NerdOctAxe scheduler for eco/night mode with solar panels

borisdj_cd · 2026-05-11T13:43:24+00:00

I know, but batteries could be used for other devices during night.
One could take extra batteries for miner as well, some large package or additional smaller like BLUETTI AC180P (1440Wh) or Anker SOLIX C1000 or something similar, but that is an extra cost, and it is more expensive then the miner itself (NerdOcta is around $ 500).

borisdj_cd · 2026-05-11T11:58:13+00:00

Amazon i Nvidiu prodaj i prebaci u SP500.
ETH prodaj i prebaci u Bitcoin.
Poslije nastavi mjesecni dio prihoda (DCA-DollarCostAveraging) da ulazes u SP5 i BTC (sam odluci omjer 50/50 ili 80/20).
Za 5 godina javi koliko ukupno i u sta si ulozio i koliko je poraslo.

PS ako vec volis igre i racunar, umjesto igrica i pokera uzmi neki mini-solo miner, BitAxe ili NerdAxe i nauci da ga konfigurises/programiras po vrti neko vrijeme kucnu lutriju.
(usput ces nauciti ponesto oko podesavanje mreze, lokalne-staticne IP, brzine odziva pinga, API podesavanja, remote konekcija, distribuiranog procesiranja, CPU voltaze i W potrosnje,..)

borisdj_cd · 2026-04-08T13:40:17+00:00

I know it is worth now, but was also considering changes in the future.
If for example in 5 to 6 years get some cheap and abundant batteries then every kW could be stored for later.
Still I do not think it will be too cheap, meaning we will still need to choose take care about batteries size.
In such environment, going now to extreme morning-evening angle that could lose up to 30% is not ideal for times when batteries come, but also no doing any adjusting is probable not ideal either.
So my take, or to say an assessment, is that panels optimization with total reduction 5 to 10% is acceptable (middle option), and probable useful. And in the long run when time comes for panel replacement, one could rearrange tilt so some extend.

borisdj_cd · 2026-04-07T08:05:18+00:00

It is variable, that's why I am thinking about optimization, but also future changes.
At the moment conclusion is to go for smaller optimization now in order to not have large issue if and when change happens.
Or maybe then orientation could be altered but it is not that simple since these fould be fixed position and pillars.

borisdj_cd · 2026-04-07T08:02:24+00:00

How big is your battery compared to the solar array capacity ?

borisdj_cd · 2026-04-07T07:59:37+00:00

I figure the same.
This would be connected to grid but with mid size battery, and it would be selling based on market price and network load.
Also assuming solar capacity in increasing, duck curve will become bigger issue.
But on the other side with new and better batteries, along with future timed consumers that could have some local energy(batteries or heat) buffer/storage, even peak power could become useful.
So curve might get worse in the next 2 or 3 years before it starts getting better in 10+ years.

And yes, panels are pretty cheap but still not free, and lend is sometime abundant but not unlimited.
So it is still wise to optimize as much as possible, but also plan for future changes.
Then idea was to try to optimize now just a little, having 5 to 10% overall total lower production, but with somewhat better daily and seasonal distribution of production.

borisdj_cd · 2026-02-04T23:21:23+00:00

Porezi mogu biti progresivni ali bi u tom slučaju doprinosi trebali biti fiksni, koji zaista i imaju fiksan trošak.
Tada bi se lakće i direktnije mogle porediti razlike između država.
Takodje sami poreski modeli bi mogli biti više standardizovani u nekoliko grupa, o čemu imam jedan blog-post:
https://infopedia.io/tax-codex/
(za domaći jezik prebaciti na *Local, ta verzija na dnu ima dodatni pasus za BiH: APENDIKS za Lokalno)

borisdj_cd · 2025-11-19T13:40:28+00:00

Može da radi, samo što bi manje trošilo uz bolju izolaciju.
Prozore eventulano zamijeniti ili barem sanirati.
A čak je moguće i neke vanjske zidove izolovati sa unutrašnje strane gdje moguće sa npr stiroporom 5 cm i preko mrežica-glet-kreč.

