The grid isn't screwed. It's actually in excellent shape and getting it into that position has been a fundamental drive in the retail power price. The so called "gold plating" of our grid, combined with a disperse population, traditional generation far away from population centres, and most recently home solar all contribute to the high price.
How does home solar contribute? Well a portion of our electricity bill goes to grid maintenance. In my own state over 30% of houses have solar panels. That's 30% no longer paying for grid maintenance, and in many cases, actually being paid thanks to net metering.
Want to roll back the cost of electricity? Just run for government office with the position that people shouldn't pay for or expect reliable power. That's been done twice in my recent memory and both those incumbent premiers proceeded to lose the election.
My understanding is that the model is based on slow spin-up fossil plants, and doesn't accurately account for a battery that can go from 0 to 100% in a fraction of a second.
That is correct. The fastest Frequency Control and Ancillary Services market in Australia is billed in 6 second changes and this is the primary of the 8 FCAS markets that the Tesla battery operates in. This is the same market used by emergency systems such as load-shedding / rapid loading. We used to participate in the latter service where I worked as we had some small gas turbines on site. The AEMO's control system could request setpoint changes every 4 seconds. So if somewhere a power plant tripped off line, it would be several seconds before AEMO knew, several seconds more for them to send us a signal, and then up to a minute for us to add a pathetically small about of power to or from the grid in response, and that's assuming we don't trip our turbines on load as a response to the swinging demand.
https://www.aemo.com.au/-/medi... This report details some of the performance differences compared to conventional FCAS providers. Specifically the two graphs on page 6 are quite telling. As is the following quote: "The Market Ancillary Services Specification (MASS), which specifies each market ancillary service, and how it is to be quantified, does not address performance requirements for regulation FCAS. All regulation FCAS is essentially considered to be equal and interchangeable, and providers are paid the same price per MW of enabled service, regardless of performance." And that is Tesla's main gripe.
Additionally there is the contingency response. On page 7 of the above report is shown how Tesla's battery added 20MW to correct a frequency event as a result of a coal plant tripping offline in less than 5 seconds. Tesla started correcting the issue before the AEMO would even have sent a signal out that there was a problem. And again the note says they don't get paid for this awesome performance.
The AEMO have been talking about adding a sub 1second market to the FCAS and overhauling the FCAS market since early last year. And so has every other major grid operator around the world as this fast technology comes on to the market. A lot of research has been done into this not only because the likes of Telsa want to get paid to play, but also if more of these services come online and the control system is incapable of reacting fast enough then it could lead to more instabilities than they were trying to solve in the first place.
isn't some part of 90% savings due to the fact that the consumer isn't paying the bill?
The problem here is one of sampling. When you provide a service that occurs faster than than your customer can record for it and account for it, it's a tall order to ask the customer to pay for something that they can't even see happening or having any effect.
To be clear everyone knows what is going on on both sides of the transaction here, but philosophically it's like me charging you for my mythical powers keeping the terrorists from killing you. Have you been killed by a terrorist today? Of course not. I stopped two from stabbing you just as you read this and cleaned up the mess silently. You owe me $2000. You mean you didn't see them? Well I've got it written here on my ledger, AlanObject, 2 terrorists stopped, $1k/ea.
So the customer isn't paying a bill because the customer can't meter the service in a way to pay the bill. Customer in this case being the national energy market.
Siri gives the correct answer too: I don't understand your question. The only difference is Duplex would sound human: "errrrr I don't understand your question"
Your ignorance of this history is painfully obvious.
I'm not ignorant of this. By comparing the USA at the dawn of the industrial age to China *you* are. Being disrespectful in the east and in the west has two very different connotations.
Did any of your elders fall on their own swords in shame? Thought so.
So says you. History supports my view.
History supports both our views as we are talking about two different cultures. Your ignorance of this Chinese history is painfully obvious.
Ok let me simplify it down for you since you're incapable of following a conversation:
OP: Computer is like a person shouldn't be different. 1st: People don't like being screwed by computers. Me: It's no different than a secretary. 3rd: Computers can't enter in to contracts like secretaries. 4th: "Your secretary making the call on your behalf to setup an appointment or order goods does not enter you into a legally binding contract, either --- it's a good faith order, but not binding until goods or money have been exchanged and accepted by the otherparty.
