Caleb James DeLisle

Don't Follow Me.
(See pinned post)

DeltaChat: http://dc.cjd.pkt.wiki/

Public Key

npub10502c8jv0y27jwcwxcq9kd3ph2wg7pt8ycexf5w2fyzythe97w2s7t88up

NIP-05 Address

Profile Code

nprofile1qqs8684vrex8j90f8v8rvqzmxcsm48y0q4njvvny689yjpz9mujl89gpz3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduqs6amnwvaz7tmwdaejumr0dsh8tw5w

Publishing to

relay.damus.io

nos.lol

Author Public Key

npub10502c8jv0y27jwcwxcq9kd3ph2wg7pt8ycexf5w2fyzythe97w2s7t88up

Show more details

Last Notes

2026-10-22 03:46:03 GMT

- reply

So Netanyahu going nuclear against Iran is not at all unrealistic. Most likely after the US election and before the Israeli election.
If he strikes pickaxe mountain, it has no impact. It's a firework.
If he strikes Tehran, he kills millions of people, and it would probably be pretty popular in Israel. But it will also probably unite the entire Muslim world...
All of the (US puppet) oil kingdoms who were wishy-washy about doing business with Israel are ripe to be overthrown.
If Jordan became aligned with Iran, this would be a nightmare for Israel because it's right on their border.

2026-10-22 03:34:16 GMT

- reply

It's definitely not good for their long term interests, but it's not as insane as it looks.
Israel's problem is that their own social cohesion is falling apart. There are 3 or 4 factions in Israel and the situation is threatening to devolve into a civil war.
So Netanyahu is basically doing the old "start a war to distract from problems at home" gambit. It's bad for foreign relations, but it's being done against a backdrop of "we might not have a country much longer"... Kind of "go big or go broke" move.

2026-10-22 03:24:27 GMT

- reply

IDK what Putin's security strategy is, but it probably does something like "If I don't check in every 24 hours, London, NYC and DC are barbecue". Because he gets treated with infinite caution.

2026-10-22 03:22:23 GMT

- reply

That's the problem with nuclear weapons and war crimes, you can't cover them up. Once you do it, the whole world can see you did it.
And the world is shocked (the plebs), and the world leaders have their opportunity to settle old scores whilst representing themselves as the saviors of humanity.
Nuking Europe is a suicide mission for Israel. Nuking Iran is probably also suicide, just somewhat less obvious.

2026-10-22 03:10:29 GMT

- reply

Even if Netanyahu wanted to do a real chimp-out move and nuke every city in the world, #1 he doesn't have enough weapons, and #2 what city isn't already filled with Jews.
I do think he's *quite* likely to be the one that initiates nuclear conflict against Iran, but this is "one bomb" not Sampson Option.
That of course will backfire spectacularly, but it will make him seem strong in Israel and save him the election...

2026-10-22 02:55:26 GMT

- reply

Evacuated to where?
Remember, once you run out of atoms, unless you're on MARS, you cannot escape consequences...

2026-10-22 02:51:03 GMT

- reply

Remember, he has a son in the US...

2026-10-22 02:44:44 GMT

- reply

Well, Netanyahu may yet strike Iran with a nuclear weapon, it would probably help him in the up-coming election.
But to CHIMP OUT and do Sampson Option on every capital in the world? No.
No because in a total civilizational breakdown scenario started from Israel, the reaction would be to shoot the Jews to extinction.

2026-10-22 02:37:02 GMT

- reply

Sure sure, but you're assuming people are reasonable about the assignment of blame. In reality there's always gonna be *someone* to hunt down and exterminate. An ethnic group for instance.

2026-10-22 01:49:58 GMT

- reply

Yeah, the math is awful.
Incidentally, if I was in charge of nuclear policy (haw haw haw 😈) I would build suicide bomber submarines, because I want meteor-that-killed-the-dinosaurs level firepower. Nuclear weapons never really make sense except as a national suicide belt, so I'd push it to it's logical limit.
https://pkteerium.xyz/media/efac6ea0165d4a07203158f005bbbcd76b1f2a318c250101a10ff04a12edc7b3.png

2026-10-21 22:20:34 GMT

This is wild. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_settlement so, you can buy someone's life insurance policy off of them.
So like, if someone seems like they're more likely to die sooner than the insurance company thinks, you can tell them to take out a million dollar life insurance policy, and then immediately write them a check to buy it out.
You keep paying the premium and then whenever they die, you get the payout from the insurance company.
Legitimately I think this is potentially one of the most interesting investments out there right now.
CC: @npub1ajc…pq5u

2026-10-21 15:04:41 GMT

- reply

On the one hand, everybody is a bit afraid of chimping out because we have no experience with it and nobody knows how it's going to end up.
The loser class re-represents this fear as honorable behavior "turn the other cheek" and so on.
The clever strategy is to publicly eschew violence while secretly engaging in it. The loser class will take the bait if you tell them to be peaceful.
Of course, anyone with an ounce of historical knowledge knows that the only way to reconcile irreconcilable differences is by force. Throughout history, millions of man-hours of time has been spent trying to find a different solution, and it's all been for nothing because there is none.
However, if you're not going to actually pull the trigger and use force, there are two directions that can be pursued:
1. Building up your position such that if you ever do pull the trigger, you will be that much more successful. e.g. training and stockpiling arms.
2. Low-grade application of force. Not enough to warrant a major reaction, but enough to create pressure against your adversaries. Here, precision is everything. Most people are not your adversaries, by creating pain and inconvenience for those who align with your adversaries, you will ensure that your actual adversaries are isolated.
The Other Guys got wise to #2 and will use "hate crime" theory to throw the book at you over relatively small offenses like property damage. But it's basically the same game as troll vs. mod, as they become increasingly paranoid, you continue turning the volume down until they start to hear voices in their walls...

2026-10-21 14:25:48 GMT

- reply

There's actually a really good reason to think no one will ever actually pull the Nuclear Armageddon trigger, and that's because whoever starts it will be blamed for it.
And when all of the atoms are split, and all of the dust settles, humanity will not go extinct - but the people who initiated the thing, and their family members, and the people they love the most..... You know the brazen bull?...

2026-10-21 14:19:52 GMT

- reply

To give MD credit where credit is due, humans spend an *exorbitant* amount of time worrying about things that have never happened before, so the Nothing Ever Happens card is not wholly unjustified.
There's a real difference here that for the first time ever, the world empire is collapsing and that empire has been in power since the advent of the nuclear weapon - so we are seeing SOME things we've never seen before.
Will it get to uranium fireworks? That's still a big question. Arguments can be made either way.

2026-10-21 13:42:42 GMT

- reply

I bet you as soon as actual sovereignty is on the line, they're gonna bring back chemical weapons just as if nothing ever happened.
> The Only Sin Is Not To Win...

2026-10-20 16:39:18 GMT

- reply

Well, debating religion in the sense of "What Is Truth" is certainly a dead end.
But what we're discussing is what belief system would work the best for the physical material situation of our people... And that's something we can actually reason about.

2026-10-20 13:54:43 GMT

- reply

Christianity has this philosophy that if you're doing something and it's RIGHT, it doesn't matter how bad the consequences are, you do it because your reward is in Heaven. And I think Islam has something similar.
Judaism has a thing that when everyone else is dead and you are the last one left fighting, THEN, God will intervene and make you win.
This stuff is obviously very powerful if you're trying to fight a war, and you know that there's people who aren't gonna make it, but you need them to fight and die for you anyway...
However, the flip side is when you get locked on to some belief that is self-destructive, your ability to reason "lets not do this" is turned off, so you're a bit fucked.

