• 0 Posts
  • 22 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 14th, 2023

help-circle


  • I torrented and seeded many torrents (its still seeding right now) and it can do at least 2 (havent tried more) jellyfin streams at once as long as I disable server side transcoding to reserve resources. I had the full arr suite of apps running along with ombi (gonna move to jellyseer, but imo ombi used too much ram on my 4GB laptop to be something I kept running). Is it perfect? No, it has quirks that will come up now and again but can I really complain when getting now 16 years of use out of a laptop I never thought I’d touch again once I built my desktop?

    Edit: oh be aware, if you’re using old hardware, DO NOT use the newest versions of things like Linux mint, it possibly won’t have drivers that works for really old hardware (like wifi card, Lan card, etc.) and it won’t be easily apparent sometimes. I solved this with a friend who had the same laptop as me but couldn’t get internet once installing mint. It turns out he used a newer version of mint that did not have a way to support his wifi card and installing and older version solved it



  • Yes, in a sense. It technically isn’t vibrating them, but rapidly spinning them due to the constantly changing magnetic field (produced by the magnetron).

    Since water has a dipole moment (one side of the molecule experiences a slight positive charge, while one side experiences a slight negative charge) it will react to changes in an electric field just like a magnet would

    Edit: I’d also like to add this is not specific to water. Some fats and other food material also undergoes that rotation, and the same concept (with different frequencies and wavelengths) is used in industrial processes all the time to quickly, and efficiently heat materials


  • You would use materials that perform completely fine at those temps. This could be anything from high nickel alloy steel, to Inconel, to an HEA (high entropy alloy). You can even do high heat resistant metals with ceramic coatings on the inside for protection if creating a passivation layer is too difficult for the application or the exposure environment does not allow for one to form.

    There is an entire subsection of engineering studies focused on purely coaxing specific properties out of a material or developing materials to custom suit extreme applications, known as material science. They generally work very closely with chemical engineers (my background) and metallurgists in order to manufacture the designed product in either batch form, or in continuous fashion.

    I work in a steel mill and we have Inconel furnace rolls that hang out in 1600 F heat 24/7 and are rated (iirc) to ~2300F max operation temp. For reference medium carbon steel melts between 2600 and 2800F, and loses a lot of its mechanical strength well before 2300F (I am trying to find a stress strain curve for carbon steel over multiple temperatures for reference. I will update if I find one)

    Edit: Okay so I found one that does show what I am trying to convey. As you can see, the higher the temperature of the sample material, the lower the yield strength. Example: the 100C sample was strained to >25% before failure, while the 700C sample began to plastically deform (fail) before 10% strain. Take note of the second link, all the test temperatures are MUCH higher than any of the carbon steel samples

    Carbon Steel Curve: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Stress-strain-curves-at-different-temperatures-for-steel-4509-2_fig11_236341600

    Inconel Curve: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Stress-strain-curves-of-Inconel-625-alloy_fig11_338984803



  • The issue in my eyes, and my number one complaint with this massive E.V. push (for many years now) is the insane environmental impact of lithium mining and the very short termed planning of just going hard on batteries (without spending more time and money on better battery tech [Toyota actually has that new solid state battery I’m very hopeful for, and we’ve been working on polymer batteries for decades]) we will waste a very precious earth material we WILL NEED in the future, and you never ever hear any of the politicians or CEOs talk about how dirty lithium mining and processing is because almost all of it happens outside the countries leading this push (thus, not their problem).

    Not saying we shouldn’t be moving away from ICE, it’s that I feel our current approach is incredibly short sighted, and will have far reaching impacts into future generations and I feel as though we may even cause more damage than help in our current approach


  • Honestly (this is cliche as fuck) but keep at it. I think the contract positions I took helped me build a slightly stronger resume than just having worked highschool/college jobs, even though they were not directly in my intended field. I am a chemical engineer by education, and worked 2 contract jobs in “Product safety & Regulatory Compliance” (which I hated btw). I was afraid that it would essentially lock me into a field that I really had no interest in. This was not the case I discovered. I now have a job as a process engineer in a steel mill and absolutely love everything that I do. IIRC when they contacted me for the interview for this job, I straight up had forgotten I had applied because I had sent so many out. I believe I had applied multiple months prior before they ever even reached out. With how tight the labor market is currently (in the U.S.) I am seeing a lot of places have more legitimate “entry level” requirements. For example, my mill dropped its “prior industrial site experience” requirement


  • ENTRY LEVEL POSITION [Insert job title]

    Requirements:

    • 10+ Years in a similar environment
    • 2+ Years of management experience

    or

    You apply and literally never get any form of anything back besides a confirmation email “thanks”. That was the absolute most annoying, demoralizing shit when I was searching for a job post school. I tumbled around 2 contract positions and finally have landed somewhere that I love, but fuck me was it hard on me mentally to keep farming out applications for basically a year, and hear back (I dont care if its a no, i just want some form of an answer!) less than 2% of the time



  • Actually a very fair point, and something that I do in fact find interesting is that it hasn’t breached FO4’s numbers. That game burned me so fucking hard lol. I bought that pile of shit at full price (last game I ever purchased at launch), and it ran SOOOOOO bad. Like less than 20 fps in any city bad. I tried to push through the framerate/bugs to get to the good and for me it just never came. I dropped that game after 1 playthrough and I have 0 desire at all to ever pick it up again. I have replayed skyrim (heavily modded at this point) and FO:NV (FO3 didnt work right on my W10 machine, i wonder if it works now with W11 and compatibility mode. I would replay that for sure), but I think with FO4 the charm had worn off. Playing a game that felt like oblivion [Not in a literal sense, but in the “its a bethesda RPG” sense] (with shitty quest writing) in the modern day at sub 20 fps for the price of $60 was one hell of a wakeup call.

