the goal of the tax credits was to incentivize Americans to shift to EVs. By that measure, the job is far from finished. It never made sense to me that the credit phased out on a per-automaker basis
I prefer the invisible-hand approach (yes, I know), so I never liked consumer-end subsidies. We should have subsidized the manufacturers.
When you buy a car, you buy a $12,000 used Chevy Volt. The other $25,000 is useful for other things.
Well, wait, if you buy a new Tesla, you get $7,500 from the Government. If you don't buy the Tesla, you lose $7,500 when the subsidies go away, so now there's an incentive to buy the new Tesla. Demand goes up, and of course the manufacturers raise the price to take that subsidy for themselves.
So...you can't sell a $30,000 car for $25,000. It won't work. You need to sell above cost or you'll be out of business.
Well, for each actual sale, we could give the manufacturers $7,500. That $35,000 car is now a $27,500 car. It's competing with $30,000 cars, so people who were looking for a new $30,000 car are now looking at this $27,500 car priced competitively and with competitive features. Lower price, same demand, higher quantity demanded.
That's how you get the market to solve the problem. At this point I'd say we should implement such a subsidy.
2 if his trade dispute with China puts us in a recession.
This administration inherited a strong recovery economy and went on a two-year cocaine binge. It's been a house of cards for a while now, and it's coming down. Of course we're going into recession.
The Apple guidance in a way, is a small window to how tariffs are actually hurting the Chinese economy.
Apple and Tesla are manufacturing in China for export to the Chinese and European market.
China is buying soy from Brazil, and I see no reason they should switch back to America ever. Brazilian soy production increases and market price equilibrium with United States farmers has displaced the American export market. China could go to Venezuela next for oil.
People don't realize that shirts are made in China with cotton grown in Egypt or America. Those northern Sud states can produce cotton just as well, with the right technology, and China may end up giving them the boost they need to become major cotton exporters. That's another lost export market.
China isn't trying to see who can bleed more without passing out; they're simply cutting America's feeding tubes.
The fertilizer is fine; the pesticides, less so, although if you're using pesticides you damned well better use synthetics if you care anything about the environment. The tillage damages soil structure.
I'm surrounded by coffee shops and breweries, so I've been considering collecting the spent grounds and grains, growing oyster mushrooms, enriching the spent substrate with redworms, and then selling the worm castings as top dressing for gardens and farms. It'd be a massive, massive amount of highly-enriched fertilizer, though, unless the worms and mushrooms reduce the mass significantly.
Wouldn't putting it on the grid cause the power load to fall, thus reducing how much power you're consuming? Meanwhile you still need your night time base generation, so running off batteries at night is inefficient.
Solar on your house is just daytime generation, and would displace load. When using batteries to store solar, actual consumption at peak is higher than just putting the extra power on the grid.
The force of gravity acts vertically and the normal force acts perpendicularly on an object on a slope. This creates a resultant force proportional to the mass of the object. A heavier object accelerates down a slope faster.
When rolling back up the next slope, rolling resistance comes into play. Heavier cars have to run tires at higher pressure due to tire load, so don't have proportionally-higher rolling resistance. Likewise, due to high-performance lubricants, the loss to frictional forces in drive bearings isn't proportional to kinetic energy stored. One of these things will have less loss going up the next hill.
It's kind of weird, but if you roll a pingpong ball and a steel ball down a half pipe, the steel ball goes further up the other side. You might also notice that a skateboard without a rider doesn't make it up the other side of a half pipe, to say the least, although the rider can shift center of mass to add driving force. We should put sandbags on the skateboards to see how that affects them.
battery is used to avoid selling power cheaply to the grid then buying it back for much higher prices later.
Here, we have to use net metering. If your power company could meter your power during the day and at night separately, billing on a one-hour cycle, then you'd sell wholesale and buy market, transmission, and taxes. Because it's metered once monthly, you're avoiding that.
Let's say you overgenerate 10kWh at 8 cent electricity, 11 cent transmission, and 3 cent taxes--21 cents per kWh. That's $2.10 you'd pay to buy it, but the utility pays you only 80 cents. Sounds like a rip-off, right?
Here's the thing: during the day, you overgenerate about 7kWh; then at night you consume 6.7kWh. Over the month, you've sold 210kWh to the grid and bought back 200kWh..
So, at these arbitrages, you'll pay $25.20, right? Not so. You're metered once per month, so your metering is for -10kWh at 8 cents, or a credit of $0.80.
Flip it the other way around--consume 210kWh and buy back 200kWh--and your metering is for 10kWh at 8 cents, plus transmission and taxes, totaling a cost of $2.10.
