Spyke

Replies

Comment on

Spicy Air ☢️

Reply in thread

Photovoltaic is the future, it'sprettyy much unarguably the only technology that can create energy without moving parts or without any sort of burning.

You don't get any more futuristic than this. The only problem with photovoltaic and wind is that they've been actively boycotted.

Here in the UK energy providers habitually stop their own wind turbines just because otherwise the price of energy will get too low. That's how fucked up the system is. And nuclear is nothing more than an astute way for these capitalist pigs in control of the energy sector to keep making money from something that should be free already.

Comment on

Spicy Air ☢️

Reply in thread

And earthquakes, and tsunamis, and hurricanes, and floods, and any other unforeseen circumstance which will result in rising level of cancer and lowering life expectancy for generations in the centuries to come. But yes who cares?! Glowy thing go brrrrrrr!

Comment on

Spicy Air ☢️

Reply in thread

Yes, transmission is a complex thing to do, and that's why more funds should used to improve research in that direction, rather than wasting hundreds of billions on ticking time bombs, so that mining company owners can get richer while making us sicker.

1 hour of sunlight that hits the sunlit hemisphere, contains enough energy to satisfy the needs of the whole planet for 1 year. That's how much solar is better than nuclear.

I really can't believe that in 2026, the idea of generating energy by boiling water, is still considered "advanced tech" just because they wanna use a different fuel. Lol

And no, solar doesn't need land.

Comment on

Spicy Air ☢️

Reply in thread

No it's not! It's a minuscule step forward which will achieve no change whatsoever for the average person except an INCREASE in the amount of carcinogenic compounds in the atmosphere!

The massive step forward would be not needing boiling water and not needing to burn any fuel whatsoever to produce energy. That would be a "massive" step forward, not nuclear.

And btw, water vapour is a greenhouse gas too.

privacy

Comment on

Privacy focused home-lab project.

Reply in thread

Hi thanks for the feedback. As of now, on top of being encrypted, vthe sender is also given a passphrase that needs to be shared to the recipient via a different channel. I'm not sure how that would affects bots, but at least it should stops spammers

privacy

Comment on

*Permanently Deleted*

Reply in thread

"Capacity" doesn't merely regard hardware. Right now in the US, the number of active LE officers is outnumbered 400 to 1. Meaning each police officer/FBI agent would have to keep an eye on 400 people at a time to get to the kind of surveillance state that many think is already here (it's not). The situation is similar if not worse in the rest of the western world. The UK is seeing record low numbers of LE officers, so low that the government changed the law few years ago to allow people with face tatoos in the force lol.

They do monitor individual "Profiles" when they have justifiable reasons for it. Monitoring aprofile can include everything, phone monitoring, social media monitoring, physical monitoring. But again, you must have been cause of serious worry for them to start such investigations on you.

In most cases simply attending a protest, which is protected by the constitution, would not amount to that kind of surveillance, even for the simple fact of lack of officers to monitor every attendant to the protest.

Again I'm not saying this stuff doesn't happen. It does happen, sometimes officers can pick on you and make stuff up to justify it, the use of AI models for this type of operations is gonna makes things worse for sure, and the way trump is using ICE as his personal paramilitary group also doesnt help, but we are still very very far for that Orwell's 1984 type of surveillance, merely from a technology and capacity standpoint.

Right now the people that are monitoring every single of your actions are big tech, not police or governments. And what I'm arguing is simply that safety should not come at the cost of action. Because that's also how they get you, either by arresting you or by making you so afraid that you won't rise up against them. They win in both cases.

I speak for me personally now when I say that even though I'm a privacy advocate, my priority is to try make change even at the cost of putting myself in risky situations, that's actually why I am a privacy advocate. It's not a tool I use to hide from the system, it's a tool I use to keep myself safe as I go against the system.