2026-10-20 12:04:03 GMT

- reply

The issue with this "importing infinity Africans" thing is it's basically what the French people want. This is a predominantly Catholic country, and you know the "import Africans" NGOs are Catholic (even if their leaders are Jews, the rank-and-file are believing Catholics). And for those people, the "love thy neighbor" command has spiraled out of control and here we are.
Can't argue with them that it's bad for France because they don't care. Do The Right Thing is foundational, so when The Right Thing is suicidal, you have a suicide cult.

2026-10-19 22:57:55 GMT

- reply

Yeah, I'm not gonna claim it isn't. All I have to say for them is whatever they do, it ends up with a pretty decent result. Could be better, could also be a whole lot worse...

2026-10-19 22:35:24 GMT

- reply

That number is a little bit fluffed up because the state has this silly habit of taking tax money from you, and then giving it all back in subsidies.
That said, they do actually spend a LOT of money, and they're fairly good at it - it's a very nice place to live.

2026-10-19 18:49:24 GMT

- reply

Okay, fair enough.
Now we can just say "importing African refugees is not God's will", and they can say "yes it is", and the only way to resolve that disagreement is to fight it out. There's like a billion Catholics, I would not want to face all of them.
My thought process is that maybe we can say "important African refugees is not going to be good for our people in the long term, and here's why ...", which is something that anyone with the capacity for reason can follow.
This has the potential to save us all getting exterminated by Catholic death squads, but we have to accept the notion that a scriptural interpretation can be adjusted if it conflicts with what is decided to be good for our people.
I get it that changing the rules is dangerous as hell, but when you're heading for a wall it's not like there are a lot of other choices...

2026-10-19 18:33:03 GMT

- reply

> Christianity is a general set of beliefs and purpose, and a framework of thought, and a way of life
This is the version of Christianity that I think has a lot of merit.
But we've got the pope washing the feet of refugees, universalist protestant woman pastors doing gay marriages, dispensationalists giving the shirt off their back for jews in Israel... My reaction is like "these are not good ideas, this will not end well"...
So my reaction is "can we adapt the rules a little based on knowing this shit obviously doesn't work" - to which the reply is They're God's Rules, You Can't Change Them...
So I ask the question: You choose your ethnic group or you choose your faith?
I'm expecting the answer: "Okay, you're right, there are obviously SOME limits to faith"...
Instead, massive hell-thread, autistic rage I thought was only present in r/atheists, and seemingly some actual haters.

2026-10-19 18:12:06 GMT

- reply

I appreciate your interpretation, I think it's more workable.
I think really what it comes down to is whatever one's belief system, when something is OBVIOUSLY unworkable, that belief system needs to be flexible enough to get out of the way.
You consider like that French woman with the shop, she's got this whole belief system that tells he that she needs to help the poor helpless refugees to be a good human being. Is she gonna have enough introspection to accept that she needs to adjust that belief system or else its ending with civilizational collapse?
I feel like I'm a bit parroting Thomas Aquinas to say that faith needs to be moderated in the face of observable fact...

2026-10-19 17:45:41 GMT

- reply

No, actually not at all.
Until yesterday, I thought Christians kind of balanced their faith with other things.
Now I'm finding out you people would literally drink cyanide coolaid for your beliefs and I'm just super weirded out by it.

2026-10-19 01:03:26 GMT

- reply

I could also give you the choice of a million dollars and a blowjob, but that doesn't reveal your allegiance.
I WANT TO KNOW, if Christians value their religion more than their ethnic group.
And so far it seems many of them get so upset by the line of inquiry, that the most reasonable interpretation is that actually they do put religion before bloodline and ethnic group - but they're too ashamed to admit it.

2026-10-19 00:45:40 GMT

- reply

> I'll be dead in either case.
That's a cop-out answer and you know it. The question is what's your allegiance, to your ethnic group or to your religion?
The question that Whiplash refused to answer was the clarified version where dying is explicitly excluded:
1. All European origin people on the planet disappear (except you)
2. Men-in-black flash, everyone forgets Christianity ever existed

2026-10-19 00:35:45 GMT

- reply

I wanna know what is your preference - but none of you won't give me a straight answer, which tells me the answer is you will sacrifice your bloodline and nation for your god-thingy.
Ladies and Gentlemen, The Mind Of The Christian.

2026-10-18 21:34:21 GMT

- reply

Claude is not so good at non-coding tasks. I generally always use GPT (also because they don't cut you off after a while when you're a freeloader like me)

2026-10-18 18:34:15 GMT

- reply

They're gonna get consequences anyway. All of the former Soviet bloc is gonna get consequences... Russia is gonna do a land grab the second NATO runs out of loot - and there's really not much that anyone's gonna do about it.

2026-10-18 17:17:36 GMT

- reply

You have to choose:
1. All European origin people on the planet disappear (except you)
2. Men-in-black flash, everyone forgets Christianity ever existed
And no answer is also an answer, it means you're too ashamed to say what your answer is.

2026-10-18 16:51:28 GMT

- reply

Would you rather a world with Christianity and no White people, or a world with White people and no Christians?
Pick one.

2026-10-18 16:00:53 GMT

- reply

> There is no such authority save Christ himself.
Okay but that's obviously contrary to what the VAST majority of self-identifying Christians believe. All of the Catholics obviously believe the Vatican is the only legitimate interpreter of scripture, and Protestants have different views, but if they're going to listen to a priest every Sunday then they obviously consider that person's word to be somewhat authoritative.
So you're promoting "Christianity" but not what like 99% of the world thinks knows as Christianity, what are we even doing here?

2026-10-18 15:52:26 GMT

- reply

Well firstly, self-identifying "Christian" NGOs that you claim are "fronts for jews" are still not the "post-Christain Atheists" that Whiplash is accusing.
And secondly, where is the "based" Christian church which actually makes it official doctrine that these NGOs and those supporting them are not Christian?
As far as I can see, Christians like to get loud about how based Christianity is, except when you ask them to cite the official policy of their church on these topics, then they get real quiet.

2026-10-18 15:31:32 GMT

- reply

Nice theory, except nobody believes that for one second because all of the NGOs that are openly publicly admitting to moving African refugees into western countries, are Christian.
https://pkteerium.xyz/media/28ee8daababf1e44584554adf2026ced3eb83a790f7389fadcd27596b26597f0.png

2026-10-18 02:59:44 GMT

- reply

If you step out of Christianity into post-Christian atheism (so-called "post-Christian" because it retains Christian culture and morality), then a relatively obvious factual statement: "Christianity is the culture of Our People", basically says the same thing.
Nobody is going to try to claim Christianity was invented in Africa and then Africans came to Europe and converted Europeans... That just makes no sense, it's something which evolved in the context of Europeans.

2026-10-18 02:04:23 GMT

- reply

Men's Suicide Hotline, except it's actually Fight Club...
Yeah, this sounds like it could work...

2026-10-17 19:04:24 GMT

- reply

Working now?

2026-10-17 19:03:12 GMT

- reply

My side shows I followed you back, did you not catch it? Want me to unfollow / refollow?

2026-10-17 19:01:53 GMT

I see this reply but my notifications show zero. I'm like "is something wrong with my pleroma" before realizing it was for someone else 😂
#note1074…qtzx

2026-10-17 15:39:22 GMT

- reply

I actually wanna stop using fuel for myself personally - just because I wanna save money. But yeah, most of this shit is total brainrot and low grade psyop bullshit.

