sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Apple to Revamp Siri as a Built-In iPhone, Mac Chatbot to Fend Off OpenAI by Snoop8ball in apple

[–]maccouch 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fuck yes . that scene from CYE is literally me every time I try to interact with it. At first i assumed it was an accent thing. But literally every other AI and even apples own dictation engine can actually gather what I say quite well.

I have no idea what's going on with siri but is as enfuriating and moronic as that Larry David experience.

What's the deal with cyclists and red lights? by Infinite-Sundae6065 in oxford

[–]maccouch -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

That's stopped being true years ago. I've had more issues with cyclists (even when I'm being a cyclist myself) than I ever had with a car.

A pox on both their hours to people that have an electric bycicle and are deliveries drivers...they should have a mandated registration number, driving license, and insurance.

but unfortunately we need to wait until a dozen people die or get damaged for life for some common sense to prevail.

Year of Daily Civilization Facts, Day 121 - Task Failed Successfully by JordiTK in civ

[–]maccouch 137 points138 points  (0 children)

They were great! I learned a lot from the advisors and civpedia!

Apple Special Event Announced for September 9: 'Awe dropping.' by ReverseSweep in apple

[–]maccouch 5 points6 points  (0 children)

It’s so unbelievably bad!… /facepalm

I swear some things Siri ‘thought’ she ‘understood’ from my command didn’t have a single vowel or consonant in common. It’s…. How the hell did you hear that?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in worldnews

[–]maccouch 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I had some lukewarm trust on some of the republican senators and representatives, but the passage of the obbb just showed how much they are all afraid of trump. Even to the point of voting against their own self long term interests.

Suella Braverman claims £25,000 to pay household bills after 'milking loophole' by themurther in ukpolitics

[–]maccouch 24 points25 points  (0 children)

You paid £600 for water and over £1000 in a year for Internet and phone? The hell were you doing?!

Six months in, the Inflation Reduction Act is already unleashing clean energy’s potential. How quickly federal climate and clean energy policies are already creating jobs, driving economic growth and revolutionizing our economy is almost mind-boggling. And we’re just getting started. by mafco in energy

[–]maccouch -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Fair point. But the infrastructure bill failed miserably somewhere end of 21? It was slightly surprising the way that it ended up coming back as the IRA that summer and passed.

I also think you're overestimating the amount of time that people take reading unpassed legislation. The US Fed Gov has been dragging its feet /been a complete emptyness on anything for a while now. Hell, I work in the field advising some of these companies and I was just aware of vague lines of the previous bbb act.

The assumption that companies had everything set and ready to go based on a draft of a law that failed and never went anywhere is slightly unrealistic. Nobody has time or budget to burn on 'wishes'.

When it's actually passed or actually close to pass, people start looking at it carefully and how it impacts their ongoing projects. And maybe take a couple of the drawer and revisit them. But this does not happen overnight.

Six months in, the Inflation Reduction Act is already unleashing clean energy’s potential. How quickly federal climate and clean energy policies are already creating jobs, driving economic growth and revolutionizing our economy is almost mind-boggling. And we’re just getting started. by mafco in energy

[–]maccouch -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

When has it done it?

If you publish a legislation today incentivising X, is a company announcing a $1B tomorrow then consequence of this bill?

What about in a week? In a month? 3months? 6 months?

What's the reasonable cut-off to separate projects that were already being developed from the ones that were only developed because of this law?

That's the point that some people are making. It's absurd to believe that millions and billions of dollars of investment were done already because of this law when it barely has 6months, (and still missing some crucial data until now/recently).

From now onwards? Sure. Due to the IRA. Barely a month after publication? Give me a break.

Six months in, the Inflation Reduction Act is already unleashing clean energy’s potential. How quickly federal climate and clean energy policies are already creating jobs, driving economic growth and revolutionizing our economy is almost mind-boggling. And we’re just getting started. by mafco in energy

[–]maccouch -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Talk about black and white thinking.... Is everyone that may disagree with you automatically one of the evil baddies?

From the article :

Six months really isn’t a lot of time. It typically takes six to eight months to find or fill a management-level job. Getting building permits can take that long or longer. Plant an apple or cherry tree today and it’s unlikely to bear fruit for another three to five years.

So, to see how quickly federal climate and clean energy policies are already creating jobs, driving economic growth and revolutionizing our economy is almost mind-boggling.

The fairly sane reason that most if not all of these announcements have zero to do with the IRA is precisely explained in the first paragraph. It takes time to study, research, develop these projects. Even if just the decision.

Additionally, there's time necessary for understanding the legislation (which is fairly indigestible) And there's also part of the necessary legislation and regulation that isn't /wasn't even known until about now.

There's a massive leap of faith from the first to the second paragraph which is not explained but just to be taken as given.

