They did before they were available. They dug the Panama Canal with Steam Power and manpower. If you can build that, you can build almost anything.
Building raceways to use mechanical water power is even easier, and can help bootstrap the other technologies. Before steam, most factories were water powered. One such factory took in ore, and brass products like pots, pans, pins, wire, etc were produced.
I am in Sacramento, so we have a very high solar ratio for home rooftop, 4% of power last year came from PVs
There is no talk of charging us extra, they are still giving incentives on new homes and existing homes to add PV. But again, we are customer owned, not corporate.
And you have to have a pretty big system to get 100% of your power needs even in winter. Mine would have to be at least 4-5x bigger than it is, which would have cost $80 to $100K pre rebate. Winter output is just so low, in January, my system generates as little as 2KWh per day, 1/20 what it does in June/July
The best method is to get yourself under the Tier 1 cap, usually 1000Kwh per month. The rates are low because of the tier-ing system, and it pays itself back very quickly. So my bill is generally around $70 per month, which means I am at about 70% of Tier 1 usage.
Thank $DEITY I have SMUD. They are probably one of the few reasonable utilities in California. It is "customer owned" not a public corporation like PG&E
If you are producing more power during the day, the meter runs backwards. Or at least it should, they installed a second meter to measure what I generate so they could subtract it from what I used.
So if you generate 10 during the day, use 5, and then use 5 at night, your net cost is zero.
At least where I am, they pay me something like 3.2c, but it also runs my meter backwards. If I put an extra 10kwh on the grid during the day, I can draw that same 10kwh at night for net zero. And I "made" 32c.
I don't need a battery system, the "grid" acts as one, and with one year billing cycle, power I put on during the summer I can draw back in winter for no charge.
Rather than teach CS as a separate subject, teach the other subjects in the context of CS.
If the goal is to train the kids today for the jobs of tomorrow, there will be CS elements to every job, even if it is just using computers.
Case in point: Wife was an attendance clerk at the local school. When the new attendance tool was rolled out, it came with no pre-defined reports. Clerks were sent to a class, and then were expected to write their own reports.
Did not turn out well for a lot of clerks who have had zero CS experience, which was pretty much all of them. Including my wife, who went and found another job. From what she has heard, all the report writing has been done by two clerks out of about 100, who just happen to have some CS experience from previous jobs.
The article does not address or even mention the section about compelling interest of the government.
8(b)(1) if you even care.
The government just has to show compelling interest and that the interest is the least limiting.
"Racism" is pretty clearly a compelling government interest. And in the infamous "Wedding" examples, not being sued for refusing to take part in a private ceremony seems a pretty reasonable action.
The government, ACA included, should not be compelling actions, but preventing certain actions. I don't see how any valid law could or should be used to force someone to participate in something that has no compelling government interest. Refusing to deliver a cake, or taking photos, or presiding over a private marriage is not compelling.
Refusing to serve someone at a public accommodation is a compelling interest.
These laws don't give you the right to say "We don't serve your kind here." at a public accommodation. That would be a violation of the law. You are not exempt from complying with laws where the government has a compelling interest.
What is somewhat amusing is that when the Federal law that provides the same protection as these State laws was passed under Clinton, it was to allow the use of ceremonial drugs in Native American rituals and the Amish to avoid some building codes.
Render unto God what is due God, and render unto Caesar what is due Caesar.
Not exactly separation of church and state, but a recognition that they are not one and the same, and that following the Law (Caesar) is not automatically a sin.
That said, I really don't understand the controversy. Why should someone be forced to participate in a ceremony that is not something they agreed to be part of willingly?
Go somewhere else.
Refusing service at a place of public accommodation is not, nor has ever been, covered by these laws.
Slashdot Mirror
Doesn't have to, it is just economically efficient. More efficient than other options, like collecting biological waste products.
That is why they called human waste "nightsoil" in the past.
They did before they were available. They dug the Panama Canal with Steam Power and manpower. If you can build that, you can build almost anything.
Building raceways to use mechanical water power is even easier, and can help bootstrap the other technologies. Before steam, most factories were water powered.
One such factory took in ore, and brass products like pots, pans, pins, wire, etc were produced.
I KNEW it!
The Illuminati are controlling our new robot Overlords!
There is more than meets the eye.
I am in Sacramento, so we have a very high solar ratio for home rooftop, 4% of power last year came from PVs
There is no talk of charging us extra, they are still giving incentives on new homes and existing homes to add PV. But again, we are customer owned, not corporate.