2026-10-17 12:23:57 GMT

- reply

> I still don't get it why you are so sure you're right, to the point where you get angry at people who believe in the opposite
There's nothing in what I've said so far that implies I'm *angry* at people who believe the opposite.
And in fact, I don't really care enough to be angry. There's a bunch of people who think aliens are coming, or the earth is flat, or that they need to sit in the highway to "stop oil". I'm not motivated to be angry at them either. The world is full of un-serious people.
Furthermore, "you are angry at people who don't believe what you believe" is a known Talking Point. Talking points are these little "canned arguments" that are made and presented by media outlets and then are repeated verbatim by a mob of intellectual zombies with no unique opinions of their own. This is the target of the "NPC" meme, and the saying "When you argue with a boomer, you're arguing with the TV and the TV doesn't care".
I council anyone against ever repeating a talking point because it's "NPC coded" activity. If you don't wanna get laughed at, don't show up in clown shoes...
Anyway, your responses have significantly degraded my enthusiasm in engaging this conversation any further - and the only thing in my mind right now is that so much of the trouble with modernity is down to the fact that everyone's vote is equal.

2026-10-16 22:49:03 GMT

- reply

Yes and no. I agree that he's definitely selling these to "upper middle" strivers. Like basically an expensive Mustang - that's the one with no thrusters.
But he's also selling to like oligarch founder types (and Jay Leno) that just do not care what the number is and want one of The Fastest Car On The Road. And that's the "price not disclosed" invite only car...
Legacy brand shit is another can of worms, indeed. But you can't compete with Rolls Royce unless you are literally Rolls Royce, so he's being smart by not trying.
I think when these things start coming out, the thrusters are going to create quite a lot of drama in the no-prep / cash days / grudge racing scene, because basically anyone can have a 2500hp LS, and the entire problem at this point is getting that to the track. Well, one guy has thrusters and the other guy doesn't, might as well have come with a bicycle.
Then the sucker fan, I think that's going to make a lot of noice in places like the Nurburgring because when you have that kind of down-force, you can do corners a lot faster... There's a reason F1 banned sucker-fans...

2026-10-16 22:33:28 GMT

- reply

I think Elon will be able to sell a fair number of roadsters just on account of the fact that they'll be untouchable in a street race. So whatever you can have your porche, but against a roadster it's gonna be slow as dogshit.

2026-10-16 12:10:12 GMT

- reply

> Yours, or borrowed?
I didn't invent it.
"Pop Sci" is a reference to Bill Nye, Neil Tyson, or Hawkins type of celebs. Nye is a little bit more legit because he taught children real scientific principles. Hawkins likewise is credited with some actual research discoveries. Tyson is probably the purest example of Pop Sci...
I just checked if there were any sea level bets on Polymarket and there are none. Which tells me there is just no meaningful interest in betting against Team Nothing Ever Happens.
https://pkteerium.xyz/media/164b603fef1fb77f696254c457dc91712452b637b1ec4946623f88c15269473a.png

2026-10-16 11:49:45 GMT

- reply

Good grief, why would anyone ever EV-convert a rusty Mini.
If I'm gonna do all the work to have a car that I DON'T PAY FOR FUEL, I want a goddamn 1969 Lincoln Continental. Or, you know what, it could be a 1995 Ford F350 dually, I don't care.
Hell, if "British Car" is a requirement, grab a 1963 Rolls Royce Phantom and EV that. That'll piss off the diehards.
But What Kind Of An Idiot would do all the effort to electrify a rusty shopping cart?!

2026-10-16 09:48:00 GMT

- reply

Okay so there are a few different questions wrapped up in this "is human caused climate change real" question.
Firstly, if you take the question literally and pedantically, then the answer is obviously yes. But literally speaking, butterflies are also causing climate change. At a literal level, the question is just meaningless.
Conversely, it's also obvious that the climate evolves without human (industrial) - which we know from ice ages.
The IMPLIED question, and the one that actually matters, is whether the human influenced component of climate change will have a meaningful impact on the future world we live in.
This is a future prediction question, so nobody really knows for sure, but in the field of future prediction - "Nothing Ever Happens" is generally a REALLY good bet. Rewinding over the past couple of centuries, we see that the things people worried about didn't happen and the things that happened were things very few people were seriously worrying about.
Here's a document which I wrote some months ago about my predictions for the year 2060: https://iona.pkt.wiki/doc/IONA_MEMO_0002_FUTURE_PREDICTION_v1.0_2026_JAN_2.pdf
It's probably obvious that I'm not calling for a global catastrophe...
There are also a lot of other people who make it their job to identify trends, make long term future predictions, and then inform investors who will bet on these things. For the most part, these people are not really predicting a major catastrophe either, so I'm definitely not alone in my position here.
The people calling for a major catastrophe are more Pop Sci types, and these are more entertainers than inputs for decision makers...

2026-10-16 08:29:22 GMT

- reply

1. If we're to accept that pre-industrial "Ice Ages" are real, then changing climate obviously does not prove human involvement.
2. Much of the climate change rhetoric qualifies as an Apocalypse Prediction. There is a LONG history of Apocalypse Predictions, which have been taken seriously by people considered serious in their day. Demonstrating that there is a major human bias toward believing such things, and therefore any statement which may qualify as an Apocalypse Prediction must be treated with more doubt than normal. In particular, appeals to authority are worthless because authorities have a history of falling for Apocalypse Predictions in the past.
3. "Science" is far more unreliable and far more political than its practitioners would like to believe. I could point to such "Scientific Findings" as the assertion that performing surgical sex-changes on young children will improve their life outcome, or that the covid vaccine is beneficial for pregnant women, but maybe you believe all of those things. However, I'm sure that if you look for a while, you will find a fairly well respected paper which YOU find disgusting and unserious.
4. The fact that "Climate Science" is its own field is cause for suspicion. You may be aware of The Tobacco Institute, referenced as "The Institute For Tobacco Studies" in the film Thank You For Smoking... It's now widely accepted that this "institute" had the objective of not finding any connection between smoking and health problems. It was off on its own because if its research had been published in classical medical journals, it would have faced challenges. Likewise, the unwillingness of "Climate Scientists" to publish where they will be reviewed by meteorologists, geologists, and other relevant experts raises an eyebrow.
5. Many climate related Apocalypse Predictions have simply not come to pass. In any serious scientific field, making such a bold statement which turns out false should be career-ending. The fact that there has never been any serious reckoning in the Climate Community for the fact that the ice which was supposed to melt in 2013, then 2016, then 2019 is still frozen, casts further doubt on the seriousness of the field.
6. The people who are most vocal about Climate Change don't seem to have any personal conviction about the disasters that they claim are imminent. They all keep flying private jets and living in beachfront property. Moreover, the billions of dollars that they have are predominantly NOT being invested in funds that will profit in a climate catastrophe. Such funds exist, but they are very marginal. Green Tech funds are significant, but actual profit-from-catastrophe funds are nearly nonexistent.
And at the end of the day, even if none of this is convincing - the people most vocal about Climate Change are Epstein Client Philanthropaths, and Reddit-Atheist losers. If you want to be part of that club, be my guest. You can also be part of the club that maintains child pornography is free speech. But in either case, you will be judged by the company you keep...
https://pkteerium.xyz/media/94b472cff299e22117abd6cc4a924a706ce32493b7798ae16742575bbb2adafa.png
https://pkteerium.xyz/media/4b5b771e2e3cae096175ffcec49ea727b5dad4e8e172ff0e2de78e9243653fd5.png

2026-10-15 16:16:29 GMT

I think a couple of hours she posted this video with a thumbnail "How we know for sure climate change is caused by humans" and "Show this to that uncle who doesn't believe it"...
She must have gotten zero clicks b/c I don't see it anymore and this one just popped up.
Man-made climate change theory is so widely believed by insufferable fucking midwits and/or Epstein clients, that even if you could fully convince me that it was real, I still wouldn't tell anybody.
https://pkteerium.xyz/media/ad74642fec26bdb187cef534b9c9c6fe95a70b210d0f757afabab492dc8c47dd.png

2026-10-14 21:03:59 GMT

- reply

Well, if you're a Chinese factory, your goal is to find big customers who care about quality and will choose you because you can provide what they want.
Or else if you want to sell to consumer, your goal is to build a brand name like Vevor and transport all of your goods to customer countries and sell them direct to customers on platforms like Amazon - then go after counterfeit sellers on platforms like Aliexpress...

