• @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        50
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        No.

        The rest of the world’s doing a great job at following through on CFC bans.

        This is entirely on China and China alone. No one is forcing their factories to cut corners and use them. Just the same as plastic rice, gutter oil, poison baby formula, etc.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    351 year ago

    TBH “The whole world agreed on something” narrative doesn’t really reflect what happened.

    Actually, The Industry dropped using CFC after a cheaper and luckily safer alternative has been discovered right around that time.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      21
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The fact is, most companies are fine to let an existing system run rather than replace it with one that has a cheaper consumable thing, provided they can still get that consumable and the cost of replacing that system is high.

      Basically, corps would have kept buying and using CFCs because replacing the refrigeration system is too costly.

      Not only was an alternative found that was cheaper and safer and almost as good (as effective), but scientists and engineers put in the effort to find ways to adapt existing systems to the new working fluid. All for significantly less than replacing the system.

      Not only was a replacement found, but it was made economically viable for widespread deployment in a very short timeframe; not just having a short development time, but also a very short duration to deploy the new solution to an existing system.

      You’re right, that it was cheaper and everything, but most of the time changing the working fluid of a refrigerator/air conditioning unit, will require that the system is replaced. They worked around that. Additionally, you’re correct that it was industry that made the change and pushed it to their clients.

      I just want to make sure we recognise the efforts put in by the scientists and engineers that enabled the rapid switch to non-CFC based cooling systems. It’s still an amazing achievement IMO, and something that required a remarkable amount of cooperation by people who probably don’t cooperate often or at all (and are, in all likelihood, fairly hostile to eachother, most of the time).

      IMO, that’s still one of the best examples of global cooperation that anyone could possibly point to. Rarely do we have a problem where there’s almost universal consensus on the issue and how to fix it. In this case, there was. That level of cooperation among the people of earth is borderline unparalleled; the only other times we cooperated this well that people would know about are usually negotiations done with the barrel of a gun. Namely the world wars. One group said that we’re going to do a thing, another group said nope. It was settled with lives, bullets and bombs, and nearly every person alive was on one side or the other… Except Sweden, I suppose… And maybe smaller countries that didn’t have enough of an army to participate. (I’m sure there’s dozens of reasons, but I’m not a historian)

      Without guns, bombs, or even threats, just a presentation of the facts and a proposal for a solution, everyone just … went along with it.

      To me, that’s unprecedented.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      121 year ago

      There was a necessary round of nearly all governments on Earth agreeing to fine and extinguish business or even throwing executives on jail if they insisted on using the more expensive alternative.

      Only after that people stopped using CFCs.

      Honestly, some times I wonder if we live in an episode of Captain Planet. Some people look like plain childish cartoon villains.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1541 year ago

    I literally had this exact exchange with someone last year, when they tried to cast doubt on global warming by comparing it to the ozone. Another person did the same , using acid rain, and I pointed out that the northeast sued the shit out of the Midwest until they cut that shit with the coal fire power plants.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      831 year ago

      The Conservative Party led Canadian Government and the Regan-era Republican US Government started working on the US-Canada Air Quality Agreement, which was signed by the George H.W. Bush administration into law in the US (and the Brian Mulroney led Government of Canada).

      That’s right — two Conservative governments identified a problem, listened to their scientists, and enacted a solution to acid rain. And now the problem has virtually disappeared.

      Oh how low Conservatives have fallen on both sides of the border since those days.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        61 year ago

        I use talking points like these a fair amount with Republicans. Try to get them to think back to when they were leaders in environmental policy. Get back to their roots of environmental stewardship. It seems to have moved the needle slightly.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          21 year ago

          Many, unfortunately, are so deep in doublethink the won’t believe that tricky Dick initiated the whole thing with the EPA, clean water or air act, and the endangered species acts. Some came after, i think, but he set it rolling. He was still a bad dude, but he did some good stuff

  • Queen HawlSera
    link
    fedilink
    English
    221 year ago

    Conservatives aren’t used to the concept of “Problems go away when you do something about them.”

    They are stuck in the mindset of “The problem will always be with us, so just shame those suffering from it and isolate them so we don’t catch their problem.”

