this post was submitted on 27 Jul 2023
48 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
2 readers
1 users here now
This magazine is dedicated to discussions on the latest developments, trends, and innovations in the world of technology. Whether you are a tech enthusiast, a developer, or simply curious about the latest gadgets and software, this is the place for you. Here you can share your knowledge, ask questions, and engage in discussions on topics such as artificial intelligence, robotics, cloud computing, cybersecurity, and more. From the impact of technology on society to the ethical considerations of new technologies, this category covers a wide range of topics related to technology. Join the conversation and let's explore the ever-evolving world of technology together!
founded 1 year ago
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'm dark mode everything, everywhere, but options are good and taking away options is bad. If people want to sear their retinas by using light mode, they should be able to.
I use light mode because dark mode is far more likely to trigger migraines in me. This is legit an accessibility issue, and he fired the entire accessibility team.
@stopthatgirl7 I also often use light mode on most websites. Since 2 years or so I started using dark mode on several applications or websites as well, but most dark modes suck. Some give me headache or burn my eyes.
Taking the option is really an accessibility issue. Elon tries every trick under the sun to destroy the platform, in ways I could not imagine or forgot. I'm sure there will pop up addons for browsers at least to change the style. Everyone else, good luck.
Try the "Dark Reader" plugin (works for all chromium-based browsers and Firefox - at least). It lets you customise the "darkness" of the dark mode to your hearts content. I have most of my sites set up so that they're more "very dark grey" rather than black.
Doesn't always work nicely, some sites get their images mangled, or the text will get a weird shade that makes it illegible, but overall, it's great. And you probably can fix most of these issues by tweaking the filter settings.
@Alaknar I actually used that mentioned plugin (on Firefox) for a month or so. But embarrassingly forgot why removing it later. That one is actually a good point, as it exists today.
Can it be used to make everything light mode?
The thing is, I don't think he's deliberately trying to destroy the birdsite. He's exhibiting the same mentality as the billionaire who got himself and a few others to die in a faulty submersible. He thinks he knows better than everyone but is completely out of touch from reality because his money usually shields him from consequences.
Elon Musk is just an idiot. A useful idiot to those who fund him like the Saudis, but an idiot all the same.
He's a useful idiot to us as well in lots of ways. The current EV situation only exists because of him. Space travel etc is only happening again because of him.
Keep in mind if it weren't for him, the USA would have started building high speed rail by now. And remember that the ego rockets have a massive detrimental environmental impact.
Elon Musk doesn't control if the government builds a high speed rail or not. If the Government wanted a high speed rail line they would have started building one by now.
Calling them "ego rockets" is silly. Those "ego rockets" are better for the environment than normal rockets, and they're helping to further mankind.
California had plans to build high speed rail. Elon Musk convinced them to fund his hyperloop project instead.
Remember that recent SpaceX rocket that exploded on the launchpad? That pollutes the area and could have been predicted by any actual expert. It's a waste of resources when the society needs them elsewhere.
So who's fault is that? The people that decided to give elon musk the money. Why on earth would they go with a private company instead of building a public high speed rail? That story doesn't make any sense.
What resources are wasted in SpaceX rockets that society would otherwise use elsewhere?
This one's easy. American governments are obsessed with the idea that the market is the most efficient way to do things and thus will immediately jump towards the private solution, even if it's inferior.
It did not explode on the launchpad. It exploded 4 minutes into flight, at an altitude of 39 kilometers.
There was no "pollution" in the area. A bunch of pulverized concrete and sand got thrown around. They actually did expect the pad to be damaged by the launch, just not quite to that extent; they already knew they would need to rebuild it with a more robust design but figured it would survive one test launch so they delayed the planned renovations until after the launch.
Even if it had exploded on the launch pad, it would not have polluted the area, Starship is fuelled with liquid oxygen and liquid methane. Whatever didn't burn would have simply evaporated away.
If you're going to criticize Elon Musk or SpaceX you should use criticisms that are actually based on real facts, otherwise you end up hurting your position.
Isn't methane one of the worst greenhouse gasses? It doesn't have as much longevity as carbon dioxide but traps significantly more heat and will decompose into carbon dioxide afterward. The debris apparently also affected hundreds of acres of land, including damaging the habitats of protected wildlife. As well as that, Musk chose to forgo launchpad frame trenches which are historically used to keep launch pads from exploding but didn't have his water-cooled steel plate idea ready, so instead idiotically used nothing (Source). In the past, I would have been willing to write off these mistakes as unfortunate but unpredictable, but after seeing the debacle with Twitter I've honestly come to believe that Elon Musk is a profoundly stupid man that just got lucky.
Yes, methane is a greenhosue gas. The amount that would have been released would have been negligible on a global scale, and it certainly wouldn't have "polluted the area" as phi1997 stated.
It "affects" hundreds of acres of land in the sense that it is part of it. It's gravel, essentially. Gravel on a beach.
Do you have any evidence that it damaged the habitats of protected wildlife? The FAA has been conducting environmental assessments and they have the authority to shut down operations if they think there's a danger. They haven't.
The water table is just a few meters below the surface of the ground. Building a flame trench is impractical. It would also be far more environmentally disruptive. And just because it's "historically" used doesn't mean it's the best approach. Rockets are historically disposable, the whole point of Starship is to break with historical traditions.
Indeed. As I explicitly said above:
If they'd decided to delay launching until they had the steel plates in place they'd only just now be getting ready to do their first test launch rather than their second.
“Better for the environment.”
Oh ok
Massive, exploded SpaceX rocket devastated a town and a wildlife reserve — and locals are furious
SpaceX used wildlife preserve as 'dumping ground for space waste,' lawsuit alleges
What NASA Can Teach SpaceX About Environmentally Friendly Rocket Launches
Why did you conveniently leave off the rest of my sentence there?
Also come on......talking about how many birds might have died from the rockets explosion way up in the sky, when the likely answer is zero? Really?
Why did you cherry pick the one thing you can dismiss and ignore that they’ve been causing actual environmental damage?
They did the same thing in my comment thread. Ignored my source, cherry-picked a single argument they had a rebuttal for, and dismissed any culpability SpaceX could have had.
Are you the person that blamed musk for the government choosing him over building a high speed rail?
If not, what are you talking about?
When that’s one of the first and main points brought up in the article and it’s so stupid it basically screams “this article is garbage”.
You’re talking about environmental damage limited to some tiny little area around the launch site. If that’s the best you’ve got, give up.
Some people are definitely worth talking to and discussing opposing viewpoints.
You do not seem to be one of those people. Have a lovely day.
Yeah light mode doesn't work for me but why in the name of the gods would I want that to mean it's not an option for other people? Compulsory light mode is bad. Compulsory dark mode is bad. But Elon seems to have incredible trouble believing other people are a thing to model, let alone actually doing the modelling. It sucks, and I am sorrowful for people like you and thingsiplay for having the internet get less useful for you and having this dipshit providing a bad example for other people with too much power and too little wisdom.
I use dark mode everywhere, but people with dyslexia or astigmatism may have difficulty reading light text on dark backgrounds.
Honestly, dark modes are hard on my eyes