2026-10-14 20:53:26 GMT

Chinese wire manufacturers shrink-wrapping (low denomination) currency into their spools of wire because they're having trouble with counterfeit wire passing off as being from their company, and:
1. They publish the serial numbers of the notes they embedded, and
2. The penalty for counterfeiting wire is not that bad, but the penalty for counterfeiting Chinese currency is brutal
Nice trick...
https://pkteerium.xyz/media/7859eba328c59bd9f291ebda699c76d98a6772812942fce26fd4c1a4e90a374e.png

2026-10-14 10:15:41 GMT

- reply

But does anybody actually get sued? Writing "gimmedat munny" on a napkin and dropping it in a mailbox doesn't really count as anything, anyone can do that...

2026-10-14 08:44:08 GMT

- reply

There haven't been any punishments for downloading movies in over a decade. I think people just like to whine.

2026-10-14 08:31:08 GMT

I've seen so much hand-wringing about how: "If I copy it, it's called piracy, but if AI companies copy it, it's not, this is no fair"...
I'm like... Does ANYONE actually take piracy seriously anymore?
I mean, sure Sony does, but does anyone care what Sony thinks?
> I should buy that DVD because otherwise I'm stealing projected lost revenue
Do these people still exist?
https://pkteerium.xyz/media/2f9e6e8ecace59328c1632872e254044f939830f2bfd1472ddc3bf57d49e56ab.png

2026-10-10 22:48:49 GMT

- reply

I'm always just flabbergasted at how every company beyond a certain size seems to have this irrational phobia of not having a certain percentage of totally useless workers.
If they were hiring the kid of the mayor or something, it would make sense, but they're jus hiring some random woman as if it's a gift to the diversity gods because they're afraid of being smited by a civil rights investigation or something....

2026-10-06 23:58:53 GMT

- reply

Where I live there's no real wind most of the year. How much kwh capacity do you have?

2026-10-06 23:56:53 GMT

- reply

price/kwh is a big issue with batteries. That's why seasonal energy storage is unrealistic.
If you've got 30kw of panels, you're gonna be seeing 100kwh/day for a pretty good chunk of the summer and trying to store that much energy will bankrupt you buying any kind of battery...

2026-10-06 23:51:06 GMT

- reply

> NiFe batteries
> but they're so expensive
When did you buy them and what's the cost per kwh?
If they're like 20 years old, back then everything was expensive. But these days you can get LFP at like 50/kwh.

2026-10-06 23:40:52 GMT

- reply

I'm really interested in trying to build a battery on this chemsitry:
FeCl₂ + 2 NaOH → Fe(OH)₂ + 2 NaCl
I wrote about it last sunday https://pkteerium.xyz/@cjd/posts/BB56iMu1RKxmI8KAVs
If that works, that could be massive. Fe = iron, and NaCl = salt, so cheap cheap material inputs. Realistic to think about storing an entire season of energy...

2026-10-06 22:56:41 GMT

- reply

> manufacturing still exists, but its so tightly controlled by the feds that its impossible to get functional vehicles from the factory
That's not gonna happen. In an all-white America it could, white Americans are cucked beyond belief and have some vision that the fedgov is this all powerful omnipotent god-monster. But America has blacks, mexicans, and muslims who will just never tolerate this shit, and they'll just riot and burn cities until the govt relents.
In a REAL post-apocalyptic scenario, what you want is a horse. But again, this is not realistic.
All of the stuff with biodiesel and ethanol hits one big nasty wall, and that's the 1% efficiency of photosynthesis. Somewhere in the past year or so I posted all of the math on this. You get like 100x the miles per year per acre if you just use PV panels and put the power in an EV. It's not "sexy", it doesn't have a "prepper" vibe, but it is the actual most efficient realistic way to power your car without requiring a stable supply chain.

2026-10-06 22:28:34 GMT

- reply

> It's easier to machine a chunk of cast iron into a cude piston
ALUMINUM
Okay now I've got 4 years of school running lathes, mills, grinders, etc. I'm gonna venture to guess here that if there's one of us that could have a chance of making a piston that lasts more than 20 minutes, it'd be me.
But I ain't fucking around with that shit. Even if I wanted to build an ICE, I'm not gonna go making engine parts like a Cuban, I'll go pluck an LS out of a junkyard.
I gather you're talking about some kind of societal collapse where junkyards don't exist anymore - but Where Are You Getting Gas?
Don't give me corn ethanol bullshit, it's such a pain in the ass to make, nobody does that. You're better off with wood gas, but then what's your plan to get an oil change? Even in an End Of The World scenario, I'd rather an EV and a dozen solar panels.

2026-10-06 22:09:22 GMT

- reply

That's not exactly true. If you take like a Hudson, Packard, or International and you need a piston for it, you are In The Shit because the supply chain for those things just does not exist anymore.
My plan is to go rip a drive axle out of a crashed tesla and if that shit blows up (which is a rare occurrence with EV motors), I'm gonna go rip another drive axle out of another crashed tesla.
And if tesla stops making that drive axle, I'll find some other EV that is in junkyards and there's 3rd party companies that have reverse engineered it so I can yank it out of a crashed car and throw that in.

2026-10-06 21:59:16 GMT

- reply

A long term project I wouldn't mind doing is pick up something like a 1965 Lincoln Continental, or a 1995 Ford F350 and just stuff it with Chinese LFP batteries, and throw a Tesla drive-axle in the rear with a 3rd party drive computer. But that's more of a long term project..

2026-10-06 21:54:31 GMT

- reply

I'm not entirely opposed to CiTy PeOpLe getting the Agenda2030 WEF lockdown buttsecks.
Eventually I'm gonna get a 2018ish Nissan Leaf (those ones are hackable enough you can do stuff like swap batteries) then I won't really need to buy diesel anymore...

2026-10-06 21:45:33 GMT

- reply

Good. The Globohomo Regime needs to get taken down a notch.
And if gas can get cheaper at the same time, double-win.

2026-10-06 21:34:57 GMT

- reply

Well, both can be true at the same time. Refining capacity is fucked. If oil is actually making it out of the strait then that's potentially good for the future fuel price...
I feel like it's kind of hard to cook that number and lie about the amount of oil getting out, but I don't really trust the post either...