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        61 year ago

        Naw, this is literally the conservative mind set. Even if someone doesn’t vote for republicans, thinking like this is conservative thinking.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              31 year ago

              So what are your views on liberals that support Biden regardless of his funding of genocide in Palestine? To me it seems exactly like this mind set of “we can’t fix this, lets just not let their problem spill over to us”.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                3
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                My view is that I would prefer someone younger and with similar ideals as Bernie but in reality, we have a choice between Biden and a man that given the chance, would end liberal’s right to vote forever.

                I feel like people that bitch and complain about Biden do not at all understand the danger we are all in if Trump wins because the vote is split. Republicans do not have a conscience. They are more than happy to band together despite their disagreements if it means that they win. I just wonder why in the fuck anyone would risk that happening again given the decades of harm Trump caused in one term.

                So am I happy about voting for Biden? No not really. It bothers the fuck out of me that Israel has the support it does. But the reality is that Trump and the modern republican party are about [] that close to reinacting the night of broken glass and Id rather that not happen.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  11 year ago

                  I don’t think you understand the point of view people critisizing Biden. Democrats are the ones that put Trump in power, just so they can have an easier elections and don’t have to place more popular candidates to run against them. Voting for Biden is simply accepting defeat, that their plan worked and that they can do absolutely anything and you will support them because they will also support a worse candidate on the other side at the same time. It is not looking at the big picture, long term. In the future they can get someone like Trump to be a Democrat candidate and support someone even worse on the Republican side and you will have to vote for them under exactly the same situation. Democrats have a candidate that literarlly funds a genocide and we would think that once that line is crossed people would simply say that is enough, but apparently even Hitler would be elected in US elections as long as he places someone worse as prime candidate of another party.

  • trashcan
    link
    fedilink
    English
    57
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    #transcription

    Matt Walsh
    @MattWalshBlog

    Remember when they spent years telling us to panic over the hole in the ozone layer and then suddenly just stopped talking about it and nobody ever mentioned the ozone layer

    Derek Thompson
    @DKThomp

    What happened is scientists discovered chlorofluorocarbons were bad for the ozone, countries believed them, the Montreal Protocol was signed, and CFC use fell by 99.7%,l eading to the stabilization of the ozone layer, perhaps the greatest example of global cooperation in history.

  • Pandantic [they/them]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    126
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    There were goddamn Nickelodeon phone-a-thons where you pledged to not use cfc products. This shit was serious.

    Edit: I just remembered ,they talked about how bad the sun was for kids in Australia, or something.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      671 year ago

      Australia and New Zealand do not fuck about with sun safety. Even with the improvements in the ozone layer, our skin cancer rates are still way higher than the rest of the world

        • gila
          link
          fedilink
          English
          121 year ago

          Yeah I lived in Auckland for a bit, they don’t care as much about sunscreen. More sun safety conscious than Pacific Northwesterners in my experience, but probably closer to that group than myself as a fair-skinned Aussie that’s used to getting burnt after just sitting outside in the shade for awhile

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        21 year ago

        I’d argue that while we are much more diligent than other countries, and regulations are much stronger. The average person doesn’t pay nearly enough attention, and the fact the UV index isn’t required to be mentioned on weather reports, or as prominently or more prominently than the temperature, is a big oversight in my opinion.

        I check the UV every time I go outside (other than when it’s died down over winter), just as you’d check the temperature, and I think it’s wild barely anyone else does.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      31 year ago

      The sun is still awful here, the ozone hole is still a thing.

      But thanks world, at least I can go out for a solid 4.5 months of the year without worrying about the sun at all, and 6 of only needing to be somewhat careful. Not too shabby :)

  • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin
    link
    fedilink
    English
    661 year ago

    This has since been determined to have tack on benefits in the fight against the climate crisis as well, it’s halved the potential growth in global average temperatures by 2100, which cannot be overstated in just how fantastic that is.

    We went from everyone being baked alive and having 20 kinds of skin cancer to boot to merely dealing with catastrophic climate change and society changing people migrations the likes of which haven’t been documented since the successive eras of steppe invasions into Europe, China, India, and the Middle East.