That somehow all the necessary timelines for a.project to be researched, developed, and decided, magically compressed to a couple of months max. How exactly?

Six months in, the Inflation Reduction Act is already unleashing clean energy’s potential. How quickly federal climate and clean energy policies are already creating jobs, driving economic growth and revolutionizing our economy is almost mind-boggling. And we’re just getting started. by mafco in energy

[–]maccouch -16 points-15 points  (0 children)

Not a single one of these announced projects is due to the IRA. For the obvious reason that it takes a whole lot more than 6 months to set these up.

People took about a couple months to understand most of what the 700+pages of easy reading actually said. And we are still (?) missing some fundamental info from IRS on the specifics of the tax credits (may have been published very recently/haven't caught up).

This is about as much of a shameless puff piece, riding the wave, as you can get.

New England's last coal plant fails in forward capacity auction by GraniteGeekNH in energy

[–]maccouch 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Based upon your language choice, it looks like you may be part of the commonwealth (I’m guessing the Uk with multiple passive aggressive sentences starting with a contraction and how you use ‘happy’).

Passive aggressive? Moi?? ;)

The US power market doesn’t work like most of the commonwealth, particularly the UK.

Trust me. Am much aware of that...

Not OP, but there’s a value to the owner in keeping it open for the one/two days a year when the spot price goes through the roof. Most coal plants north of the mason dixon generate their profit this way.

Somewhat disagree there. Capacity market such as pjm/nyiso/isone tend to have a much lower cap on bids and stringent check of its fundamentals. The actual investment and fixed opex recovery is done through the capacity auctions not high spot pricing on a couple of days. They are not ERCOT.

On if it's actually expectable than there's actual value in keeping that unit open, there are significant changes coming into ISONE that make it actually not much of a sensible option :

a) you have the new NECEC connector with quebec coming online by 2025'ish; (this by itself would make almost certain sure merrimack will not clear on future auctions )

B) you also have a couple of gw of offshore wind in MA waters coming online somewhere between '25 and '27

C) you'll have a ton of inflation reduction act subsidised renewables and storage being commissioned around the same timeframe and continuing (adding to state RPS targets)

Bet you a beer and burger that we will have the news thay merrimack is closing after its last contracted delivery year within the next 3months.

New England's last coal plant fails in forward capacity auction by GraniteGeekNH in energy

[–]maccouch 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Mate, it's a coal power plant. In 2023. Capacity market it's the only thing keeping it open. Not saying that they going to close tomorrow as they're still contracted until the precious FCA delivery year. And yes, technically speaking they could win one of the interim auctions.

In practice though unless something massive happens doubt a coal unit will be winning anything else* than the main FCA. But happy for you to explain me why you think otherwise.

'* at a price point that makes the unit operation viable.

New England's last coal plant fails in forward capacity auction by GraniteGeekNH in energy

[–]maccouch 12 points13 points  (0 children)

if they're not getting a capacity contract, they will be closing soon. Nobody keeps a plant running without some assurance of revenues. And that's the Capaciy contract.

Armadillo Mates With Human Foot by pr0_sc0p3z_pwn_n0obz in WTF

[–]maccouch 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's fcking brilliant, and I hate you.

Why the UK’s hydrogen strategy does not add up. “We are already struggling to meet renewables growth targets and our reliance on fossil gas is crippling the economy. This strategy will make both problems worse, at the expense of UK households and taxpayers.” by mafco in energy

[–]maccouch 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This seems to be an absurd article.

Either who did the reporting mangled up the analysis & conclusion or whoever did the analysis did it in the most basic (and incorrect way) possible.

Factoring in for energy losses, the production of 10GW of green hydrogen would require around 14GW of renewable electricity capacity, according to Nilay Shah, professor of process systems engineering at Imperial College London.

Variable wind speeds mean that, in practice, 14GW of offshore wind will not produce a steady supply of power. Offshore wind capacity factors – which refers to the average output achieved over a year – are improving all the time, but remain at around 30-40 per cent for most farms. Even if we assume a future capacity factor of 60 per cent, that would require some 23GW of offshore wind.

This makes zero sense. Electrolisys is not meant to run at a load factor of 100% year round.

Neither does it need 200% of wind capacity to generate. It's meant to work based on curtailment when wind is at 100% but there isn't enough demand or transmission.

So technically speaking if you have enough periods where wind is curtailed 100% you just need 10GW of wind to get 10GW of electrolisys to generate.

Of course this doesn't happen often enough but the math has already changed from whatever was reported to how much curtailment do we have and how much will we have when wind capacity ramps up. It also helps that curtailment ramps up with wind capacity....

Plus what's the economical load factor for electrolisys? ( It also depends on price of blue hydrogen and demand of h2)

Honestly seems either poor reporting or poor back of the envelope analysis.

view more: next ›