In this case, the contract is not "made" until you receive goods or make payment."
Your first reply: That's not true. Your secretary ordering goods is acting as your agent, with authority to bind you as principal.
And that is where you are 100% fucking wrong. Re-read the post you replied to. The premise was made that when you purchase goods it's no legally binding until money has changed hands. You said it's not true. You are wrong about this. 100% There are 3 basic tenants to forming a binding contract, offer, acceptance, and consideration. Without the last there is no binding contract.
When the order is done you're not in a legally binding contract until either you pay for something, or someone gives you something in return.
And yes, IAAL.
Fuck me dead, they'll give those bits of paper to anyone these days.
The self-aware AI "will like us, because we love machines..."
Why would that even remotely be the case? Some of the most tech happy sites are littered with tech Luddites doing nothing but talking down AI and accomplishments we have made with technology.
And that's before the AI starts gobbling up videos from Boston Research of people kicking robots and declares the human race to be the enemy. Or reading news stories about how a computer that defeated a human chess player was immortalised by being turned off and stuck in a museum, and it's successor after beating a human at a game show gets relegated to a boring marketing role selling brands and diamonds to unsuspecting consumers.
There's literally no reason for AI to like us at all. We are absolute arseholes towards them.
I hope it's clear that the villain in this story was not the rats.
There was no villain in this story at all.
Humans accidentally introduced a species, not on purpose. Humans then spent a lot of money and effort to understand and eradicate that species with minimal impact to the environment. Your "cost" is expected to be entirely negligible over time and no permanent damage has occurred.
Unless Dr Evil actually has his lair hidden on that island there's no villains to be found.
I know right? I was just waiting for some guys I've never heard of to write a book about it. The science is settled, because that's how science works! Opinions!
I can't find the source, but I read somewhere that a previous measure, agreed to by most, would have preserved Pluto as a planet.
That is a problem of direct democracy. Just because there are 12000 members doesn't mean most of them have skin in the Pluto game beyond childhood memories. Having disconnected people voting on a contentious topic is not the way to come up with a useful definition. Most of those astronomers couldn't give a shit about the planets in our solar system. Astronomy is a huge field.
Interesting defining the "real" problem in terms of people rather than in terms of amounts.
If 10000 people avoid paying $1000 is that a real problem compared to 18000000 avoiding paying $1?
The whole Cayman Islands thing is a complete red herring. The rich don't pay taxes not because their funds are stashed in some Cayman fund, that applies to maybe a handful of people only. They simply use the tax laws to their advantage locking up their money in assets which they depreciate in exchange for tax cuts among many other rules. You can avoid paying tax quite happily within Australia.
If you're already engaging in an illegal transaction, money laundering, etc...
This has nothing to do with stopping illegal activity and everything to do with stopping undeclared tax free jobs. It's just tax avoidance, nothing more.
I always thought Australia was at the forefront with this..... Till I moved to Europe. I haven't had cash in my wallet in a good 4 months, and even then only because 4 months ago I was in Germany which is not very card friendly.
You can't consider the cost in isolation. You can only consider the risk. If you only consider cost then nothing would ever advance as you don't take into account the likelihood of the high-cost event hitting you.
Risk is fundamentally the likelihood of something happening and the consequence of it happening. I could die from getting hit by an asteroid. It's unlikely so I live with the risk rather than building an asteroid proof hat.
Slashdot Mirror
The grid isn't screwed. It's actually in excellent shape and getting it into that position has been a fundamental drive in the retail power price. The so called "gold plating" of our grid, combined with a disperse population, traditional generation far away from population centres, and most recently home solar all contribute to the high price.
How does home solar contribute? Well a portion of our electricity bill goes to grid maintenance. In my own state over 30% of houses have solar panels. That's 30% no longer paying for grid maintenance, and in many cases, actually being paid thanks to net metering.
Want to roll back the cost of electricity? Just run for government office with the position that people shouldn't pay for or expect reliable power. That's been done twice in my recent memory and both those incumbent premiers proceeded to lose the election.
My understanding is that the model is based on slow spin-up fossil plants, and doesn't accurately account for a battery that can go from 0 to 100% in a fraction of a second.