2026-10-04 22:51:30 GMT

- reply

I realize I probably did a shit job of describing that purification cell. So here's a picture (1). Salt goes in the middle, and then there's a stack of cation exchange membranes going toward the left, and a stack of anion exchange membranes going to the right. How to make these is in the YT video in the first post. Cl- heads left and Na+ heads right. At each membrane in the stack, the acidity / alkalinity increases until it eventually reaches the point where it starts either off-gassing HCl or precipitating NaOH, depending on which side you're looking at.
If you don't want the HCl off-gassing, you need to circulate some water into the far left cell to keep the concentration from going too far. As you're adding fresh water, you're removing a little bit of what you're going to store as HCl in water.
https://pkteerium.xyz/media/c5eee11d8abe7ec7daf72c0b8293c01346809b280618ed5d290ca35293acb323.png

2026-10-04 21:54:58 GMT

Sunday Energy Post Is Here!
For people new to this, the premise is always the same: You just spend $10k on solar panels, and because you're not dumb, you bought your panels direct from China and you now have something like 30KW of installed capacity. This means you only need to buy power on a few of the darkest days of the winter, but it also means there's a good 3 months of the summer when your system is cranking out 100kWh per day. What do you do with all of that excess energy? (Ideally, you store it)...
Today we're going to talk about making your own batteries.
Last Sunday's post: https://pkteerium.xyz/@cjd/posts/BAqT8uoMirk4hqxHZw
In case you missed it, a tangental topic: Nobody Understands Leyden Jars: https://pkteerium.xyz/@cjd/posts/BAySnj8t1CerbFWADY
@npub15lm…56cl requested a tag.
You might wonder why I would suggest making your own battery when companies like CATL and EVE already make them really well and really cheaply. If this was a hobby chemistry post, then a legitimate answer would be "because it's fun". This is not a hobby chemistry post, so we're not talking about doing anything that's already being done more cheaply at a factory.
Commercial batteries absolutely have a role in a home energy storage system for spreading power generation from the sunny part of the day to the night and perhaps bridging over a cloudy day or two. However, commercial batteries cost at least about $50/kWh, so a 100kWh battery costs about $5000 (at the cheapest). We're talking about 90 days of energy in the summer that we need to store, and we're not interested in buying 1/2 million dollars worth of commercial batteries.
> What makes you think you can beat what's commercially available?
We have different requirements.
1. Commercial battery cells must be self-contained with no user-serviceable parts. Nobody wants a battery they might have to open up and clean once a year. For our needs, some amount of greasing, oiling, cleaning, and inspecting is not unreasonable.
2. Commercial batteries are usually designed with EVs in mind so they are expected to charge really quickly. If we have a battery for storing 90 days of summer energy, it's okay if it takes 90 days to charge.
3. A commercial battery cell must not require on-site assembly. We're assembling the cell already, so this restriction has zero value to us.
4. Commercial batteries need to have (at least) good enough energy per weight that they're worth shipping over from China. As they're typically designed for EVs or other portable applications, the energy density expectation is usually far higher than that. We care far more about the up-front cost per kWh than the weight.
5. Commercial batteries typically have a round-trip efficiency in the 90+% range. A battery chemistry that loses 20% of its energy charging and discharging might be dismissed as commercially infeasible, but when we compare it with pumped hydro at 70% efficiency, and various hydrogen storage models with 10-50% efficiency, we see that fairly lossy batteries can still be quite practical.
On our side, we have three requirements that commercial battery companies don't have:
1. We need our battery components to be *readily available*. Something like LiPF₆ electrolyte salt might be "cheap" if you buy it by the train car load, but you won't find it at the corner store, and buying it in small quantities might lead you to lab supply companies with very high markups.
2. We need a chemistry which is tolerant of some contamination. We don't have a factory where we can exclude water and oxygen down to parts-per-million levels, so we'd rather avoid chemicals that react with them rather than having to build one.
3. We'd like our chemistry to be more or less human friendly and realistic to dispose of. We can be expected to act like adults and use PPE, but it would be nice not to have mustard gas coming out of our cell when we open it for inspection. Moreover, if we have 100 tons of acid, we would like to have a plan to neutralize it rather than just: Truck it all to a toxic waste disposal company at massive expense, or dumping it in the storm gutter which is a crime and is gonna leave a LOT of evidence when it kills absolutely everything.
---
The simplest kind of battery is basically an electrolysis cell. You put salt water in a cell with anode, cathode and ion exchange membrane, the salt splits into NaOH and HCl. Discharging it turns the NaOH and HCl back into salt. You can store about 0.1 kWh per kilogram of salt this way. Your salt concentrations should be somewhere between 1% and 11%, so lets say you are able to convert 1kg of salt per 10kg of water. Figure 1, from this fabulous YT: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eq7fR9ISuCw (but note this is not the iron battery he describes)
This is obviously challenged in terms of energy density. You're looking at 10kwh per ton (cubic meter) of water. But just because you're limited to 10% salt in water doesn't mean you're required to keep that water indefinitely.
The same chemistry works in acid or alkaline as it does in neutral PH, so after you've finished making your salt into HCl and NaOH, you can then take each component and electrolyze them in isolation, turning even more salt into even more HCl and NaOH.
It turns out that you don't need to pump the electrolyte from one cell to another, all you need to do is add more ion exchange membranes, and you raise the voltage since now it is a series cell stack. The same rules apply - one side becomes acid and the other side becomes base, it's just that they become far more acid and base than they would.
Now that brings us to our extremes:
At 37% HCl in water, the HCl begins leaving as a gas.
At 50% NaOH, the NaOH begins settling out as a solid.
There are two storage choices, either store enriched water, or store solids. 1kg of NaCl makes 0.684kg of NaOH and 0.624kg of HCl.
If we choose to store 33% HCl in water rather than letting it get to 37% and offgas, we can store our 0.624kg of HCl in 1.63L.
On the NaOH side, we'd be better off driving it to crystalize out and then using settling ponds and spiral classifier to get it out of the liquid and store it in a semi-dry storage. It's more mechanical hardware, but the resulting material to store is a solid which is much safer. Our 0.684kg of NaOH comes out to 0.32L of solid material.
So this way, 1kg of salt turns into 1.63 liters of liquid, giving us 100 watt-hours of storage. 1 tonne of salt into 1.63 cubic meters of acid plus 0.32 cubic meters of lye gives us 100 kWh of storage.
This is "okay" but not great, because we're tying up a lot of acid and if it spills, that's a serious environmental disaster. It's kind of obligatory to put the acid in a double-walled container with water on the outside so that if the inner wall fails, water goes in rather than acid coming out. But 163 cubic meters is "a couple swimming pools" and would store 10,000 kWh - or 500mn$ worth of batteries.
Batteries are a massive area of research so there's a lot of other stuff I can write. Eliminating the storage of large amounts acid is possible by playing with the chemistry - and I may or may not continue in a part 2...
https://pkteerium.xyz/media/63e95427a2fbf37f8940f39fc0c89f50ae8c0f850b016d4aa3ce5f66fb0aa8a2.png
https://pkteerium.xyz/media/236c5f30ddfaa4d06bc841a17514143ed25abdf0f8ede15fd9a4883bab45b9d3.png

2026-10-04 18:13:20 GMT

- reply

If I was a professor, assignments are required on a RANDOM day between the "official due date" and two weeks after the official due date.
And if you don't have it on the day it is requested, you get a zero.
So if you are late, you don't lose 1/14th credit per day, you lose 1/14th CHANCE of getting any credit at all.
Procrastinate at your own risk 😈

2026-10-03 14:56:09 GMT

- reply

If someone were to read ONE of his books, in order to get a superior understanding and appreciation of what he contributed, which one should it be in your opinion?

2026-10-03 12:24:43 GMT

- reply

But that's the thing, you can just buy it online. It's not illegal to do that, and it absolutely fucks with surveillance strategy because now they're hearing terrorists in their walls...

2026-10-02 19:50:09 GMT

- reply

Meaning he doesn't speak any other language better.

2026-10-02 19:35:18 GMT

- reply

Well he's a native English speaker, so I would hope he's not

2026-10-02 19:21:15 GMT

- reply

I used to know a French guy who would say "Nuclear Factories" because actually powerplant doesn't have a direct translation in French.

2026-10-02 05:32:04 GMT

- reply

The application I wish I could figure out how to make work is hydrogen storage. But even concentrated H3O requires electrons to become H2 + H2O.
If you're thinking about storing power, an iron based flow battery like the one in the YT in the last post is supposedly good to about 25wh per liter of water. Not much but it's just water and iron which are extremely cheap. And that amounts to 25kwh per cubic meter of water... not at all bad.
An olympic sized swimming pool of 2-3 meter depth is about 3000 cubic meters, so if you have two of those full of iron water slurry, that's 75MWh of storage.
Maybe I'll do a future energy post on cheap flow batteries...

