nick1812216

nick1812216 t1_j6h08z9 wrote

Reply to Scientists lower price of lithium's best competition - flow batteries - by 20%. Makes the battery effectively equal to or cheaper than lithium ion when spread over 30 years (flow battery lifetimes are effectively infinite with light repowering efforts). by PorkyPigDid911

For decades now ive been reading about all these amazing advancements “longer lasting/cheaper batteries/solar panels/super capacitors, green energy future imminent!”. And yet here we are, still at the coal face.

“It’s all retch and no vomit. It never gets there!”

−1

nick1812216 t1_iw2apg1 wrote

Reply to Scientists show for the 1st time that monkeys that are more sociable – eg, grooming or being groomed more often, & with more grooming partners – have a healthier gut microbiome.This is further evidence that in primates, social connectedness translates into good physical & mental health, & vice versa by MistWeaver80

I struggle with social anxiety and loneliness and all these articles are like ‘you’re probably gonna die’

2

nick1812216 t1_iudw4e3 wrote

Reply to comment by Korith_Eaglecry in Poland chooses US to build its first nuclear power plant by Vegeta9001

That’s kind of what i thought too, but i watched that 3-mile island documentary on netflix and it changed my view of the accident. I’m pro nuclear but 3-mile island imho was a disaster and highlighted engineering/operational incompetence in the American nuclear industry and the regulatory body and private operator really botched the PR. I think if they’d been more honest with the public about the gravity of the incident there would be more public trust in nuclear and maybe the industry would have weathered the crisis better.

−5

nick1812216 t1_irnwcqr wrote

Reply to comment by MindSwipe in [OC] Percent of human moves matching computer recommended moves in top chess tournaments by Evidently_21

I don’t think that it existed prior to the 20th century. I think it’s tied into the end of the preindustrial world and the industrialization/technological revolution of the 19th/20th/21st centuries. It is a small manifestation of a much larger shift in western culture. Think of it like the transition from artisanal cottage industry to mass production factories. You transition from working when you want on handmade pieces to a factory environment that’s governed by clocks and timetables and train schedules and punch cards and quarterly reports and currency exchange rates. If the goal is to bring the maximum benefit to the most people for the lowest cost, unequivocally the industrialized approach to production is far superior, but there is a sort of sentimental nostalgic value to the way things were done before, you know? And it is the same with chess. Unequivocally, if you want to win, materialistic/hypermodern chess is superior to romantic chess. Sorry, this was a little longwinded, but I think it’s an interesting subject.

1

nick1812216 t1_irnb888 wrote

Reply to comment by MindSwipe in [OC] Percent of human moves matching computer recommended moves in top chess tournaments by Evidently_21

Well! There are two distinct periods of chess theory. There is romantic chess, which is focused on dramatic sacrifices to gain advantageous positions. It’s a very exciting form of chess play prevalent in the 19th century. Then there is hypermodern chess, which is more focused on material (material meaning pawns, rooks, knights, etc…), and it begins in the 20th century. Each piece has a numeric value representative of its worth. Hypermodern materialistic chess is focused on maximizing material, so there are no dramatic sacrifices or grandiose positional moves. (Romantic chess/sacrifices/positional play is a very human form of chess. Hypermodern/material is a very computerized form of chess) We see this dip around 1880-1900 as this would have been the tail end of the romantic period of chess, when the prevailing form of chess was diametrically opposite to how computers play chess.

Im so glad you asked this question. I love history and chess

34