    Out of the fire and into the frying pan.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    8
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Turns out, that the hole in the ozone layer didn’t get repaired. In fact, it’s larger than it’s ever been and above the Antarctic. Antarctica is currently experiencing a mass die-off of animals. We didn’t do shit. This is pure climate change copium.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      131 year ago

      We definitely did something. It just would have been a lot worse if we didn’t. In fact so bad that BBC says the planet would have been “uninhabitable.”

      According to some models, the Montreal Protocol and its amendments have helped prevent up to two million cases of skin cancer yearly and avoided millions of cataract cases worldwide.

      Had the world not banned CFCs, we would now find ourselves nearing massive ozone depletion. “By 2050, it’s pretty well-established we would have had ozone hole-like conditions over the whole planet, and the planet would have become uninhabitable,” says Solomon.

      https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20220321-what-happened-to-the-worlds-ozone-hole

    • TheHarpyEagle
      link
      fedilink
      English
      291 year ago

      Is this true? An article from 2022 indicates things are getting better, just slowly

      Today, the ozone hole still exists, forming every year over Antarctica in the spring. It closes up again over the summer as stratospheric air from lower latitudes is mixed in, patching it up until the following spring when the cycle begins again. But there’s evidence it’s starting to disappear – and recover more or less as expected, says Solomon. Based on scientific assessments, the ozone layer is expected to return to pre-1980 levels around the middle of the century. Healing is slow because of the long lifespan of ozone-depleting molecules. Some persist in the atmosphere for 50 to 150 years before decaying.

      https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20220321-what-happened-to-the-worlds-ozone-hole

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        16
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        It’s not. I’m guessing they did a Google search, looked at a few misleading article titles, and then decided they were a scientist.

        On average, the hole has been shrinking, but 2023’s hole was the 12th biggest on record. The eruption of Hunga-Tonga was thought to be the main factor.

        The mass die-off reference likely refers to penguin chicks dying because climate change is causing sea ice to melt earlier than before. The poor little guys are falling into the ocean and drowning. It’s not ozone layer related, though

        • TheHarpyEagle
          link
          fedilink
          English
          131 year ago

          Models suggest that the concentration of chlorine and other ozone-depleting substances in the stratosphere will not return to pre-1980 levels until the middle decades of the 21st century. Scientists have already seen the first definitive proof of ozone recovery, observing a 20 percent decrease in ozone depletion during the winter months from 2005 to 2016. In 2019, abnormal weather patterns in the upper atmosphere over Antarctica dramatically limited ozone depletion, leading to the smallest hole since 1982. Models predict that the Antarctic ozone layer will mostly recover by 2040.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    171 year ago

    Wtf was that dumbest posting about? He never learned about CFCs in 8th grade high school? Embarrassing

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      251 year ago

      Matt Walsh is literally the dumbest person on the planet. Most of the people involved with The Daily Wire are cynical little freaks playing a part, Walsh is just a moron.

  • ozoned
    link
    fedilink
    English
    151 year ago

    Remember when cavemen unga bunga’d about dinosaurs? Whatever happened to those dinosaurs! It’s like the Flintstones wasn’t actually the ground breaking documentary it was or something!

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    2611 year ago

    Similar with Y2K — it was only a nothingburger because it was taken seriously, and funded well. But the narrative is sometimes, “yeah lol it was a dud.”

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      21
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I wasn’t working in the IT field back then, as I was only 16, but as I knew that it’d most likely be my field one day (yup, I was right), I followed this closely due to interest, and applied patches accordingly.

      Everything kept working fine except this one modem I had.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        3
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Most of the y2k problem was custom software, and really old embedded stuff. In my case, all our systems were fine at the OS, and I don’t remember any commercial software we had trouble with, but we had a lot of custom software with problems, as did our partners

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        61 year ago

        I kinda wish I knew what it was like working on Y2K stuff. It sounds like the most mundane bug to fix, but the problem is that it was everywhere. Which I imagine made it pretty expensive 👀

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11 year ago

          And computer networking, especially the ability to remote into a system and make changes or deliver updates en masse, was nowhere near as robust as it is today meaning a lot of those fixes were done manually.