2026-10-01 18:01:41 GMT

- reply

Can be a battery, but not a very energy dense one.
I think water purification might be the most interesting application.
Second most interesting is ion concentration, but there are other ways to do that, e.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eq7fR9ISuCw
But this doesn't require conductivity so it allows you to concentrate ions without adding salt - which is why it works for water purification.

2026-10-01 16:59:28 GMT

Nobody Understands Leyden Jars.
A leyden jar, for those who have never seen one, is a rudimentary capacitor made from a jar and some metal foil. In the early days of electricity research, they were commonly used for storing static electricity.
In the famous Ben Franklin kite experiment, he was said to have stored the static collected from the air to a leyden jar.
Normally, they're pretty simple devices, they have 2 conductive plates (foil) separated by an insulator (glass), that's your classical capacitor. What makes absolutely no sense is the fact that when you fill one with water, it's capacity for storing energy increases *dramatically*.
Based on typical electrical understanding, this is a total mystery. The water is not completing a circuit that goes anywhere, it's not even acting as an electrode because (as you can see in diagram 2) there is foil between the water and the glass. The water seems to be connected to a dead-end of the circuit.
The reason why water affects the leyden jar is because electric fields cause water to polarize (fig 4). All of the hydrogens begin pointing one way, and all of the oxygens begin pointing the other. The water doesn't "want" to do this, entropy drives it toward random alignment. Polarization actually causes a small amount of heat to be expelled from the water, and relaxation (discharging the jar) causes a small amount of heat to be absorbed as the atoms go back to bouncing around at random, this is called electrocaloric effect.
This is one thing, and it explains why water has such an effect on leyden jars, but when there's an electrolyte like salt in the water, things get even more interesting.
Common table salt is NaCl (sodium chloride). Dissolved in water, we're told, the Na+ and Cl- disassociate. Though they're no longer chemically bonded, they have opposite charges so they don't move far apart from each other. In classical electrolysis, you apply electricity across two plates, pulling the Na+ in one direction and the Cl- in the other. Then electrons split H2O into H2 and OH-. Were it not for the Na+, the entire reaction would stop before you noticed anything, but because Na+ is happy to sit next to OH-, Cl- is free to walk across the cell to the other side, where electricity does one of two things: Either evolve Cl2 (chlorine gas) or else O2.
Now this little detour into electrolysis is important because the first step in this process is actually happening in a leyden jar. If you have a salt water leyden jar, and you charge the outer plate negative (water is positive), the Na+ is drawn toward the outer edge of the jar while the center of the jar becomes Cl- rich. If you charge the jar and then draw water from the center, you will get Cl- rich water. If you then discard the remaining water and put back the Cl- rich water and charge it again, you will get even richer water.
You can easily imagine a cascade of this construct making arbitrarily strong NaOH (sodium hydroxide) and HCL (hydrochloric acid) simply by doing the same bias over and over again. Indeed a 2020 paper ( https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0011916419312937 ) showed that exactly this trick can be used for desalination of sea water - because as the NaOH and HCL become more concentrated, the intermediate water obviously becomes less salty.
But what's really interesting is that this isn't constrained to Na+Cl- ions, ALL ions in water would be drawn out by this cascading construct (including fluoride), so it could be used as an alternative to reverse osmosis filtration.
But even fresh distilled, deionized water has ions. These are "intrinsic" ions of H3O+ and OH- which spontaneously emerge. The reason why these ions are insufficient for electrolysis is because there aren't enough of them, and while electrolysis does make more of them. 2H2O + 2e- -> H2 + 2OH- and 6H2O -> 3O2 + 4H3O+ + 4e- produces OH- and H3O+ respectively, but they tend to walk across the water and cancel each other out, bringing us back to our problem of ion poverty.
However, if we were to concentrate the intrinsic ions, we would have H3O+ rich water, and OH- rich water. These would both make very good electrolytes if we wanted to make hydrogen from water later on.
All this from lyden jars - which nobody understands.
https://pkteerium.xyz/media/49125f5f10a59eb2d48d4ec7c2b00da0852f6fe21ff315d2ba5aecb15823e95c.png
https://pkteerium.xyz/media/2cbf6526e4c1fb48ea8d93e2ed33a19d4e66b6932b85a6d99a299ff3736a5cc0.png
https://pkteerium.xyz/media/44ddcb3a7ccf1a4148c5088090b7bc5712e84724801dfcb51f2f6ccaf783c0f6.png
https://pkteerium.xyz/media/8777e2d7edcb888ab178b4f9f77c389aeb0c05242fea79aaf6a630be07e113d8.png

2026-09-30 17:46:09 GMT

- reply

Yes and no. They are indeed simple, but they're also full of little tchotchkes like pistons, rods, lifters, rockers, etc that are becoming more and more unobtanium as the engine ages out. Not that you can't find lifters, it's just becoming increasingly difficult to find lifters for THAT engine.
That said, all of the automatic locks, automatic windows, seat adjustment, etc is a bunch of stuff that is also hard to get ahold of, and would also challenge my idea as well...

2026-09-30 17:34:08 GMT

- reply

I want one of those so I can stuff it with cheap batteries and throw a tesla axle in the rear end

2026-09-30 00:58:25 GMT

- reply

When random guys in camo pop up to arrest you, I guess that means you made someone upset...
Did they say if it was enriched?

2026-09-28 19:58:17 GMT

- reply

It's not a lozenge, it's not meant to be used that way. The lozenges typically are 18mg, this is 50 so I'm kinda misusing it. But it seems to work for the purpose.

2026-09-28 16:58:02 GMT

Zinc update: Had a mild sore throat today, popped a Zinc-50 Depot in like a Zyn about 3 hours ago, still not entirely dissolved but that sore throat sure is gone...

2026-09-28 14:02:07 GMT

- reply

Back around 2020, a futurist guy I talked to said ammonia is the future of fuel. Just based on first principles I think he was probably right.

2026-09-28 12:36:44 GMT

- reply

This shit is gonna eventually lead to everyone without a known name getting banned from open source contribution entirely.

2026-09-28 12:34:02 GMT

New pull request :)
It's AI slop :(
Bug report pic related.
If it was real, lots of production devices would not work.
Fix is almost certain to break things.
To the casual observer, looks 200IQ brilliant...
https://pkteerium.xyz/media/2ee15704425648c2a8be97536c82dee6331d30332551d707d0a30fa18260aa5d.png

2026-09-28 09:53:49 GMT

- reply

Recent paper on electrolytic production of ammonia. The promise is you can imagine pumping in electricity and water and getting something which burns and you can realistically compress to liquid.
Still more engineering to be done because the efficiency is still not great, and the working chemicals inside of the cell go to crap over time, but I'd guess this might be commercialized by the end of the decade.
And it's not wildly esoteric chemistry, one could try building one at home. It's just that the lithium is very fussy stuff, can't get near water or oxygen...
https://pkteerium.xyz/media/8bc76bc1b25334a11aef148d4db8a5c82e4952b5309ae913cfc2c049150174dd.pdf

2026-09-27 22:02:33 GMT

- reply

> as soon as Iran gives up
So, uhh, when is Iran gonna give up?
https://pkteerium.xyz/media/c5621e6d4f5fdb0505ad3ea3698e26b95bdc432040a4700032d86d5608f7e812.png