    So all of that is to say, I find it surprising that their new flagship has not beaten FO4’s numbers. Perhaps they burned a lot more people than just me?


  • I do not know a single person IRL who has purchased this game (across multiple platforms). We all played and love to this day, Skyrim, FO3, FO:NV (my friends like FO4, it wasn’t for me personally, I found the story incredibly boring…the dogshit performance on release also never helped). So I am wondering what their gamepass numbers are vs. full purchases. Steam (the numbers cited in the article) would be purchases, but I would be interested one day to see the split of gamepass to purchase users




  • Yeah, very sadly the chemical industry (and then by extension, manufacturing/maintenance as a whole) is rife with this shit. I hope and pray that young and aspiring chemists/chemical engineers/regulators/safety engineers/etc. will make changes in time that we take harder approaches to shit like this. We put the environment and people first, the “progress” of industry in a close second.

    Regarding what you said about the old guys doing it how they used to. I see that all the time in my steel mill. Lots of older guys (and some younger ones who put off the too cool for school vibe) dont wear earplugs all the time. They havent for the last 20 years, so what is me telling them they will lose their hearing gonna do? They have done it this way, and will continue to do it this way. Luckily, we have had success in general improving our safety culture, but getting people to care about the unseen threats (particulate matter, hearing loss, exposure, etc.) can be very hard


  • To be exact, it is a wt% of the feedstock they are changing. Not the fuel itself. (I am not commenting on the fact that they likely would be exposed to combustion products/uncombusted products).

    From a chemical perspective, it also chemically needs to be similiar to the original feedstock, or else you would not be producing the fuel you want in the correct ratios. These systems are a very complex system of multiple primary reactions + side chain reactions. They are not trying to reinvent the wheel here, they would want the system to behave as close to the same as possible so that they can just apply this in their existing plants.

    IF (BIG IF) they can prove that the waste plastic feedstock does not change the output products of the combusted fuel (included non combusted products, or products of incomplete combustion), this could be a big win for making use of waste plastics, otherwise I have a very sick feeling that this is trending towards the next tetra-ethyl lead event


  • So I wanted to provide a bit of unique perspective here on the topic. I now work as a process engineer in a steel mill, but 2 of my previous positions were in product safety and regulatory compliance. I worked in US, CA, & MX regulatory law, as well as global compliance with countries outside of the Americas. In my position I had to deal with regulatory compliance with chemical lists (TSCA, ECHA, DSL/NDSL, ISHL, etc.) and I was responsible for creating and verifying the information we use to create our SDS sheets.

    So a large part of people are stuck on the fact that there is a lot of redacted information in the paper, this could be for multiple reasons outside of protecting trade secrets. As I stated above, there are regulatory chemical lists. In many countries, it is entirely ILLEGAL to sell or use in manufacturing, any chemicals which do not appear on the list for the country in question. When a company wants to create a new chemical (which is happening all the time, this also can be a “mix” and not a defined exact molecule, ill speak more on this later) its is a very slow and long process of classifying the chemical, getting a CAS number assigned, and then getting this chemical listed on the regulatory lists of the locations you intend to use it/sell it. To get listed on these lists is a process in itself that includes providing absolutely as much information on the chemical as reasonably achievable. From my experience, ECHA (EU) has stricter rules than TSCA (U.S) for example, and not all lists are made equal, governed equally, or even list the same chemicals. So circling back, the feedstock listed in the paper is likely very early in this process or is in the middle of the process, meaning there is not an “official” name or means of identifying what is being spoken about, anything referred to in the paper would just be internal monikers/code names or possibly a nickname to describe it.

    On the topic I said I would speak more about, “mixes” or “chemicals” without a defined chemistry. So there are feedstocks/chemicals/mixes of oils/paraffin materials/alkanes/etc. that are very hard to control the creation of, so they are created as an inseparable bulk mixture. Some Examples:

    -Cas #: 85535-86-0 [C18-28 Chloroalkanes (20-50 %Cl)]

    -Cas #: 97553-43-0 [Paraffins (petroleum), normal C > 10, chloro]

    The “mixtures” are classified based on their properties and what is actually making up that mix defined within the certain Cas #. This is likely how all of the feedstocks in the paper would be classified. Based on certain plastics that are recycled you could expect X, Y, Z, defined blends.

    Finally, regarding the safety aspect. Having been thrown into the world of chemical regulation (I am a chemical engineer by education, we covered the existence of TSCA in like one section of our safety course), I got to see first hand how almost “fly by the seat of your pants” it is. I cannot suggest a “better” way to more safely regulate these chemicals, other than to take an outright strict approach (which I am in favor of btw). Eu for example is much stricter (both health and environmental hazard wise) compared to the U.S. They have a higher burden of proof that the chemical is not harmful and an approach of “okay if it shows signs it could be a problem, classify it as such”, while it sure feels like the EPA takes the approach of “okay, lets see if you guys can keep this from becoming a problem.” Which companies have proved repeatedly, they cannot.



  • I am really hoping they ditch the bloated design of PD2 and use this as a fresh slate to not repeat some of the same mistakes as last time (I have my doubts, hence why I will let it simmer a bit before I dive in if its looking alright). I couldnt care if they added a pass or something that gives cosmetics (NO GAMEPLAY NECESSARY STUFF) if they need that long term cash, but PD2 became so DLC bloated over its life that it became a barrier to entry, or a barrier to even want to boot the game up again after another 5 little DLC purchasable thingies were dropped in the last 2 weeks