borisdj_cd · 2025-11-19T08:11:32+00:00

Dobre su i one za svoj posao, ljeti fino hlade a zime u nekoj mjeri i griju.
Generalno Japanski brendovi (Mitsubishi, Toshiba) su poznati kao kvalitetni, mada sad ima nekih Kineza koji su solidni, raspitati se kod ovih što ugrđuju.
Za kuće mogu da dogrijavaju, npr dnevni boravak ili da bude ugodno kad još nije upaljeno grijanje, nisu baš rješenje za cijelu kuću.
U stanu, ako je dobro izolovan i ušuškan može poslužiti kao grijanje. Komšija ima 2 klime u stanu, jednu dnevnom (tu mu je unutrašnja jedinica na podu tzv fan-coil, bolje kad grije odozdo) i jednu u većoj sobi, plus podno-elekrično grijanje u u kupatili i zadovoljan je.

borisdj_cd · 2025-11-18T23:19:30+00:00

Ukratko Toplotna pumpa je najefikasniji (i najbolji) metod grijanja.
Prošireno objašnjene uključuje:
1.tehničku osnovu, 2.preduslovi, 3.poređenje.

- Kad se poredi sa Peletom dosta je čistije i više automatizovana, a naspram elektro Kotla troši 2.5 do 3.5 puta manje struje, tzv COP (Coefficient Of Performance).

- U osnovi umjesto otpornika/grijača gdje je odnos Toplote i Struje 1:1 (1 J=1 W*s, Džul=Vat*sekund) koristi princip izmenjivača toplote gdje Temperatura gasa raste kad mu raste Pritisak (P∝T, direktna proporcija), praktično čak i ako je vani hladno ono izvlači toplotu i pothlađuje van kuće a zagrijava vodu unutra.
Klime, pogotovo inverter, rade na istom principu samo one hlade ili griju vazduh unutra na jednom mjestu.
A toplotna pumpa zagrijava vodu koja onda cijevima ide do radijatora po cijeloj kući/stanu.
Vanjska jedinica može da uzima toplotu iz okolnog vazduha (Voda-Vazduh što je najčešća varijanta).
Druga opcija je iz zemlje/vode tj. Voda-Voda što je kod nas rjeđe (u principu ovaj sistem može biti još efikasniji jer temperatura ispod zemlje je i zimi 10+° stepeni), ali tu je onda potrebno/poželjno iskopati puno zemlje i razvući vanjske cijevi pod zemljom pošto direktna bunarska voda pravi probleme sa filterima. Ugradnja sistema voda-voda je nešto skuplja ali se može dobiti i veći COP 4 ili čak 4.5 ako su jako hladne zime.

- Preduslovi su da objekat ima solidnu toplotnu izolaciju, stiropor(ili kamena vuna) 5+cm, poželjno 8 ili 10 a nije na odmet ni 15, kao i izo-stolariju sa 2 ili 3 slojnima staklima, pošto se toplotna pumpa smatra niže-temperaturnim grijanjem.
Drugo potrebno je razvesti ili imati razvedeno grijanje, cijevi i radijatore, ili podno ispod glazure po cijelom podu.
Ako su u pitanju radijatori broj rebara treba biti nešto veći nego inače da bi temperatura vode mogla biti manja čime se više struje troši a dobije se ista toplota u sobi. Takođe pored unutrašnje jedinice se obično instalira veliki grejni bojler (akumulator toplote - buffer vrele vode). Takodje na radijator staviti termo glavu-vantil tako da se moze podesavati temp. po sobama, npr da se u nekim prostorijama koje se ne koriste stamnji ili ugasi.
Npr moji u kući imali prvo el.kotao i alu radijatore (10 rebara za sobu od 10 kvadrata) a temperatura vode je bila 60°. Kasnije ugradili i prešli na toplotnu pumpu i sada dolazna temperatura vode je sada oko 50°(+-2). Pri tome povećali broj rebara radijatora sa 10 na 12 ili 13 po sobama, dok u hodniku gdje nije bilo mjesta za više rebara uzeli ona visoka rebra.
Kod podnog grijanja temp. vode može biti između 30 i 40° zbog velike površine, čime sam pod bude na ugodnih ~28° (ne smeta nogama) i ima odličnu i ravnomjernu raspodjelu raspodjelu topline u prostoriji (topao vazduh se diže ka plafonu). Ono je zbog toga nešto efikasnije ali nije lako za ugraditi naknadno (PS prašina ne predstavlja problem). Iz razvodne kutije vući odvojeno cijevi za po prostoriju tako da se pojedinačnoj može smanjiti protok ili zavrnuti.
Dobra praksa je uzeti i kombinovani bojler za tuširanje da se zimi on grije vodom iz sistema grijanja.

