lompad

Maybe I phrased it badly, the scenario I have in mind is this:

you have a house, taking power from the grid. Then you want to become more self-sufficient and add solar, but don't want to sell to the grid, just for yourself. If the solar installation and its circuit is not _fully_ separate from the one connected to the grid you have to get a permit even if it's a "Nulleinspeiseanlage".

Yes, technically you could make everything completely separate, then it would be fine. But I haven't seen that in the wild a single time so far.

Regarding reliability: Absolutely. I honestly didn't experience a major blackout in my entire life in germany. I always forget just how big of a problem that still is for many countries and areas.

On grid-scale this very much has an influence. Obviously not on individual scale. Is the influence big enough to warrant needing permits? Not sure, but I certainly see the problem.

In many areas solar panels get turned of by grid operators remotely for many hours on sunny days. In an area in the south I worked in around 50-70% of the produced power of larger installations (>30kwp) is essentially thrown away because the grid simply doesn't have enough capacity.

For germany:

For balcony panels you only have to do a very small registration, but no large bureaucratic process or getting a permit.

For larger ones you still must get a permit for a very simple reason: even if you don't get your power into the general network, you still affect it by using less, which might cause issues with grid stability.

We have so much power on sunny days now that we can barely deal with it. Which in turn occasionally even causes power prices to go negative - you can get paid for drawing power.

Yep. They are the Slopfather, basically.

Well, not the kind of land where you can just massacre the natives and steal it for free without ever seeing consequences for that abominable behavior. Which is what I suppose they're referring to.

It just gives a taste of what we are all going to have to pay soon, once the model providers actually have to make money. And the era of "let's charge a dollar for every 10 dollars running the infra actually costs" is rapidly coming to an end.

And you can bet GLM is still ridiculously subsidized, just not as ridiculously as Anthropic and OpenAI.

It's the wrong way to go about the issue. Instead, mandate control over the recommendation algorithms. Now THAT could actually change something. And is for good reason the worst nightmare of TikTok, Facebook and Twitter.

While they obviously have no significant issue with age control. Because it doesn't hurt them.

In case you want to enjoy it anyway, I've got a recommendation: there are quite a few mods for the game, including one which quadruples the time limit, essentially making the time between major events 4 times as long.

In that configuration, the mechanic is still there but you aren't feeling on a clock anymore and can explore and play around with stuff at your own pace.

As someone hating any kind of timed missions in games, that's what made a frustrating game into a masterpiece for me personally.

The reason why they aren't much of a problem for the grid is solar. Right now we already have the issue, that in some areas we're throwing away the majority of the produced electricity. Very common in e.g. southern germany.

Conveniently, cooling is especially needed when the energy production from solar is at its maximum.

I've been part of projects building 20-40 MW solar installations in southern germany and on average we throw away >50% of what we generate.

There is SO MUCH SOLAR now, we don't know what to do with all the energy.

>Asthma looks to be mostly caused by gas stoves.

Do you have a source for that? Because as far as I can see, asthma isn't _that_ less common in countries where gas stoves are barely used, such as germany. Still has like 60-70% of the asthma cases the US has. There's also a ton of other pollutants the US hasn't yet forbidden, but the EU has, which could also explain a lot of the difference in rates.

Don't get me wrong, it's certainly a good idea to get rid of gas stoves. I just think it's a bit much to declare them the primary cause of asthma.

Or the existence of your tongue.

Raw milk _can_ be kind of okay under very specific circumstances. (But knowing the state american farms tend to be in regarding hygiene and controls, it's a ridiculous gamble.)

1) extremely closely controlled cow health

2) minimal storage time

3) minimized chances of cross contamination/reasonably clean cows <- that's the big one

4) healthy immune system to minimize infection chances

If even one of those isn't there, it's basically sickness in a cup. Why take a risk if there's no benefit?

In germany, there's the concept of "Vorzugsmilch", which is raw milk from specifically controlled farms with super tight regulations with regular and intense controls and testing of milk, e.g. monthly testing of every individual cow's milk.

But even then, it's an - albeit small - risk without benefit, with the exception of raw-milk cheese, which can't be made in any other way. I just don't get it, practically none of the claims of the raw-milk-gurus could be proven under controlled circumstances. Why needlessly take risks?

Link doesn't seem to work, at least from EU.