In some locales, the power company figures out the net metering annually, so if you have months when you overgenerate and other months where you net-consume, they balance them out.
On long timescales, net-overgeneration means you have to eventually sell it back (your battery would be full at some point) while net-consumption means you eventually have to consume (your battery will be empty at some point). A battery adds maintenance costs and additional consumption, rather than providing any kind of savings.
2,500kg electric car doesn't use a small, inefficient combustion engine (a larger, slower engine is much more efficient) to generate its power. For driving styles that don't suck down gasoline like crazy, the heavier car stores energy in its moving mass, then transfers about 2/3 of that back to battery during regenerative braking. The greater mass also helps with mildly-uneven ground, allowing the car to travel up hills more efficiently when the hills aren't that tall and the car is already moving at speed.
Extremely-heavy freight trains add another 3,000 tonnes of freight and can move at nearly 7mpg anyway, moving one tonne of freight roughly 475 miles per gallon. Your car doesn't weigh anything near two tonnes and I bet it doesn't get anywhere near 250mpg.
So being 2-3 times as heavy doesn't mean it's half or a third as efficient to move; meanwhile the generator (if not solar-wind-geothermal) is more-efficient, the electric motor is more-efficient, the car can coast uphill further on its momentum, and the car has regenerative braking to further improve on this base efficiency.
Most Federal administration is highly-efficient. Social Security's cost is under 1% of its funding; several of the welfare systems are below 4%, although TANF has a nearly 8% administrative overhead.
Solar without batteries uses the grid. Storage is inefficient; so is transmission. If you generate and someone half a mile away consumes, that's more-efficient than battery storage or than transmitting from the power station 15 miles away.
Because the grid net meters over long time spans, this is more economically-advantageous to the homeowner than using a battery.
I've been hoping for a RISC-V SOC excluding networking, with 1 core 4-way SMT (yes I know), SATA-III, and PCI-e. The PCI-e would allow manufacturers to add a discrete ethernet/wifi/bluetooth chip (some of us want no such thing on the board) and USB 3.1 controller (upgradeable by swapping the chip rather than redesigning the SOC); the headers on the board would be USB-C, of course.
With the new modular designs, it'd be easy to put the USB3.1 on the SOC and simply cut that part off and stamp in a USB4.0 or whatnot later. If you want some boards without networking, the two-chip design is probably less expensive than producing two types of SOC at every combination of frequency and RAM.
Digging into that module, it seems to allow you to "participate in a boobathon" and has a way for you to be the "winner"...I have no idea what this is.
You describe a thought experiment in which terrans define space as coordinates from inside space, then identify mass as bending that space to cause gravity; while martians define space by the path of gravity, in which mass doesn't bend space. Then you say that both of these can't be true, thus the terran explanation is impossible.
That's a blatant equivocation fallacy. Your resolution of this fallacy is akin to if I cut a tree branch and call it a meter, and you have an iron bar you call a meter, and these two things aren't the same length, thus you must be wrong. The problem is your thing is a meter and my thing is a yard.
Technology is awesome. Instead of spending 40 minutes cleaning up a photo, you can spend 40 minutes developing the product page. So much more gets done.
"UPDATE tbl_foo SET bar = 5, baz = 10 WHERE qux = 10" is a transaction: if two rows have qux=10, then you can set zero, one, or two of those rows to have bar=5, baz=10, or both. The database engine will ensure that zero or two rows are altered, and that all alterations are done to each row--or, specifically, that nothing is done or that everything is done.
With two rows matching qux=10 above, you have five possible outcomes (there are more possible states, but any order of operations will pass through exactly five of them), and you're guaranteed one of two outcomes (transaction).
PostgreSQL is superior to Oracle. MySQL is garbage, Microsoft SQL Server can't scale to what Oracle or Postgre can do, and MongoDB is a different type of indexing system entirely.
Oracle has many other business products built around their platform which may be superior to anything else out there, at least anything else gathered all in one place. Oracle's business, as you've noticed, is garbage, and their products are terrible; they simply don't have any competition I can immediately identify.
The best solution is that everyone just dumps their own rendering engines and all standardizes on Chromium at the core and then build something like the Linux foundation to support it independently.
What if we wrote a brand-new rendering engine in C#?
Slashdot Mirror
the goal of the tax credits was to incentivize Americans to shift to EVs. By that measure, the job is far from finished. It never made sense to me that the credit phased out on a per-automaker basis
I prefer the invisible-hand approach (yes, I know), so I never liked consumer-end subsidies. We should have subsidized the manufacturers.
When you buy a car, you buy a $12,000 used Chevy Volt. The other $25,000 is useful for other things.