2026-09-27 20:26:18 GMT

- reply

2/2
There is some new research on better ways to make ammonia which is really interesting. Rather than pushing H2 and N2 over a catalyst, they instead use lithium to grab the nitrogen atoms away from the N2 making lithium nitride (6Li+N2→2Li3N). Then using electrolysis and hydrogen ions, you convert Li3N+3H+→NH3+3Li+
NH3 is the ammonia and Li is lithium ions to be cycled back.
Lithium works because it's able to pry apart the N2 nitrogen, but that takes a fair bit of power, and because lithium has this power, that means it LOVES oxygen... So any water or oxygen that touches lithium will cause the lithium to turn into junk which cannot be reversed easily. So we're back to the cleaning problem again. But at least you avoid the heat and pressure.
Recently a team has figured out a process[1] using phenol (C6H5OH) which could convert to C6H5O− and leave an H+ ion. Then it could be re-hydrogenated to C6H5OH again. On the other side they used LiBF4 (lithium, boron, fluorine) salt in a THF (Tetrahydrofuran) solvent. The LiBF4 split into Li+ and BF4- ions, the Li+ plated off on the cathode as metallic lithium. Then the lithium reacted with injected nitrogen to make Li3N, which then pulls the H+ ion off the phenol to get the coveted NH3 (ammonia). The phenol now converted to C6H5O− goes back to the anode where hydrogen is injected and it picks up an H becoming C6H5OH again.
More recently, the same team figured out how to combine this with water hydrogen electrolysis in[2]. The big advantage to integrating water in the process is that 3H2 + N2 -> 2NH3 is exothermic, but 2H2O -> H2 + O2 is endothermic, so if you can get both to happen in the same reaction, one will help pay for the other and you reduce energy expenditure. The problem is that (as mentioned) lithium loves to suicide itself on the oxygen found in water, so the water must be kept far away from the lithium. Their solution was to put two electrolysis cells next to each other, separated by a "cross-linked anion-exchange membrane (AEM)" in the non-water cell, they replaced the phenol with ethanol (C₂H₅OH or "EtOH" for short) and kept the THF and LiBF4. The Li3N as discussed previously would hit the ethanol and do: Li3N and 3EtOH → NH3 (ammonia) and 3Li+ and 3EtO−. The Li+ goes back to the cathode and becomes lithium metal and the EtO- goes back to the anion-exchange membrane where it pulls an H+ across from the water side. The way they got the N2 back into the lithium was they used a porous (like steel wool) electrode and they bubbled N2 through it. Apparently the only reason they used ethanol rather than phenol is because ethanol is more well known for doing this reaction and they wanted to prove that they could do the normal thing with the anion-exchange membrane and combine it with water electrolysis. But phenol was shown in [1] to be more effective, so there's no reason not to try the 2nd experiment with the chemistry of the 1st.
This particular reaction is quite impressive, but the real challenge is making it work continuously for a long time. Any O2 contamination in the N2 will kill some of the lithium. Any H2O crossing over the AEM will kill some of the lithium. And side-reactions might kill some of the phenol / ethanol. Making chemistry that can go back and forth millions of times without destroying its components is hard, it's not like cooking up something that's at least 80% meth, it's has to be 99.999% perfect. This challenge is the reason why batteries only started getting good about a decade ago.
All that said though, at this point I think I'd probably just build a Haber-Bosch reactor because you still need to obsessively clean the gasses, but the catalyst that you worry about ruining is just iron filings.
[1]: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-46803-w
[2]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1385894724061357
YT video about this reaction: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFcaEUj43OY
Introduction to electrolysis chemistry: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eq7fR9ISuCw

2026-09-27 20:25:36 GMT

Sunday energy post.
You've just installed a whole bunch of solar panels and it's the middle of the summer and you're generating a lot of power. Like 100-150 kWh per day. You charge up your EV, that's 1 day of power, you have a 50 kWh home battery, that charges in a half day, you can buy another home battery, but those are about $1000 bucks each. This generation is gonna go for about 3 months and you're not interested in dropping $90,000 on batteries so you can do full seasonal storage.
There's another period in the middle of the winter when you're gonna generate fuck all power - and you'll also need heating.
What can you do?
1. Lift a weight up a hill and drop it down again in the winter? Well 1 kWh is 2,655,223 foot-pounds of work. If your weight is 1 pound, and your hill is 2.6 million feet (502 miles) tall, you will store 1 kWh of energy by lifting it to the top. Conversely, a 2.6 million pound (1,327 ton) weight will use 1 kWh to lift one foot. And your seasonal storage requirement is like 14,000 kWh. So I guess you can see why nobody lists weights to store energy...
However, a large lake has such a fantastic amount of water that you can actually store meaningful energy that way. IF, you have a hill with a lake on top... If you don't, SoL.
2. Grinding, drying, and pressing... Turn everything woody into wood pellets which you can burn later (or make woodgas and run a generator). Neat, but that uses about 20% of your daily generation to grind CONSTANTLY. So you make all the wood pellets in the world and you're still generating more than you need.
3. Hydrogen - this is gonna be a theme in this post. You split water into H2 and O2 and you try to save the H2. Hydrogen is a wonderful thing because you might hope for 75% efficiency in your generator and then you can convert that H2 back into electricity in the winter using a (commercially available) fuel cell. The fuel cell is 50% efficient but the loss becomes heat - which you also need in the winter...
But, how do you store the hydrogen? (that's the neat part, you don't)
Lets try putting it in a balloon... Well, every cubic meter of hydrogen is good for 2.8 kWh of energy. That's gonna be 3.73 kWh of input if your electrolyzer is 75% efficient. So 14,000 kWh is gonna net you 3,753 cubic meters of hydrogen. That's about a medium sized hot air balloon, which would require an absolutely heroic mooring system to keep it from blowing away in the biggest storm you worry about. It's not impossible, but it's awkward. It's also big enough that it is hard to hide and will attract some regulatory attention. However, these do exist, they're called "membrane gas holders".
Since the membrane needs to be absolutely huge, and is constantly trying to lift the entire thing off the ground, you may be tempted to think about compressing it. Hydrogen is awful to compress. At 200 bar (3000 PSI) you get about 0.48 kWh per liter of storage. A 50 liter tank is somewhere around 300-500$ each and they'll store you 24 kWh of hydrogen. Just about the same price as the battery 😭
If you buy a freezer room setup to take your tanks to -20C, you get a whole 28 kWh per tank. If you chill the tanks with liquid nitrogen down to 77K (-196C, fucking-cold F), then you 83kwh per tank (but the metal is probably going to fail spectacularly).
Liquid hydrogen is another possibility, at liquid phase, 50 liters stores a whole 118Kwh. But what's better is you no longer need these expensive 200 bar tanks, you can just use a heavily insulated bucket. However, hydrogen liquifies at about 20K (-253.15 C, just 20 degrees off absolute zero). Liquid nitrogen (which you can make) will get you down to 77K, but the gap between 77 and 20 is a miserable place. The classic way to get H2 that cold is to compress, then chill to 77, then decompress so that it chills itself further. But now you need a compressor that is already cryogenically cold. Peltier (solid state) coolers just do not work in this temperature regime. Everything about this is hell.
Another possibility is biomass to oil conversion. Take woodchips, get them hot, and push hydrogen over them under pressure. This makes something a bit like petroleum oil. But then you have heat, pressure, and dirty nasty oil that you have to refine into something like gasoline and/or diesel. Or you can squeeze the nasty tar into pellets and run them later in a wood gasifier. Not the worst idea, but the biomass component is going to be huge compared to the electrical component.
Yet another possibility is methanol. You need CO or CO2 and you put this with hydrogen and it converts into methanol. You need 350C (600F) temperature and 100bar (1500psi) pressure, and you need to make sure your CO / CO2 is very clean, because you push it through a catalyst and if there is any contamination, it will most likely destroy the catalyst. Furthermore, this reaction is exothermic so you need to cool the reactor as it's running, or else it will overheat and melt down the catalyst. The requirement to clean the CO / CO2 is hellish because you're probably gonna get them from burning something.
A cousin of methanol is ammonia. Unlike methanol, ammonia is a gas but it can be compressed at about 10 bar (150 PSI) which is similar to propane gas, so you can store it in cheap large tanks. If you cool it to -33C you can also store it in a bucket. Liquified ammonia stores about 3.15kWh per liter.
Ammonia is the standard way that hydrogen is bought and sold. Nobody wants to truck around giant steel tanks, nor chill hydrogen to near absolute zero just so it will liquify, so unless it's being delivered by pipeline (like natural gas), hydrogen is usually sold in the form of ammonia.
Getting gaseous hydrogen back from ammonia requires a process called cracking. This requires heat input of about 5% of the energy of the hydrogen that will be made. This stuff is all commercially available and you can hope to get a 3kw generator system (cracker and fuel cell) for less than $20k.
You can also burn ammonia in an engine. It has an octane rating of over 130 so the knock resistance is heroic. A common strategy is to run ammonia in the intake of a diesel engine while keeping the diesel injection just to start off the burn. Some people have gotten the diesel consumption down to 5% of the total energy used by the engine. Because of ammonia's slow burn rate, you can improve performance a lot by injecting some hydrogen with the ammonia. One study saw 48% thermal efficiency burning ammonia with a little hydrogen (which you can get from a cracker). Internal combustion is an interesting direction if you need a lot of power because while fuel cells are more efficient, they are also quite expensive (thousands of $ for a 3kw fuel cell generator). That said, ammonia engines release a ton of NOx pollution because they're burning nitrogen.
If you need 100kw (133 horsepower), use an engine, if you need a few tens of kWh per day (normal home power usage) use a fuel cell and run it 24/7 to keep your batteries charged in the winter.
So in short, ammonia is theoretically a pretty good deal.
The traditional way to make ammonia is Habier-Bosch process (450C, 200bar / 3000 psi, and catalyst). You don't need to burn biomass for carbon, you just need nitrogen and the air is full of it. But, you need to make sure NO OXYGEN gets into the catalyst, so you still need cleaning. It's also exothermic so you need to keep it from overheating...
1/2
#note1047…y6ch