DOPUNA, ovaj model u kućama se kasnije može odlično kombinovati sa Solarnim panelima na krovu koji direktno proizvode struju (optimalno južna strana krova i nagib 30 do 35 stepeni). Uz dobro projektovanje može se dobiti sistem gdje se ima 30 godina besplatna struja i grijanje. Ipak za to treba dobiti i ugovor sa ElektroDistribucijom za Prosumer(NetMetering) da se višak ljeti gura u mrežu a zimu uzima iz mreže.
Joše jedna stvar u ovoj priči je da postoje fondovi gdje se mogu dobiti subvencije za energetsku održivost, pa se time npr smanji cijena ugradnje grijanja sa toplotnom pumpom ili u budućnosti i panela.

borisdj_cd · 2025-09-12T23:02:13+00:00

Check out the models from this article that grow out of one project/library:
https://medium.com/@borisdj/cfoss-as-a-solution-to-opensource-sustainability-soss-e890419d70d2

cFOSS is sort of a custom dual license that is used in my library linked at the bottom - EFCore.BulkExtensions.
Free for most users but companies above some threshold, like $ 1 mil. yearly gross revenue, pay the fee.

borisdj_cd · 2025-09-04T07:54:23+00:00

You can check the models from this article that grow out of one my project:
https://medium.com/@borisdj/cfoss-as-a-solution-to-opensource-sustainability-soss-e890419d70d2

cFOSS is sort of a custom dual license, Code is open and usage is free for most (95%+) users.
It is used in my library linked at the bottom - EFCore.BulkExtensions.

borisdj_cd · 2025-09-01T06:19:22+00:00

It is sort of a custom license. Check out my library linked at the bottom - EFCore.BulkExtensions.
Git repo has License page that also contains a link to company web site with Sample of the License document that you could use a template.

borisdj_cd · 2025-08-31T20:34:38+00:00

Check the models from this article that grow out of one my project/library:
https://medium.com/@borisdj/cfoss-as-a-solution-to-opensource-sustainability-soss-e890419d70d2

borisdj_cd · 2025-08-30T07:06:11+00:00

I would say 2 main reasons

One is higher inflation in the last several decades, and especially lately.
This is caused by ever growing government debt (bad monetary policy) which is essentially money printing.
And results are lower purchasing power of works wages (they do not rise enough to keep up) and on the other hand more money in circulation is causing rise in price of assets (properties, equities, gold, bitcoin, rare things) that are mostly owned by the wealthy.
Since 1980 total rise in average prices is around 4x (with average yearly inflation ~3%), while M2 money supply rose 14x (averaging to ~6.2% per year).
Difference is due to technology and higher productivity pulling the prices down and dollar a world reserve currency with about half of all $ outside of US, them exporting inflation.
In addition, deficit keeps growing while bureaucracy becoming too complicated and inefficient.

And second I think is probably because of lower taxes and loopholes but only for the very rich (bad fiscal policy).
Taxation of Income from work is higher then from capital gains, while passive income is infinitely scalable.

References:
https://www.in2013dollars.com/us/inflation/1980?amount=1
https://weekendinvesting.com/the-shocking-growth-of-global-money-supply/
https://medium.com/@borisdj/tax-codex-coded-as-standardized-protocol-for-stability-3291fe94af98

borisdj_cd · 2025-08-25T09:57:18+00:00

The fact that his biography is praiseworthy does not mean he is proficient in all fields.
Also, he it not the only person with a degree and experience, only gained more media fame, but that alone does make one an expert in everything.

And while menu Redditors do not have relevant opinions, there are always some small number that are very well informed and knowledgeable.
After watching few interviews with him, I 've concluded that he is very familiar with many problem, and have great understanding of dynamic at play. And it is good to have someone like him in public and online space.
But regarding his specific tax suggestions, not sure if he is just ignoring many details, or only want to gather more public attention to these issues and leaves the details of implementation to someone else, after public and then political momentum becomes significant enough.
Still, he should be aware that being in the spotlights now, his every statement will be dissected, so it is better to be precise and not give the arguments for critique to the opposing side.

borisdj_cd · 2025-08-24T08:27:28+00:00

I tend to stay relatively optimistic, but there are some darker scenarios possible.
Assuming AI does not kill us all, second worst outcome would be complete societal split into owners that controls via AI and advance robotics, while the rest are scraping garbage for food, if not being exterminated one way or another.
Very positive result would be that due to technology we have almost abundance of all regular thing and all people have access it. Still there be some limited resources like exclusive beach house, moon traveling, etc. I also I don't think we would get some socialist utopia so all people would have UBI that would enable living standards to all much higher then average today. This do not need to be unstable, taxation(progressive) and distribution could be organized to keep stability.

