she/her

  • 0 Posts
  • 188 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: August 3rd, 2023

help-circle















  • Besides the fact that you’re using Blockchain to mean Crypto Currency, this is unrealistic and counterproductive in a number of ways.

    What if people could earn money by generating solar energy and selling directly to vehicles, instead of the grid?

    How? How do you get your rooftop power to a buyer across town, or the other side of the country? Corporations or municipalities still control the grid

    Then there is the distribution issue. Energy must be transported to the points of consumption, the charging stations. But due to the decentralized nature, this could actually result surprisingly cheap, as instead of transporting large distances, more charging stations in neighborhoods could reduce those distances. But still, this would require upfront charging stations and distribution investments.

    You caught it yourself. Are you proposing an alternative grid? Good luck with that. Putting a charging station on your own property and renting that out via crypto? That’s a massive waste of space, since you’ll now need an additional parking spot for every home

    Generators would be rewarded with a blockchain token for the energy generated, while consumers would pay for the energy in those tokens. Therefore speculation would be curbed as the tokens are for a real thing, energy, which on top is a stable unit - kWh.

    How do you get tokens, if you consume more than you produce? You buy them with money. So saying it curbs speculation rings hollow. Besides, who rewards these tokens? Contrary to Bitcoin etc. you need physical hardware to confirm the proper amount of energy was transferred, and hardware can be tampered with.

    What we need are communal, shared infrastructure and an end to growth. Not more electric cars, and certainly not more individualistic, crypto-capitalist tech fetishism. I don’t mean this as an affront to you, but this whole suggestion runs contrary to all that Solarpunk is about


  • Yeah you caught it, I meant the one in the post body. I’ve read your comment before it was removed (and actually upvoted some others in the thread), so I’m aware of the formatting. But the comment you’re quoting says very explicitly that they will never use neopronouns and will respect gender identities only if they limit themselves to he/she/they. That’s the reason it got removed for gatekeeping, which seems perfectly reasonable to me.

    No one is forcing anyone to use specific pronouns. If you don’t like how someone wants to be referred to, either refer to them by name, or block them and move on. blahaj.zone is an explicitly queer instance where a sizable percentage of users are trans, and neopronouns are accepted. It’s unfortunate if trolls abuse that trust, but imo it’s way more harmful if someone started policing acceptable gender identities in a nominal safe space, than if a few trolls slip through. This only got to be such a big drama because some people got very defensive (and rude) about it.

    I’ll be sad to see you leave blahaj, I really appreciate all the activity and posts you’re bringing to lemmy as a whole. But if this is the hill you’re willing to die on, I guess blajhai is not for you. I’ll see you on !roughromanmemes@lemmy.world c:


  • YDI

    And apparently, also when you think that ‘They’ is a perfectly serviceable gender-neutral singular pronoun, but are willing to use other pronouns if asked to.

    The first image in the post body, your comment that got removed, says the complete opposite.

    It’s not up to you, or anyone else, to label someone’s use of pronouns as trolling. If you think they are, block them, and move on. If you have solid proof that they have I’ll intent, report them, block them, and move on. I don’t know why you’re surprised that a trans safe space is removing comments and banning people for vigilante misgendering.