        • brianorca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          61 year ago

          That’s a pretty good description. And most software back then didn’t use nice date utilities, they each had their own inline implementation. So sometimes you had to figure out what they were trying to do in the original code, which was usually written by someone who’s not there anymore. But other times it was the most mundane doing the same fix you already did in 200 other programs.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      421 year ago

      I can’t remember the name but I think this is some kind of paradox.

      Like the preventative measures we’re so effective that they created a perception that there was no risk in the first place.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        421 year ago

        It’s called the prevention paradox: It’s when an issue is so severe that it is prevented with proactive action, so no real consequenses are felt so people think it wasn’t severe in the first place.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          411 year ago

          Case in point: Measles. It was a thing when I was a kid. Then it wasn’t. Now my kids have to deal with Measles because we can’t teach scientific literacy.

    • Trantarius
      link
      fedilink
      English
      61 year ago

      Y2K specifically makes no sense though. Any reasonable way of storing a year would use a binary integer of some length (especially when you want to use as little memory as possible). The same goes for manipulations; they are faster, more memory efficient, and easier to implement in binary. With an 8-bit signed integer counting from 1900, the concerning overflows would occur in 2028, not 2000. A base 10 representation would require at least 8 bits to store a two digit number anyway. There is no advantage to a base 10 representation, and there never has been. For Y2K to have been anything more significant than a text formatting issue, a whole lot of programmers would have had to go out of their way to be really, really bad at their jobs. Also, usage of dates beyond 2000 would have increased gradually for decades leading up to it, so the idea it would be any sort of sudden catastrophe is absurd.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        121 year ago

        And then there is PIC 99 in Cobol. In modern languages, it makes no sense, but there is still a lot of really old code around and not everything is twos complement, especially if you do not need the efficiency in memory and calculations.

      • The Octonaut
        link
        fedilink
        English
        491 year ago

        The issue wasn’t using the dates. The issue was the computer believing it was now on those dates.

        I’m going to assume you aren’t old enough to remember, but the “only two digits to represent the year” issue predates computers. Lots of paper forms just gave two digits. And a lot of early computer work was just digitising paper forms.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        191 year ago

        You do realize that “counting from 1900” meant storing only the last two digits and just hardcoding the programs to print"19" in front of it in those days? At best, an overflow would lead to 19100, 1910 or 1900, depending on the print routines.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        241 year ago

        a whole lot of programmers would have had to go out of their way to be really, really bad at their jobs.

        You don’t spend much time around them, do you?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        381 year ago

        You’re thinking of the problem with modern solutions in mind. Y2K originates from punch cards where everything was stored in characters. To save space only the last 2 digits of the year because back then you didn’t need to store the 19 of year 19xx. The technique of storing data stayed the same for a long time despite technology advancing beyond punch cards. The assumption that it’s always 19xx caused the Y2K bug because once it overflows to 00 the system doesn’t know if it’s 1900 or 2000.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        311 year ago

        With an 8-bit signed integer counting from 1900…

        Some of the computers in question predate standardizing on 8 bits to the byte. You’ve got a whole post here of bad assumptions about how things worked.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        131 year ago

        Oh boy you heavily underestimate the amount and level of bad decision in legacy protokoll. Read up in the toppic. the Date was for a loong time stored as 6 decimal numbers.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      231 year ago

      “Lol Elon rocket go boom, science isn’t real” is also happening

      Stupid people just think they’re the smartest ones in the room now

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        121 year ago

        Well considering Elon situation I wouldn’t blame anyone for making fun of his idiotic ventures. Also starship is actually dumb and saying “you expected for it to blow up” is something no real scientist would’ve said unless they were making a bomb.

        • brianorca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11 year ago

          Starship, as it is right now, is already a better rocket than SLS. It can already carry more mass and be cheaper (even fully expended) than the SLS’s 4 billion cost per launch.

          It will get better. Falcon 9 didn’t land the first time either, but now it has successfully landed more consecutive times than any other rocket has flown.