And you have to have a pretty big system to get 100% of your power needs even in winter. Mine would have to be at least 4-5x bigger than it is, which would have cost $80 to $100K pre rebate. Winter output is just so low, in January, my system generates as little as 2KWh per day, 1/20 what it does in June/July
The best method is to get yourself under the Tier 1 cap, usually 1000Kwh per month. The rates are low because of the tier-ing system, and it pays itself back very quickly.
So my bill is generally around $70 per month, which means I am at about 70% of Tier 1 usage.
Thank $DEITY I have SMUD. They are probably one of the few reasonable utilities in California. It is "customer owned" not a public corporation like PG&E
You got that wrong.
If you are producing more power during the day, the meter runs backwards. Or at least it should, they installed a second meter to measure what I generate so they could subtract it from what I used.
So if you generate 10 during the day, use 5, and then use 5 at night, your net cost is zero.
The 3.2c they pay me is just gravy.
At least where I am, they pay me something like 3.2c, but it also runs my meter backwards. If I put an extra 10kwh on the grid during the day, I can draw that same 10kwh at night for net zero. And I "made" 32c.
I don't need a battery system, the "grid" acts as one, and with one year billing cycle, power I put on during the summer I can draw back in winter for no charge.
But perhaps not too late.
Rather than teach CS as a separate subject, teach the other subjects in the context of CS.
If the goal is to train the kids today for the jobs of tomorrow, there will be CS elements to every job, even if it is just using computers.
Case in point: Wife was an attendance clerk at the local school. When the new attendance tool was rolled out, it came with no pre-defined reports.
Clerks were sent to a class, and then were expected to write their own reports.
Did not turn out well for a lot of clerks who have had zero CS experience, which was pretty much all of them. Including my wife, who went and found another job.
From what she has heard, all the report writing has been done by two clerks out of about 100, who just happen to have some CS experience from previous jobs.
Pretty impressive for a transgendered goddess.
Do you know the key strategic weakness of the human race? The dead outnumber the living. - Missy
Yeah, but I don't remember them complaining when they diverted the Lava to miss villages using modern technology.
Isn't that thwarting the will of Pele?
Kinda kills the argument for offending the gods.
Vae Victis.
Soylent Green... it is MADE OF PEOPLE!
If people had heard it enough they would not have bothered to write the original article about a Consumer Group "bemoaning" the practice.
OF COURSE they are doing that, that is the whole point of providing a free product, to monetize you. Don't like it? Don't use it.
then you are the product.
No, we are just saying it is like the Oscars now.
8.6% registered Republicans in her district, city of San Fran. Dems could run a Dead Yellow Dog and it would still win.
Republicans could run anyone you care to name and lose.
They can't win with 30% of the registered voters, not even if they dug up Ronald Reagan.
Pelosi district is San Francisco. Registration is 8.6% Republican.
Democrats could run anyone and they will win. The Green candidate is a more viable candidate.
State is 30% Republican overall, so there is a slim-but-unlikely chance of getting a Statewide Republican candidate to win.
The article does not address or even mention the section about compelling interest of the government.
8(b)(1) if you even care.
The government just has to show compelling interest and that the interest is the least limiting.
"Racism" is pretty clearly a compelling government interest. And in the infamous "Wedding" examples, not being sued for refusing to take part in a private ceremony seems a pretty reasonable action.
The government, ACA included, should not be compelling actions, but preventing certain actions.
I don't see how any valid law could or should be used to force someone to participate in something that has no compelling government interest.
Refusing to deliver a cake, or taking photos, or presiding over a private marriage is not compelling.
Refusing to serve someone at a public accommodation is a compelling interest.
The line is drawn by the courts. You don't get automatic protection, you have to go to court to get it.
If the state can show compelling interest, then they are not protected.
These laws don't give you the right to say "We don't serve your kind here." at a public accommodation. That would be a violation of the law. You are not exempt from complying with laws where the government has a compelling interest.
What is somewhat amusing is that when the Federal law that provides the same protection as these State laws was passed under Clinton, it was to allow the use of ceremonial drugs in Native American rituals and the Amish to avoid some building codes.
Render unto God what is due God, and render unto Caesar what is due Caesar.
Not exactly separation of church and state, but a recognition that they are not one and the same, and that following the Law (Caesar) is not automatically a sin.
That said, I really don't understand the controversy. Why should someone be forced to participate in a ceremony that is not something they agreed to be part of willingly?
Go somewhere else.
Refusing service at a place of public accommodation is not, nor has ever been, covered by these laws.
*shrug*
he can say whatever he wants, he hasn't experienced it.
And the plural of anecdote is not data, so his opinion has the same weight as mine.