Nuclear plants plants "change gears" at 3-5% of their nameplate capacity. https://www.oecd-nea.org/upload/docs/application/pdf/2021-12...
1,824 karma · joined March 6, 2023
Capable of changing power output at 3-5% of nameplate capacity per minute. https://www.oecd-nea.org/upload/docs/application/pdf/2021-12...
There is a strategy beyond populism and FUD?
> Overbuilding renewables capacity so it can still provide enough even at lower efficiency.
And the cost of overbuilding is?
> And last but not least the EU hydrogen strategy, where a transport and storage network will be built similar to that for natural gas
Again, some future magical solution with unspecified costs
Very limited in where you can build it
> grid scale batteries
Don't exist. You severely underestimate the needs of the grid
> syngas
Aka burning furl and calling it carbon neutral. And have they passed the 1MW mark
If there was no baseload you wouldn't care if intermittent power generation went to zero.
Because "Base load is the minimum level of demand on an electrical supply system over 24 h."
They are not, of course.
And I wonder who will take care of peak air conditioning on a summer night?
Right now electricity maps shows that France produces 60% of electricity from nuclear, imports zero from Germany, and exports 6% of generated electricity to UK.
Also right now Germany generates 26% from coal and 9% from gas.
No, no they didn't. The shutdown due to "lack of water" (which is also bullshit) affected 0.18% of power generation.
The shutdowns happened due to planned maintenance when French government finally got its head out of its ass long enough to realize that power plants need to be maintained.
And you have sources on this except opinions and FUD?
It should be 80ch (or 70ch), not pixels
> You don’t write tuples without parentheses
> Same for the precedence rules of expression. You just use begin and end for blocks
This is exactly what I wrote, but in a Stockholm-syndrome-y way.
> The author is just complaining that you have to mark blocks like in every language.
He points out a real ambiguity in the syntax where the parser literally parses the same-looking and same-behaving statements completely differently.
Sure it's solved by "you just write begin-end" workaround that you internalise. Or it could be solved at the syntax level (like erlang and elixir)
If. Would. etc.
It could also not grow, and slip back to losing billions.
> Companies are valued at profits for 10+ years.
Wat?
I couldn't care less to calculate it this time. It fluctuates around the same number YoY
> The ad revenue from Google properties, not from the display ad network, is up.
And that somehow makes it less of an ad revenue? Or different? Or something?
And for no good reason (pun not intended).
And they were doing quite well, and influencing OCaml in good and meaningful ways (like improving error reporting).
Unless it's a library that has been around for a while and is probably hosted at Apache.
There was a marked shift in 2010s in expectations, and now we expect libraries and code to be somewhat well-documented. For older libraries... well, it's often "here's a dump of autogenerated reference files with maybe a blob of prefacing text at the top. Good luck."
They still are. You just internalize them. Progammers are the world's greatest masochists with the world's biggest Stockholm syndromes, and we don't like to admit it.
For example, his pain points about syntax ambiguity are absolutely valid, and true. However, when you "use the language every day" you learn to avoid those constructs and extract them into separate functions for example because "that's how it's always done, and it's a nice little quirk of the language".
As with anything that is not ads, it's losing money.
So:
- ad revenue is down (that's 80-90% of all of their revenue)
- all their expenses are way up (cost of revenue 1B up, R&D expenses 2.3 B up, sales and marketing costs ~0.7 B up)
- "other bets" losses increased are 400 million higher YoY
- unallocated corporate losses are 3B higher YoY
But google cloud (which includes both GCP and Google Workspace) is 191 million in profit. Must be nice, I guess.
I also use it everyday, and it's a major step back from what it was prior to version 8.
> If you only listen to the people who are talking, you'll get a very distorted picture of how your customer base feels.
On the other hand very few people voice their opinion to begin with whether they like something or not. To assume you don't have to listen to loud voices is also dangerous.
For example, in the beginning of version 8 they removed categories from the sidebar because "it gives more space to list your vaults and acounts". The only way to access categories (and search within them) was to click somewhere in search and do some contortions like typing something along the line of "in:Identities"
People complained, loudly. They brought the categories back.
They didn't have a proper sorting of items in the lists, always defaulting to "Recent only".
People complained, loudly. They brought the sorting back.
There are multiple idiotic decisions in the UI still. I guess we should stop complaining because "it's fine"?
For no reason other than they don't understand what UX is anymore they now have `Edit -> Find` that behaves almost like the previous version's search did.
It's exactly the opposite of what you wrote. Mac users abhor the software that turns shitty. However, as on all modern platforms, there's no choice: all software is turning shitty.
Worse than that. They had completely dysfunctional internal processes that they decided to solve by going people shiny toys to play with (Rust and Electron): https://blog.1password.com/1password-8-the-story-so-far/
BTW, Spotify pays 70% of its revenue to copyright holders. How much more does he want Spotify to pay? Note: it's 70% of revenue, not profit.