You should watch videos on how hard head gaskets are to design if you want an idea of some of the engineering involved- I think "engineering explained" did one recently on youtube.

What I’m saying is, should we still be building engines that rely on “the” head gasket to keep fluids separate?

An engine cylinder at a minimum must deal with: lubrication, fuel, and gasses. The exhaust manifold deals with half of the gases. I can’t recall if common rail injectors are still technically part of the head (I can find pictures where the CRI system sits on the head, with separate gaskets, but I’m not a mechanic).

With modern manufacturing would we not be better off splitting these tasks up so that only a cracked engine block can mix fluids. Not a torn gasket, not a warped head, not a thrown rod (though rods are going away too).

Here's the data on M2 money supply in billions of dollars, for those curious, in billions of dollars:

Feb 2020: 15,457.9 Feb 2022: 21,699.2

This is a 40.3% increase.

To be charitable, this money isn't all on printed physical cash dollar bills, but nowadays there is no need for it to be. (I'm tempted not to be charitable though.)

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M2SL

A 40.3% increase is different than the percentage of the total money supply that was printed in the last two years, which for your numbers works out to about 29%. I would argue that most people would interpret “we created X% of the Y supply” in this way and not as a percentage increase.

That is a fair point- although when the increases are large enough in such a small time that the prior/posterior calculations are that different, I don't feel like it inspires confidence.

the point your making is completely useless. If someone has billions of dollars in storage somewhere (like Iran literally does) it doesn't affect the supply of money until they start moving it or using it in some way.

Like if someone found a trillion long tons of pure gold somewhere, but decided not to sell it or even use it. The price of gold isn't just going to collapse overnight. Sure the markets will panic sell for a few days, but it's still a real commodity with real uses & demands.

Putting a ton more _active_ money in the system does change the value of money.

I’m not making any point at all, besides trying to clarify the math and terminology GP used. I know very little about economics :)

I don't think any of the people you are having a discussion with are making the claims you think they are making.

I’m responding to

> less cultural cohesion due to hyper diversity in memes resulting in fewer shared experiences

My take is it’s a bunch of people who are out of touch with the youth assuming that the youth feel out of touch with each other.

I've been keeping an eye on LiFePO4 batteries- they should be less likely to have a "thermal event" than lithium ion. Some manufacturers are putting them in cars now. Less energy dense but cheaper and better cycle life before wearing out. I want to see those in a 10 year old EV I can buy affordably!

I think if there is condensation between the panes then the sealed air cavity inside the window has been compromised- you might want to get a new window put in.

The large double glazed sliding glass door in one of my previous apartments had that issue, and it eventually became mold trapped inside the glass that was uncleanable.

I think in the context of this conversation, that failure mode is a reason for preferring the primitive option.

Is the failure mode likely to reoccur?

For most residential home scenarios I guess that's unlikely; wouldn't it be more convenient long term to fix the broken glazed window and enjoy its benefits for the next 10-20 years [1]?

[1]: "IG units typically last from 10 to 25 years, with windows facing the equator often lasting less than 12 years. IGUs typically carry a warranty for 10 to 20 years depending upon the manufacturer.", https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insulated_glazing#Longevity

It is a comparison in the same spirit as the original article.

The original article does not compare humans to animals. It is an article about humans and different ways that we can structure societies.

It would be utterly meaningless cruft to point out that things are better for humans than they were before the big bang.

insulation-displacement-crimps are not a good idea for the relatively high amounts of power coming through household wiring. Not much contact area, lots of potential for high resistance and heat and oxidation at the contact point. I wouldn't trust them.

Then again, wire nuts aren't that great either.

Maybe insulation displacement isn't exactly the way to go, but some kind of machine that quickly secures a connection onto a cable, either inline or at the end. And then create modular electrical boxes that those connections can connect to (probably somewhat permanently).

It could even start out as basically a fancy wire stripper and a box with push-in connections that switches/outlets subsequently plug into.

No. US homes run on 240V, not 120, and not 115 * 2. We provide a center-tap neutral so you can split the single phase 240V if you desire. And we do exactly that for many smaller circuits, including the majority of wall sockets.

Seems to me that people are much more upset about this particular video (guy in circle for 100 days) because he's a husband and father. If it had been a young 20-something person, nobody would bat an eye.

I've only thought about it for a minute- but I might speculate that it is a signal from Russia- "even if we decide we want to turn the gas back on, you might not be able to get it when you want it."

Incentives don’t align for Russia (lose revenue) and Russia could just turn off the gas if it wanted to. Putin is a wildcard, but still, if he wanted to “teach Europe a lesson” he would just come out and say I’m turning the gas off, freeze to death.

Also, Biden promised that they had the capability and desire to take out the pipelines if Russia invaded so there is that. Plus, the US would stand to profit from exporting LNG to Germany.

Russia would only be losing potential revenue if the pipelines would be getting used any time soon, which is highly unlikely. They already did turn off the gas, now this just confirms it for the long term, with the added bonus of lots of people immediately blaming the US for it. Middle Eastern nations would benefit far more than the US, which has basically sold all of its capacity for LNG already. The EU is looking to sign LNG deals with those nations, see for example Scholz touring the Gulf region recently.