2026-09-27 11:25:42 GMT

- reply

Imagine you own a plane and primarily you like to just get up in the air, see the sights, and fool around. You land at your home airport every time and you pretty much never use gas except just to have the engine running during takeoff and landing in case of emergency.
This already saves you MOST of the fuel cost of owning a plane.
Then once every three months, you go on a few hour trip. You can use batteries to shave off the first hour of flight, and when you arrive, you could just take them out and charge them at a charger at the hotel. Just put the wire in through the window of your rental car. There is also charging at SOME airports so you could potentially charge them there.
If you're on a really long flight, or you don't think charging will be available, you can just use gasoline the entire time and keep your batteries as an emergency reserve. You've already saved so much money that you don't really even care if it costs $1000 to go cross-country...

2026-09-26 22:09:10 GMT

- reply

Yeah and it was decently funny (for the time). I loved when they tried to see if they could feed discount canned food to people in a gourmet restaurant and have their waiter bullshit it up into being the greatest thing ever...
BTW this kind of talking up the food that you see in American French cuisine, never happens in actual France.

2026-09-26 21:41:45 GMT

- reply

The concept is that you own all of the battery modules, you just decide how many to stick in the airplane and how many to leave at home based on what you're doing that day. Also since they're modular, you can take them all out when you're done for the day and charge them at home rather than figuring out charging at the airport - which is typically where you leave your plane...

2026-09-26 21:20:21 GMT

- reply

I have a long term vision for a really neat little airplane. You take the Velocity XL and you put an electric motor on the front.
Then you have slots in the wings for battery modules. And you can choose how many batteries you're going to run with. Each battery weighs 50lb so you're adding batteries based on the weight of the payload so it's always at max weight.
Then you also have an engine in the back (as normal), for this you use a Yamaha Sidewinder engine which is a 998cc turbocharged 4stroke snowmobile engine. It's light as fuck and it's rated for 180hp (if you're insane you can push this well into the 300s).
So now you've got 2 entire propulsion systems, if either one dies, you can still land, at an airport.
Light payload short flight -> Lots of batteries, little gas.
Heavy payload short flight -> Less batteries, more gas (because batteries aren't enough)
Light payload long flight -> Some batteries, lots of gas
Heavy payload long flight -> Minimum batteries, maximum gas
And this is something you just configure by adding and removing batteries and fuel.
So the propeller hub comes in at the back on the engine, because you want to adjust pitch between takeoff and cruise.

2026-09-26 19:58:55 GMT

- reply

I went for it, I'm about 99% of the way to filing, I just need to do a couple more reviews and change some wording...

2026-09-25 13:54:23 GMT

- reply

That one is fun if you make a point of NOT looking anything up and fuzzing out the math mentally.

2026-09-25 13:08:40 GMT

- reply

> Your New Haskell Program Sir, Provably Correct
> ./a.out
> Segmentation fault

2026-09-25 12:51:23 GMT

- reply

One would imagine that given AI can eliminate most of the headache of writing the code, the best language would be the one where it's hardest to have a bug. So ADA and Haskell both come to mind as potentially interesting...

2026-09-25 09:15:19 GMT

- reply

It was said in the past that they were agents of the Bank of England. That would indeed explain where they came up with their dramatic wealth - the BoE has a very logical origin story.
The Rothschild origin story about the Frankfurt coin dealer who just happened to make it big is pretty weak IMO.
However, if Epstein "represents the Rothschilds" then that means they're still in business. If so, are they still BoE agents? Did they spin off on their own? Were they ever BoE agents? Did they find a new patron?
Every question spawns more questions :|

2026-09-25 09:09:27 GMT

- reply

How do you get to be the king's servant?
Be loyal, discrete, hard-working, and utterly incapable of ever overthrowing him. So being dramatically unpopular with the countryfolk is a very important qualification.
Also if you can't reproduce then he knows you have no bloodline to care about, hence Eunuchs, but that's another story.
In any case, if my understanding is right and Jews were royal servants in the past, this bolsters the "Front Man" hypothesis.
Though, when is the agent acting for the principle and when is he acting for himself? How do you know if a servant overthrew his master and took over the castle? You don't... So that make my hypothesis weaker ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

2026-09-25 08:59:23 GMT

- reply

Is it not correct that the reason they had said privileges at that time is because they were servants to the king (e.g. tax collectors) ?

2026-09-25 08:34:03 GMT

- reply

Like I said to Bernard, it doesn't necessarily matter what I think because the internet is gonna eventually get to the bottom of it anyway, and in a couple of decades everyone's gonna wear the reputation they made for themselves.
> How the world would be different if that was the case, or if Jews were not the fall guys?
Not massively because even when someone is a front man, he's still got his own interests and will certainly be conspiring to feather his own bed. You look at the Indian tech CEOs and nobody's really asserting that Indians control the US, but they still project a lot of power, e.g. replacing an entire workforce with Indians... But here's a few things off the top of my head:
* Gates would have been groveling to Epstein.
* Everyone at the Jekyll Island meeting would have been Jewish.
* No Indian tech CEOs b/c another ethnic group = competition.
* SBF would not be in prison because he would have made a phone call.
* Epstein story would have stayed out of the media
* Chabad NYC tunnel story would have stayed out of the media