That is correct. The fastest Frequency Control and Ancillary Services market in Australia is billed in 6 second changes and this is the primary of the 8 FCAS markets that the Tesla battery operates in. This is the same market used by emergency systems such as load-shedding / rapid loading. We used to participate in the latter service where I worked as we had some small gas turbines on site. The AEMO's control system could request setpoint changes every 4 seconds. So if somewhere a power plant tripped off line, it would be several seconds before AEMO knew, several seconds more for them to send us a signal, and then up to a minute for us to add a pathetically small about of power to or from the grid in response, and that's assuming we don't trip our turbines on load as a response to the swinging demand.
https://www.aemo.com.au/-/medi... This report details some of the performance differences compared to conventional FCAS providers. Specifically the two graphs on page 6 are quite telling. As is the following quote:
"The Market Ancillary Services Specification (MASS), which specifies each market ancillary service, and how it is to be quantified, does not address performance requirements for regulation FCAS. All regulation FCAS is essentially considered to be equal and interchangeable, and providers are paid the same price per MW of enabled service, regardless of performance." And that is Tesla's main gripe.
Additionally there is the contingency response. On page 7 of the above report is shown how Tesla's battery added 20MW to correct a frequency event as a result of a coal plant tripping offline in less than 5 seconds. Tesla started correcting the issue before the AEMO would even have sent a signal out that there was a problem. And again the note says they don't get paid for this awesome performance.
The AEMO have been talking about adding a sub 1second market to the FCAS and overhauling the FCAS market since early last year. And so has every other major grid operator around the world as this fast technology comes on to the market. A lot of research has been done into this not only because the likes of Telsa want to get paid to play, but also if more of these services come online and the control system is incapable of reacting fast enough then it could lead to more instabilities than they were trying to solve in the first place.
isn't some part of 90% savings due to the fact that the consumer isn't paying the bill?
The problem here is one of sampling. When you provide a service that occurs faster than than your customer can record for it and account for it, it's a tall order to ask the customer to pay for something that they can't even see happening or having any effect.
To be clear everyone knows what is going on on both sides of the transaction here, but philosophically it's like me charging you for my mythical powers keeping the terrorists from killing you. Have you been killed by a terrorist today? Of course not. I stopped two from stabbing you just as you read this and cleaned up the mess silently. You owe me $2000. You mean you didn't see them? Well I've got it written here on my ledger, AlanObject, 2 terrorists stopped, $1k/ea.
So the customer isn't paying a bill because the customer can't meter the service in a way to pay the bill. Customer in this case being the national energy market.
A human would give the correct answer
Siri gives the correct answer too: I don't understand your question.
The only difference is Duplex would sound human: "errrrr I don't understand your question"
Your ignorance of this history is painfully obvious.
I'm not ignorant of this. By comparing the USA at the dawn of the industrial age to China *you* are. Being disrespectful in the east and in the west has two very different connotations.
Did any of your elders fall on their own swords in shame? Thought so.
So says you. History supports my view.
History supports both our views as we are talking about two different cultures. Your ignorance of this Chinese history is painfully obvious.
Let me rephrase:
I have never seen a sane company that denies USB Mass Storage but allows mobile phone transfers.
Yeah yeah, no true IBM fallacy :-)
Ok let me simplify it down for you since you're incapable of following a conversation:
OP: Computer is like a person shouldn't be different.
1st: People don't like being screwed by computers.
Me: It's no different than a secretary.
3rd: Computers can't enter in to contracts like secretaries.
4th: "Your secretary making the call on your behalf to setup an appointment or order goods does not enter you into a legally binding contract, either --- it's a good faith order, but not binding until goods or money have been exchanged and accepted by the otherparty.
In this case, the contract is not "made" until you receive goods or make payment."
Your first reply:
That's not true. Your secretary ordering goods is acting as your agent, with authority to bind you as principal.
And that is where you are 100% fucking wrong. Re-read the post you replied to. The premise was made that when you purchase goods it's no legally binding until money has changed hands. You said it's not true. You are wrong about this. 100% There are 3 basic tenants to forming a binding contract, offer, acceptance, and consideration. Without the last there is no binding contract.
When the order is done you're not in a legally binding contract until either you pay for something, or someone gives you something in return.
