It's kind of hard to judge considering the whiplash from Europe moving away from Russia.
Checkout the cost over time here (and set it to the 10 years view): https://tradingeconomics.com/spain/electricity-price
It's cheaper now than 10 years ago, but the Russian invasion made everything way more volatile.
As I understand it, Spanish generation is cheap but its grid is outdated, so it'll continue like that until more of the grid is switched out.
Not exactly, they reuse waste which reduces the amount of waste but makes the remaining waste more radioactive.
That isn't a reason to not use nuclear though since either: the waste can be made worse (which also makes it better because it doesn't last as long) and can be buried only for 200 years which is easy to manage, or the waste can be used as an ingredient in betavoltaics which gets rid of the waste (and might get us to the point where we need to spin up nuclear reactors just to make more waste to use).
Either way it doesn't matter, green generation and storage are now to cheap for nuclear to be considered economical anymore.
Here's the breakdown of Romanian Energy:
They still have a long way to go to be considered green.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_Romania#/media/File:Energy-consumption-by-source-Romania.png
Thorium is awesome, but fully renewable energy plus storage got too cheap for any kind of nuclear to stand an economic chance.
No need, use a sail
Ironic
YES! It already goes over the mistakes you were making.
On a side note, this was probably the best video I've seen in the last 12 months.
I thought it would be a nice and nerdy breakdown of solar panels, but the more I watched the better it got.
For those who did watch it: wow what a whiplash!
I say daymon not to avoid offence, but since it sounds cooler than demon.
A demon sounds like a fiend that has only been around for at most a few hundred years, but a daemon sounds like it has been around for a few thousand so it is much more dangerous.
I'm usually programming, but I've got a few bits and pieces that can be shared:
The rest are too experimental, or are released commercial projects.
It's Phoronix, the articles are good but the comments on every article are unbearable.
It's basically a meme at this point.
There's a bunch of people in the forum with poor awareness and emotional control throwing tantrums, typically over any project with a code of conduct (even something as simple as "Don't be an asshole") because they believe it infringes on their right to be inconsiderate.
New projects want to avoid the drama and issues of projects from decades past, so naturally they add codes of conduct which causes those folks above to have hissyfits everywhere about those projects anytime they or something adjacent to them is mentioned.
Most places warn then kick those users out, and then there's Phoronix.
This is the kind of divorced from reality slop I expect to see from managers who think that 9 mothers can birth a child in one month
I don't understand comments like this
It’s a wishlist of Open tickets. Wouldn’t necessarily even call this a commitment to a roadmap.
Roadmaps are just wishlists with a committed to priority list, like an assembly line. Programming doesn't work like an assembly line and anyone trying to convince you to the contrary is bullshiting marketing.
Every task has the potential to bring forwards new information that changes the order in which tasks should be completed, let alone which tasks even need to attempted. You only get all the information once you've finished.
Instead of having an inflexible commitment, use a wishlist, and do the tasks in order of which one makes the most sense at the time.
75% of Open tickets will never get resolved anyway.
Based on what?
You can clearly see that practically all tickets in their previous epoch were resolved: https://github.com/orgs/pop-os/projects/23/insights?period=max
If I were a uutils developer, I would stay far away from all of these discussions because of how much hate is directed towards it.
I only see the hate towards this project being either from anti-rust trolls, or misdirected hate from Ubuntu towards switching to a new coreutils implementation on an LTS release before full compatibility has been achieved. I don't see any hate in regards to licensing.
If they do not adopt the license you prefer, would it be better for them to just go ahead and abandon the whole effort? Are there efforts really so valueless simply because they chose the license that they did?
Their efforts have value, but the value is limited by its current license. MIT licenced projects have a recurring history of being improved privately without those improvements going back into the project. It leads to a lot of duplicated, wasted effort. There may also be the potential for patent issues with the licence. No one wants to deal with some litigious asshole or company going after the project turning it radioactive.
Moreover, is dictating to volunteers what license they should be using for their code what you think this community should be about?
I think bringing up issues with the project is definitely something that should be brought up. As for dictating which particular licence is used, that's up to the contributors, but that doesn't mean others can't give their input. It's also likely that most of the contributors will want a license that allows the project to safely continue into the future.
You claim that it is important that people make tons noise in every single post on uutils because it will prevent a bad scenario down the line, but could you detail what that scenario is? Because people like to make allusions to such a scenario constantly but refuse to get specific and then engage on a discussion on the specifics.
I thought the Redis example was a good example of this.
I continue on this point further down, but I'm leaving this right now to stay on topic with redis.
Incidentally, your choice of Redis is an example exactly illustrates my point that this license is not a gigantic deal it shows that the worst case scenario is… uutils being forked.
The community was fractured. A report by an enterprise support company said 75% of existing redis users were motivated to seek alternatives. I'm not sure what number you would consider to be a gigantic deal, but Redis certainly thought it was, otherwise they would not have reverted back to the previous license.
Heck, it can even be forked at any time with a copyleft license precisely because its existing language is permissive.
It can be forked, but relicensing can mean needing permission from every contributor of the original, and/or removing all contributions from those who don't agree to the new licence. Not to mention the community fracturing, and legal issues. It's a massive effort that can be prevented by the original project choosing a better license earlier.
You claim that it is important that people make tons noise in every single post on uutils because it will prevent a bad scenario down the line, but could you detail what that scenario is? Because people like to make allusions to such a scenario constantly but refuse to get specific and then engage on a discussion on the specifics.
Well this comment is probably getting too long, so I'll simply point you towards the busybox licensing drama.
So it needs to be commented on in every single article?
Yes
If so, is that going to change anything?
Potentially.
The alternative is not bringing up the concern and it goes forgotten until it is too late and we are stuck with the results of bad decisions for no good reason.
Developers voicing their concerns is the only way things can change for the better.
Here's two examples:
And there's plenty of other examples (e.g. Microsoft against linux -> WSL support, etc...)
If developers don't voice their concerns, then things stop changing for the better.
Licencing is a legitimate concern (not noise), even more so considering it's for the core utils
Yes, Windows is the Problem.
macOS has far better desktop applications across the board than Linux. What you get for free with a Mac is nothing to sneeze at:
Counterpoint: The apple of yore is not the apple of today.
Recent examples:
At this point, the beginner-friendly linux distros (Linux Mint, Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Bazzite) are more sensible and logically consistent than either Windows or MacOS.
Tangent: If you're looking at paid git clients on MacOS, I'd recommend fork over Git Tower or Kaleidoscope.
That should be:
People use used windows because it has had decades of backwards compatibility sort of.
Nowadays: it has current compatibility sort of.
Microsoft is a mess now, so it's no surprise that their current Windows version is also a mess.
Can we give it ears instead so it'll hear us when we tell it to fuck off?
App stores are always terrible no matter which distro you use.
There's a million different apps for this, and they add features on top like sharing one mouse, keyboard between devices, etc...
Which is why you add storage and wind to the mix. Overproduce energy when it's available and store the leftovers for when you under-produce.
At this point, saying Solar doesn't work at night is kind of like saying cars don't work without wheels. No one is getting solar without storage, just like no one is driving a car without wheels.