words whilst a robot cannot, legally, be assaulted. I'll take destruction of property to defend my daughter's honor to a jury of normies.
As to the attrition, this is mostly to the collapse of the protections of working conditions.
The trick is measuring a frequency in the 60s of Hz of a non-sinusoid within a thousandth of a second.
Otherwise you get a short.
Riddle me this, what instantaneous voltage should an inverter target if the grid's at a fault condition? Stated another way, how do you define the frequency of a non-sinuoid?
Careful, get the wrong answer and you get a short and you help melt millions of dollars of equipment, some with year old lead times.
(One of ) the problem with inverter the angular velocity of a spinning rotor is trivially easy to define and measure. The operating frequency of the grid that an inverter needs to target is hard to define under the realtime constraints of a failing grid.
Which is what brought Spain down. It wasnt the panels and windmills, it was the inverters.
We're the end stage of utilitarianism: getting rid of centuries old C3 energy producers of alkanes because the grove is "inefficient" and loudly extolling the beauty of pieces of black glass.
The solutions to the energy problems are largely solved and have been since the 70s, conservation.
Meanwhile, guys like Gates have been bemoaning cow's rectal emissions while AI (ie Microsoft, of which he is a major shareholder) is becoming the larger consumer of energy to train AI.