Well, wait, if you buy a new Tesla, you get $7,500 from the Government. If you don't buy the Tesla, you lose $7,500 when the subsidies go away, so now there's an incentive to buy the new Tesla. Demand goes up, and of course the manufacturers raise the price to take that subsidy for themselves.
So...you can't sell a $30,000 car for $25,000. It won't work. You need to sell above cost or you'll be out of business.
Well, for each actual sale, we could give the manufacturers $7,500. That $35,000 car is now a $27,500 car. It's competing with $30,000 cars, so people who were looking for a new $30,000 car are now looking at this $27,500 car priced competitively and with competitive features. Lower price, same demand, higher quantity demanded.
That's how you get the market to solve the problem. At this point I'd say we should implement such a subsidy.
2 if his trade dispute with China puts us in a recession.
This administration inherited a strong recovery economy and went on a two-year cocaine binge. It's been a house of cards for a while now, and it's coming down. Of course we're going into recession.
The Apple guidance in a way, is a small window to how tariffs are actually hurting the Chinese economy.
Apple and Tesla are manufacturing in China for export to the Chinese and European market.
China is buying soy from Brazil, and I see no reason they should switch back to America ever. Brazilian soy production increases and market price equilibrium with United States farmers has displaced the American export market. China could go to Venezuela next for oil.
People don't realize that shirts are made in China with cotton grown in Egypt or America. Those northern Sud states can produce cotton just as well, with the right technology, and China may end up giving them the boost they need to become major cotton exporters. That's another lost export market.
China isn't trying to see who can bleed more without passing out; they're simply cutting America's feeding tubes.
There's always adiabatic CAES.
The fertilizer is fine; the pesticides, less so, although if you're using pesticides you damned well better use synthetics if you care anything about the environment. The tillage damages soil structure.
I'm surrounded by coffee shops and breweries, so I've been considering collecting the spent grounds and grains, growing oyster mushrooms, enriching the spent substrate with redworms, and then selling the worm castings as top dressing for gardens and farms. It'd be a massive, massive amount of highly-enriched fertilizer, though, unless the worms and mushrooms reduce the mass significantly.
Wouldn't putting it on the grid cause the power load to fall, thus reducing how much power you're consuming? Meanwhile you still need your night time base generation, so running off batteries at night is inefficient.
Solar on your house is just daytime generation, and would displace load. When using batteries to store solar, actual consumption at peak is higher than just putting the extra power on the grid.
The force of gravity acts vertically and the normal force acts perpendicularly on an object on a slope. This creates a resultant force proportional to the mass of the object. A heavier object accelerates down a slope faster.
When rolling back up the next slope, rolling resistance comes into play. Heavier cars have to run tires at higher pressure due to tire load, so don't have proportionally-higher rolling resistance. Likewise, due to high-performance lubricants, the loss to frictional forces in drive bearings isn't proportional to kinetic energy stored. One of these things will have less loss going up the next hill.
It's kind of weird, but if you roll a pingpong ball and a steel ball down a half pipe, the steel ball goes further up the other side. You might also notice that a skateboard without a rider doesn't make it up the other side of a half pipe, to say the least, although the rider can shift center of mass to add driving force. We should put sandbags on the skateboards to see how that affects them.
battery is used to avoid selling power cheaply to the grid then buying it back for much higher prices later.
Here, we have to use net metering. If your power company could meter your power during the day and at night separately, billing on a one-hour cycle, then you'd sell wholesale and buy market, transmission, and taxes. Because it's metered once monthly, you're avoiding that.
Let's say you overgenerate 10kWh at 8 cent electricity, 11 cent transmission, and 3 cent taxes--21 cents per kWh. That's $2.10 you'd pay to buy it, but the utility pays you only 80 cents. Sounds like a rip-off, right?
Here's the thing: during the day, you overgenerate about 7kWh; then at night you consume 6.7kWh. Over the month, you've sold 210kWh to the grid and bought back 200kWh..
So, at these arbitrages, you'll pay $25.20, right? Not so. You're metered once per month, so your metering is for -10kWh at 8 cents, or a credit of $0.80.
Flip it the other way around--consume 210kWh and buy back 200kWh--and your metering is for 10kWh at 8 cents, plus transmission and taxes, totaling a cost of $2.10.
In some locales, the power company figures out the net metering annually, so if you have months when you overgenerate and other months where you net-consume, they balance them out.
On long timescales, net-overgeneration means you have to eventually sell it back (your battery would be full at some point) while net-consumption means you eventually have to consume (your battery will be empty at some point). A battery adds maintenance costs and additional consumption, rather than providing any kind of savings.
