> That *is* the crux, isn't it? We need to think long term again.
I desperately want us to think long term again but I don't think it will happen until there's a big enough economic crash. It's gotta be REALLY bad. Something we can't print our way out of and leave as a mess for citizens 20 years from now.
> Trump
Yep which is why I think he'll green light private deployments of SMRs. Someone's gonna whisper in his ear that this is like the space race and he'll jump on it. After all, our entire economic trajectory collapses if we don't meet future energy demands (regardless of anyone's feelings about what the energy may be used for)
I didn't think that needing expertise for things like containment vessels was such a big deal, but perhaps it is??? Oh boy I can't wait until they just throw AI at the problem. Oil & gas is already doing this so why not let the amateur nuclear engineers give it a go? :laugh:
> What's your view on a TVA
I haven't looked too deeply into it. I will have to study this more. I'm aware of what it is but not the specifics of how it operates.
I was working within the jurisdiction of MISO. What's interesting to me looking at this map now is how the entire southeast USA is not under control by an oversight entity. In MISO, for example, if there was a shortage of generation capacity the MISO authorities could remotely control our generation plants and turn them on to ensure that there would not be any voltage drops / brownout/blackout events due to a sudden peak in demand or a plant failure elsewhere in the region. This is all post-Enron stuff AFAIK.
Anyway it's been nice picking your brain on this stuff, I'll keep an eye out for your posts.
> it's their attribution that's usually the hard part.
nah that's super easy with KYC on-ramps and off-ramps. It's difficult if they manage to cash out in a currency that is not the US Dollar or Euro. But then they have a whole new problem of how to turn that into something more useful.
yeah this is dumb they are complements and both clean
> Pretending that, to borrow a phrase, renewable energy will be "too cheap to meter" really grinds my gears.
People don't understand the economics of energy markets. If it's "too cheap to meter" because of negative prices the company generating is losing money. They're paying you for the energy you're receiving. So who is gonna pay their bills? Who is going to shoulder the costs to maintain the infrastructure? *crickets*
> Nuclear energy is proven to be extremely cheap in the long run,
But that's the problem. The modern world does not entertain long term investments. Everyone demands short term returns. Energy companies *today* struggle with long term funding for their projects, and they're a mere fraction of a new nuclear plant. (note: the American model is likely quite different than EU which has more state intervention. In the USA because they're a natural monopoly the regulations mean they're only allowed to charge enough to recoup their infrastructure investment costs and they have to carefully figure out how to do this over a long period of time and weather the economic cycles)
If someone can show that you can deploy new nuclear plants without any government-backed loans or subsidies to cover its build out and long term maintenance I'm all for it. But that doesn't seem to be the reality which is why I'm hoping we get an SMR breakthrough and we can quickly deploy cheaper, smaller generation plants where they are needed most. We've gotta turn off the money printer and force the markets to solve this. Let Meta, Apple, Oracle, Amazon, etc throw their trillions of dollars at the problem privately. At least it's better they burn their money on this problem than other nefarious things.
> We will not, I repeat NOT, be able to power many countries in Europe with solar and wind alone.
oh yeah, Europe is in a bad situation. No doubt.
Meanwhile:
China:
>> New figures show the pace of its clean energy transition is roughly the equivalent of installing five large-scale nuclear power plants worth of renewables every week.
and USA, slowly but surely:
>> The US power grid has recently undergone a significant transformation, adding battery storage equivalent to 20 nuclear reactors in just the past four years.
We just can't build reactors that fast.
Australia desperately wants nuclear too but they can't as they have almost zero trained engineers in the country to operate it.
so I just don't see it happening, but we absolutely need the stable base load that nuclear can provide.
@briankrebs@cybeardjm@xdydx the FBI reportedly loves crypto especially bitcoin because of how easy it is to trace fraud thanks to entire companies existing to analyze blockchain transactions and wallets. It makes their jobs much easier when there's a single ledger instead of having to get data out of many different banks.
> which is very badly and facilitating an eye-watering amount of money laundering and all that comes with it.
crypto money laundering peaked at about $31 billion dollars.
Meanwhile US Dollar money laundering is in the TRILLIONS per year
> The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime approach remains most popular for calculating how much money is laundered every year. The body suggests that the annual money laundering volumes range from 2 to 5% of the global GDP. Using these estimates, that will be between $2.11 and $5.28 trillion in 2023 and $2.22 and $5.54 trillion in 2024.
so I wouldn't call crypto money laundering "eye watering". It's not even worth blinking at.
@polarisera well she's not wrong; there is nothing quite as brash as Fox News, Newsmax, etc for the left.
MSNBC, CNN, etc have a narrative but they don't pull the whole "caravan of migrants" shtick. (obvi illegal border crossings are very real but remember when the scary caravan that was coming just "disappeared" and was never talked about again? Pepperidge Farm remembers).
Or the more recent "the illegal Haitians are eating pets"? Sure they didn't invent it but they also didn't shy away from broadcasting it.
I don't think playing that same game will bode well for the Democrats or the country, so I certainly hope they don't attempt to emulate it.
@jimsalter@lattera oh god I think I just remembered -- I think it's socat because I wrote an rc script for it for FreeBSD and I naively added a "reload" option and was shocked to see it kill the service
from its man page:
sighup, sigint, sigquit Has socat pass signals of this type to the sub process. If no address has this option, socat terminates on these signals.
@lattera@jimsalter It wouldn't even make sense to trap SIGINFO and exit or crash; if you're writing a tool primarily aimed at Linux you likely never even know SIGINFO exists and if the software doesn't recognize SIGINFO nothing should happen or any stray signal would cause the same problem.
I *do* have a memory of some brain-damaged Linux tool that did crazy things with signals... *scratching head*... GNU dd requires you send SIGUSR1 to get statistics but that's not it. There's another piece of software I've run into in the last 10 years that did something absolutely crazy when it received a SIGHUP. I think it treated it like SIGTERM.
I'd be willing to bet money this never happened and it was something else misbehaving with SIGHUP.
@parker if you've ever touched WhatsApp or iMessage or just any Apple device (all apple push notifications are XMPP) you've definitely used XMPP (unknowingly) :)