          There’s nothing wrong with saying this is a test. This is only a test, and we don’t expect it to be perfect yet. Each time they learn from the data. And SpaceX hasn’t repeated the same mistake twice.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          3
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          It had no payload on any of its flights. Rockets that have enough time/money put into development to have a reasonable expectation of working on the first try (and don’t have such an ambitious design) normally launch with a payload on their first flight. Sometimes, even those fail on the first few flights. Having the first few of a new rocket design fail before reliability is achieved is common (ex: Astra) and SpaceX’s other rocket, the Falcon 9, is known as the most reliable rocket, I even suspect it achieves landings more often lately than most others do launches.

          Starship’s last launch went decently well, reaching orbit (which is as far as most rockets go!) but failing during reentry. It is also supposed to be the rocket with the largest payload capacity to low earth orbit, with 100-150 tons when reused and likely 200-300 when expended.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          111 year ago

          How is Starship dumb exactly? Making a new thing at any extreme of our current capability is going to be hard and its not unexpected when something goes wrong. What would be dumb is if they put human lives on the line

      • Phoenixz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        281 year ago

        Elon musk isn’t a scientist, he’s a scammer who got lucky. That, and an asshole.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      491 year ago

      The question is, what will happen in 2038 when y2k happens again due to an integer overflow? People are already sounding the alarm but who knows if people will fix all of the systems before it hits.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        35
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        It’s already been addressed in Linux - not sure about other OSes. They doubled the size of time data so now you can keep using it until after the heat death of the universe. If you’re around then.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          21 year ago

          Obviously new systems are unaffected, the question is how many industrial controllers checking oil pipeline flow levels or whatever were installed before the fix and never updated.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            31 year ago

            Being somewhat adjacent to that with my work, there is a good chance anything in a critical area (hopefully fields like utilities, petroleum, areas with enough energy to cause harm) have decently hardened or updated equipment where it either isn’t an issue, will stop reporting tread data correctly, or roll over to date “0” which depending on the platform with industrial equipment tends to be 1970 in my personal experience. That said, there is always the case that it will not be handled correctly and either run away or stop entirely.

          • baconsanga
            link
            fedilink
            English
            121 year ago

            This is the funniest comment I have ever read here. Thank you.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          101 year ago

          debian for example is atm at work recompiling everything vom 32bit to 64bit timestamps (thanks to open source this is no problem) donno what happens to propriarary legacy software

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          31 year ago

          I think everything works in windows but the old windows media player. You can test it by setting the time in a windows VM to 2039.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          14
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          AfaIk that’s not entirely true, e.g. Debian is changing the system time from 32 bit integer to 64 bit. Thus I assume other distros do this as well. However, this does not help for industrial or IOT devices running deprecated Unix / Linux derivatives.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            191 year ago

            industrial or IOT devices running deprecated Unix / Linux derivatives

            This is my concern, all the embedded devices happily running in underground systems like pipes and cables. I assume there are at least a few which nobody even considered patching because they’ve “just worked” for decades!

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      841 year ago

      All this hysteria over nuclear weapons is overblown. We’ve known how to build them for 75 years yet there hasn’t been a single one detonated on inhabited American soil. They’re harmless

      • robotica
        link
        fedilink
        English
        21 year ago

        Yeah but not all people live on American soil…

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        45
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        You even dropped a few accidentally and nothing happened! Complete duds these things really

      • hedidwot
        link
        fedilink
        English
        6
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        WTF?

        Unless that was sarcasm that I missed… 100’s of weapons have been tested on US soil…

          • hedidwot
            link
            fedilink
            English
            41 year ago

            Not sure what you mean.

            The US was inhabited last I checked.

            • wanderingmagus
              link
              fedilink
              English
              71 year ago

              Pretty sure no human lived at the Trinity test site or anywhere else in the test sites where weapons were detonated, especially at the moment of detonation. And I’m pretty sure none have since moved onto those sites either. Hence “inhabited”. It’s not like we nuked cities and towns.

              • hedidwot
                link
                fedilink
                English
                21 year ago

                Right… Gotcha. So you’re a ‘change the goalposts to keep making me right as the argument and evidence changes’ kinda person.

                No point engaging with your type.

                • wanderingmagus
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  51 year ago

                  Sounds like you’re the goalposts-mover here, shipmate, and it seems the rest of the readers here agree with me. Maybe this place ain’t your venue.