2,500kg electric car doesn't use a small, inefficient combustion engine (a larger, slower engine is much more efficient) to generate its power. For driving styles that don't suck down gasoline like crazy, the heavier car stores energy in its moving mass, then transfers about 2/3 of that back to battery during regenerative braking. The greater mass also helps with mildly-uneven ground, allowing the car to travel up hills more efficiently when the hills aren't that tall and the car is already moving at speed.
Extremely-heavy freight trains add another 3,000 tonnes of freight and can move at nearly 7mpg anyway, moving one tonne of freight roughly 475 miles per gallon. Your car doesn't weigh anything near two tonnes and I bet it doesn't get anywhere near 250mpg.
So being 2-3 times as heavy doesn't mean it's half or a third as efficient to move; meanwhile the generator (if not solar-wind-geothermal) is more-efficient, the electric motor is more-efficient, the car can coast uphill further on its momentum, and the car has regenerative braking to further improve on this base efficiency.
Most Federal administration is highly-efficient. Social Security's cost is under 1% of its funding; several of the welfare systems are below 4%, although TANF has a nearly 8% administrative overhead.
Solar without batteries uses the grid. Storage is inefficient; so is transmission. If you generate and someone half a mile away consumes, that's more-efficient than battery storage or than transmitting from the power station 15 miles away.
Because the grid net meters over long time spans, this is more economically-advantageous to the homeowner than using a battery.
I was hoping they'd announce release under MIT license.
I've been hoping for a RISC-V SOC excluding networking, with 1 core 4-way SMT (yes I know), SATA-III, and PCI-e. The PCI-e would allow manufacturers to add a discrete ethernet/wifi/bluetooth chip (some of us want no such thing on the board) and USB 3.1 controller (upgradeable by swapping the chip rather than redesigning the SOC); the headers on the board would be USB-C, of course.
With the new modular designs, it'd be easy to put the USB3.1 on the SOC and simply cut that part off and stamp in a USB4.0 or whatnot later. If you want some boards without networking, the two-chip design is probably less expensive than producing two types of SOC at every combination of frequency and RAM.
Okay, so leave now, fag.
Software is built by some very classy people who are no doubt stable geniuses.
Digging into that module, it seems to allow you to "participate in a boobathon" and has a way for you to be the "winner"...I have no idea what this is.
The Weboob dev team sets off the asshole detector pretty hard.
What you apparently don't know is that existing DRAM is in an indeterminate state when powered up, and it has to be cleared before use anyway.
Kind of. RAM stays wherever it is at the time; the OS will wipe each allocated page on allocation.
Second-level memory is generally randomly-accessible memory.
You describe a thought experiment in which terrans define space as coordinates from inside space, then identify mass as bending that space to cause gravity; while martians define space by the path of gravity, in which mass doesn't bend space. Then you say that both of these can't be true, thus the terran explanation is impossible.
That's a blatant equivocation fallacy. Your resolution of this fallacy is akin to if I cut a tree branch and call it a meter, and you have an iron bar you call a meter, and these two things aren't the same length, thus you must be wrong. The problem is your thing is a meter and my thing is a yard.
Every telecom has exaggerated the size of their mobile network to a cute regulator at the bar here and there.
I've been for improved and free health care and social security
So go fix it all, or help me fix it all.
People sometimes see themselves in the situation having to sell their bodies for sex. And that *is* indeed a problem
I'll fix it one day.
Technology is awesome. Instead of spending 40 minutes cleaning up a photo, you can spend 40 minutes developing the product page. So much more gets done.
"UPDATE tbl_foo SET bar = 5, baz = 10 WHERE qux = 10" is a transaction: if two rows have qux=10, then you can set zero, one, or two of those rows to have bar=5, baz=10, or both. The database engine will ensure that zero or two rows are altered, and that all alterations are done to each row--or, specifically, that nothing is done or that everything is done.
With two rows matching qux=10 above, you have five possible outcomes (there are more possible states, but any order of operations will pass through exactly five of them), and you're guaranteed one of two outcomes (transaction).
PostgreSQL is superior to Oracle. MySQL is garbage, Microsoft SQL Server can't scale to what Oracle or Postgre can do, and MongoDB is a different type of indexing system entirely.
Oracle has many other business products built around their platform which may be superior to anything else out there, at least anything else gathered all in one place. Oracle's business, as you've noticed, is garbage, and their products are terrible; they simply don't have any competition I can immediately identify.
The best solution is that everyone just dumps their own rendering engines and all standardizes on Chromium at the core and then build something like the Linux foundation to support it independently.
What if we wrote a brand-new rendering engine in C#?