I looked really hard in the original paper for where it says the rate of change is greater than it has been at any other time in the Phanerozoic and for the life of me could not find it. This article from 2013 states that climate is changing faster now than in the last 65mya (since KT extinction). So I was eager to see this updated number in the paper. The cleantechnica article cites that from an interview with Judd.

My sense is that the paper does not specifically address rate because the time spans at which the rate of change is measure is dramatically different between contemporary climate change and climate change over the last 500mya. And this is what Judd observed, but did not try to get this number through the peer-review process because it might be difficult and the paper is about so much more than just rate.

I think it’s a little irresponsible of the cleantechnica journalist here to use this as the title and main point. If you read the abstract and conclusion of the paper the rate is not mentioned at all. This article makes very important contributions, namely showing a strong consistent link between climate change and CO2 concentration, showing that global mean surface temperature (GMST) varied over a range from 11° to 36°C over the last 500mya, and calculating that for every doubling of CO2 concentration the GMST increases by 8°C (which is a lot higher than we thought).

“We got a president that doesn’t know he’s alive”

Lol this guy thinks democrats are leftists

Yeah, i agree that there are some really tough contradictions there, and the material result definitely looks like accelerationism.

Thanks for reading it!

I would really love to see the source for that, not that i doubt you i’m just very curious

I think it’s worth platforming this particular indigenous perspective outlined in Voting is Not Harm Reduction. Not expounding the point but rather bringing a concertedly marginalized voice into the conversation. https://www.indigenousaction.org/voting-is-not-harm-reduction-an-indigenous-perspective/

Sweet! Does it sync to mobile? I’m on ios, and haven’t looked into syncthing

I have been using obsidian for the past few months and i really enjoy it. It’s not open source, but you can self-host a not syncing service called Obsidian LiveSync that I use to sync between my computers and phone

Literally did this this morning and now searx is the default search engine on all my devices. Works great so far

This is funny and also begets some serious questions about who we are seizing the means of reproduction from and why they were seized in the first place. Silvia Federici offers some answers in her book Caliban and the Witch

At your recommendation, this is what I’ve been trying for the last week. I favorited all my artists, and I have to say that it’s working pretty well! I feel that my music library is much more intimate now. I’ll keep ‘testing’ it for a while longer but this might be my solution. Thanks!

Thank you! If I can’t find a way to figure it out in navidrome I’ll consider giving jellyfin a try, since I already use it for my visual media

I use obsidian with obsidian-livesync for selfhosting the notes. Works pretty well across linux, macos, ios so far

https://pi-hole.net/

I never had a good way to ingest info, but i setup a self-hosted FreshRSS instance a few months ago and it’s completely changed how i consume information for the better. I spend a lot less time scrolling through shit that never interested me much in the first place

So for this, would i make another zfs pool on my remote backup server that is not snapshotted? Like, the problem i have is that i have snapshotting via rsync, but then the whole remote server zfs pool is further snapshotted so there’s a lot of redundancy.

This is fantastically helpful, thank you. I will do this.

I don’t know why I thought sending zfs snapshots was the better option

Yeah i think you have a point but I also think humans were moral agents and ascribed value to each other and their environment long long before the advent of science

I’ve been thinking about this a lot recently. I don’t think this finding suggests that humans are innately negative forces in ecosystems, but rather that becoming indigenous to a place is a process. As people spread out to new areas, they didn’t have cultural practices that maintained historical ecological relations, and upended some of the ecology in the new places. But over time, it’s in everyone’s best interest to maintain relatively sustainable and cyclical ecological relations for long term survivalship, and that becomes part of the culture and stories, and then you get indigeneity. I think there’s no coincidence that the megafauna that still exists is primarily in the area where humans evolved (subsaharan africa). This is where people have been indigenous to the longest, perhaps before people had the means to extirpate megafauna. And once the cultural indigeneity was in place, there were reasons to not destroy megafauna populations (until the modern colonial era, at least)