There needs to be a bigger focus on self-install - it seems installers are stealing a huge amount of the value of consumer solar power systems.

Consider that even humans have alignment issues, and that there is a real concern Putin would nuke USA, you will see the fears are actually far from overblown.

So since we are not going to change policy having no children is the most impactful thing an environmentalist can do, right?

One environmentalist not having 2 children is the same as 60 people not driving? If environmentalists made up 5% of the population and none of them had any children it would be the same impact as if everyone stopped driving.

Sounds like a good deal to me.

> use enormous amounts of energy and resources that can't currently be supplied through renewable sources

Nonsense. In fact the carbon impact of Chinese solar panels are reducing because their grid is becoming cleaner.

30% of detached homes have solar in Australia, and in Japan all new homes have to have solar, and they replace their homes every 30 years.

Lol.What a non-sequitur.

> I don't think that we are capable of creating something as complex as we are that would outsmart us or try to get rid of us.

Parents create kids smarter than them all the time lol, and sometimes they kill them.

The whole process of evolution falsifies your statement.

Dealing with dirty data is exactly the strength of neural networks. It is just a matter of time.

If you understand enough to predict you understand enough .

Finding the relationship between items is exactly what AI is good at. You sound like the people who said AI would never beat Go because the number of combinations were more than the atoms in the universe.

Well, that is an unsupported opinion only.

If AIs can understand protein folding better than humans, I think it is pretty obvious those higher level abstractions are also tractible, especially complex things like ecology. I would bet AI would be much better at understanding ecology than us.

There is very little sign AGI is centuries away, and decades go past pretty fast.

No, he is right. If UBI is enabled by AGI/ASI, then "people will work on science, volunteer, build stuff and create stuff" will be unnecessary.

Whatever you can do, could be done more easily and better by an AGI.

Ironically the best thing the ASI could do was put everyone in the matrix, where they pretend to live meaningful lives.

That is why you need electricity, like when they make panko.

A plasma arc could do it....

It's not really like that. Well-looked-after batteries see steeper initial loses and then much slower further losses.

I think, due to competition, people will have to very rapidly commercialise their new inventions.

In practical terms, if you want to visualize it, imagine the last 100 years of innovation compressed into one year.

In January you still have a horse and cart, in March you are using a tram, in May you have your own car, in November it's electric and in December it drives itself.

In January you are washing your clothes in a river, in Feb you have a mechanical washing machine, in May you have an electric washing machine and July you have a washer and dryer and in October your clothes are non-iron.

Or in January you are mailing a latter, in February sending a telegram, in March making a phone call, in August a mobile phone call, in September an email, in October a video call and in December a video conference call with your whole family.

> I gave you an example. If you have an big oil tank and fill it full, you pay many years nearly nothing till it is empty you and you need to fill it again.

That is a silly example, isn't it. Again, you are ignoring the payback period. You paid for your fuel ahead of time.

If you buy 2000L of fuel oil ahead of time and use it over a year, there is no payback period - it costs exactly the same as if you bought it month to month.

It's more like buying a hacked satellite dish and getting free TV.

You are investing in the capability, not the fuel.

I dont think you understand - its just another way of looking at the same thing, and one which makes a lot more sense.

But you don't seem to understand - pity.

You probably do not understand why people are so eager to install solar despite the costs actually going up this year, but let me explain - its because the payback period has reduced.

Like I said, pity.

No, I dont think you understand the consumer viewpoint.

Because you have to make an upfront payment, and also because you cant opt out of electricity bills, getting solar is not just like switching to a cheaper electricity provider which sells energy at 28c per kwh.

Consumers have to decide if the upfront investment is worthwhile which is where the payback period comes in.

And obviously, after something is paid back, it's free afterwards.

Amortising the cost over the lifetime of the solar kind of ignores the concept of payback time, doesn't it, which is much more important for home users.

Cue sodium batteries.

Explain that to me like I am 5 years old.

You will need electricity in any case, so you have a fixed cost of say 3000 euro a year.

You buy 9000 euro of solar + battery and now you pay nothing per year (in theory).

In 3 years your system had paid itself back, and for the next 7 years your battery lasts, your electricity is without any additional cost, ie free.

Why is it not free?

The only reason I can think of is that you could have invested 9000 euro, but then you would still have spend 30,000 over 10 years, and you 9000 is unlikely to turn into 30,000 over 10 years.

Shortages will only lead to substitution. Electric is very fungible.