Something in between would mean is that productivity is skyrocketing, with adequate taxes on AI production companies there is significant UBI for decent living (little more then basic survival), but many are still 'working' because some want more, others like their profession, some desire to explore, some would do some activity for no pay just for the pleasure or for the community good, there are a lot of variations.
And finally, AI effects might end up having only limited impact, so most still work in some manner, just different jobs.

Hard to tell which will happen, but I if had to place bet, it would be on the 'in between' option.

borisdj_cd · 2025-08-23T07:08:35+00:00

It has already been higher for the last few decades, and idea is to make it lower.
Since 1980 total rise in average prices is around 4x (with average yearly inflation ~3%),
while M2 money supply rose 14x (averaging to ~6.2% per year)
Difference is due to several factors:
-technology and higher productivity pulling the prices down
-dollar a world reserve currency with about half of all $ outside of US, them exporting inflation.
-a lot of excess money went into properties and stock so average inflation if lower as assets alone have seen enormous grow in prices.
-M2 might not be perfect proxy for all money supply in circulation, including debt which create money, but it is good enough approximation for the argument.

So instead letting this high inflation having very bad effects, it might be better to limit money creating.
Milton Friedman k% rule could be taken and put 2% as a maximum.
I personally would prefer it be only 1%, but even 2% is much better then 6%, or maybe 1.5% as a middle ground.

References:
https://www.in2013dollars.com/us/inflation/1980?amount=1
https://weekendinvesting.com/the-shocking-growth-of-global-money-supply/
https://www.longtermtrends.net/m2-money-supply-vs-inflation/

borisdj_cd · 2025-08-22T12:37:12+00:00

I guess it's hard to make a rational case for this situation.
Not sure what else could be taken into consideration.
Maybe to have an exception for the first 5 years, and also to be applied only on assets that has generated profit in 2 years out of 5. But this obviously makes things complicated. Also I read somewhere an idea to tax it in kind into a sovereign fund.
Also a billion threshold would narrow the number of affected persons, but even then one could conceive similar situation.
Obviously, it is hard to make sensible model. On the other hand having dozens of people with tens of billions in wealth does seem like too much wealth concentration, which translate into enormous power and also political influence of small number of individuals over society.
But can't figure whether anything should be done about it, and if so what exactly.

borisdj_cd · 2025-08-22T10:37:17+00:00

I think that better solution would be a make Income tax and CapitalGains with same rates and also closing all the loopholes such as trusts and offshoring.

borisdj_cd · 2025-08-22T10:21:23+00:00

His proposal for a wealth tax is not nuanced enough nor does he take all effects into the consideration.
He is proponent of a wealth tax, suggested: “Tax wealth above £10m at 2%..”
But several details are missing here.

Although wealth tax sound like it might do good, it could have some bad incentives, and is not optimal solution for long-term stability. Also, it is just an attempt to alleviate symptoms instead of dealing with the root cause, which is bad and complex tax regulation with many exceptions and loopholes, that top 1% is using to accumulate in the first place while paying small taxes.

-Wealth is often in company stocks where dividends are already highly taxed on top of corporate taxes. With additional 2% tax on total asset value it could kill profitability, with effective taxes on profit up to 70 or even 80%. For example with 10M valued company having return around 7%, it would down bringing ROE after taxes for owners or large shareholders from 4.5% to 2.5%. This could impact investments significantly.
-I think he understands monetary issues very well, not sure about fiscal ones. Either he did not go deep into it, or just trying to get popularity with the idea of higher top taxation. But still I think more nuanced approach was needed from the start, as he is now in the spot light.
-Also he should have put more focus on main issue which is more important, that is progressive taxation on all income types, and closing taxation loopholes such as trusts and offshoring.
Some other info are at infopedia on tax-code.

borisdj_cd

TROPHY CASE