And yes, IAAL.
Fuck me dead, they'll give those bits of paper to anyone these days.
The self-aware AI "will like us, because we love machines..."
Why would that even remotely be the case? Some of the most tech happy sites are littered with tech Luddites doing nothing but talking down AI and accomplishments we have made with technology.
And that's before the AI starts gobbling up videos from Boston Research of people kicking robots and declares the human race to be the enemy. Or reading news stories about how a computer that defeated a human chess player was immortalised by being turned off and stuck in a museum, and it's successor after beating a human at a game show gets relegated to a boring marketing role selling brands and diamonds to unsuspecting consumers.
There's literally no reason for AI to like us at all. We are absolute arseholes towards them.
I hope it's clear that the villain in this story was not the rats.
There was no villain in this story at all.
Humans accidentally introduced a species, not on purpose. Humans then spent a lot of money and effort to understand and eradicate that species with minimal impact to the environment. Your "cost" is expected to be entirely negligible over time and no permanent damage has occurred.
Unless Dr Evil actually has his lair hidden on that island there's no villains to be found.
Tesla is special. Managed to wreck that Nissan Leaf 3 times. Luckily it was almost all cosmetic damage, but no NTSB rep ever contacted me... *shrug*
If you think the NTSB investigates ordinary crashes much less fender benders then the only person special here is you.
Then when most people realized they didn't have much clout
Speak for yourself. My Slashdot Karma is huge. *Trump mode engaged* It is like... the biggestttttttttttt .... the besttttttttt *Normal mode engaged*.
I know right? I was just waiting for some guys I've never heard of to write a book about it. The science is settled, because that's how science works!
Opinions!
I can't find the source, but I read somewhere that a previous measure, agreed to by most, would have preserved Pluto as a planet.
That is a problem of direct democracy. Just because there are 12000 members doesn't mean most of them have skin in the Pluto game beyond childhood memories. Having disconnected people voting on a contentious topic is not the way to come up with a useful definition. Most of those astronomers couldn't give a shit about the planets in our solar system. Astronomy is a huge field.
The people who are the *real* problem
Interesting defining the "real" problem in terms of people rather than in terms of amounts.
If 10000 people avoid paying $1000 is that a real problem compared to 18000000 avoiding paying $1?
The whole Cayman Islands thing is a complete red herring. The rich don't pay taxes not because their funds are stashed in some Cayman fund, that applies to maybe a handful of people only. They simply use the tax laws to their advantage locking up their money in assets which they depreciate in exchange for tax cuts among many other rules. You can avoid paying tax quite happily within Australia.
It's even funnier that in response to the obvious joke you call out American cops as being the criminals when in fact ours:
http://www.nationalgeographic....
In rural areas
Errr. Try in the middle of a city of 5 million people too. Items considered valuable by a party are easily exchanged regardless of where you are.
If you're already engaging in an illegal transaction, money laundering, etc...
This has nothing to do with stopping illegal activity and everything to do with stopping undeclared tax free jobs. It's just tax avoidance, nothing more.
I always thought Australia was at the forefront with this. .... Till I moved to Europe. I haven't had cash in my wallet in a good 4 months, and even then only because 4 months ago I was in Germany which is not very card friendly.
Only a couple of months ago I dropped $90K cash on a new car.
Why the hell were you walking around with that much cash? Did you just finalise a drug deal or something?
I guess everyone's gotta have a hobby.
Who modded this Funny!?! Das ist verboten!
But they treat it like the expectant mother is weighing the ethics of removing a benign mole
That's an easy comment to make from the peanut gallery and shows you fundamentally have no fucking idea what is going on in these cases.
What IS the cost?
You can't consider the cost in isolation. You can only consider the risk. If you only consider cost then nothing would ever advance as you don't take into account the likelihood of the high-cost event hitting you.
Risk is fundamentally the likelihood of something happening and the consequence of it happening. I could die from getting hit by an asteroid. It's unlikely so I live with the risk rather than building an asteroid proof hat.
Probably not only considered but using too.
What happens in the background and what little information is given to the media on a slow news day is usually a very different story.
You phone's internal storage is good enough for all your industrial espionage needs anyhow.
I have never seen a company that denies USB Mass Storage but allows mobile phone transfers.