There's one case, rural areas often have abundant energy sources (hydro, wind,etc) but few consumers, in Northern Sweden f.ex. a lot is produced but there's a lot of losses in transporting the energy south.
Now, yes, as long as natural gas is cheap(inbetween US or Soviet wars) it'll probably be the core for hydrogen, however batteries won't help much in the north since the transmission rather than usage is the cap even with batteries so excess production could be redirected towards hydrogen production.
If solar continues to plummet in cost we may see distributed industry in rural areas, to take advantage of energy that is essentially stranded by transmission cost. Storage becomes even more important in this scenario.
The blockage of connecting those to the grid will encourage self-generation, which will mean putting them off in the boondocks where land is cheap. Taking that to the logical limit is where space data centers come from.
I think we're going to see a repurposing of remote coal-fired plants with renewable stored heat. The Four Corners plant, perhaps? It's supposed to stop operating in 2031, I believe.
But also, other than Texas, I don't hear about a lot of regional over production. There's pretty good interconnection within and between the two major grids.
One reason you don't see overproduction is it's hard to get connected to grids. Local self-generation eliminates that roadblock. I think we're going to see increasing energy autarky in rural regions as solar gets cheaper.
Assuming ultra low cost thermal storage becomes a thing, there's going to be a market for small externally heated engines to recover that heat as power. That (+ batteries) will enable complete off-grid operation with PV at small (maybe 100 kW) commercial scale and larger.
China has this in a big way. The big energy sources are mostly in northwest China, and the big loads are in the southeast. That's why China leads in million-volt DC power transmission.
I think the idea is that the compressor is "meta" in the sense that it directs compressors as GP mentions by selecting what's actually producing the best results, so it's not just one comrpessor but a series of supported ones plugged in to be used adaptively (controlled at a "meta" level).
Floating point data is a mess to compress, but I think the idea here is to apply different transforms (and perhaps back-end codecs) on data and see if one fits the data so perfectly that you magically get a lot of compression.
Say you have an audio with a sawtooth, it's linear an gradient but if the peaks is "random" values like 1.245 and PI then the mantissa bits of the interpolation range will look fairly "random" to a classic compressor, whilst this compressor can test to see if there are linear gradient spans (or near linear gradient) where it stores the gradient and dumps out the "difference" bits for a regular compressor.
Or 3d coordinates for 3d models (non-stripified), plenty of repeating 8-byte doubles that will be garbage and not help a classic compressor much, building a float aware dictionary and using that would easily bring down the data by quite a few %.
(I don't agree with GP, one method might win out for certain workloads, but the idea here seems to be a pluggable utility that can help a wide range of developers with something "for free").
I think self-modifying outside of JIT runtimes is a pretty rare thing these days compared to the 80s or 90s, .text sections are mostly RO these days and security requirements aren't going to decrease that.
The memory model by itself isn't, however Apple implemented it before Arm released an (incompatible) set of extensions that approach the problem at the instruction level instead of adding an Apple-style global TSO on/off switch in an IMPDEF register [0].
I thought Apple Silicon also has some extra hardware support for handling x86 flags emulation for Rosetta. But perhaps I’m remembering that incorrectly.
FWIW virtual threads are great this time around. That’s something whose time has come generally.
But yeah for me Java took a big leap forward when it got lambda but there hasn’t been another big leap since. Still so many obvious features and sugar to add to file off the sharp edges and remnants of enterpriseness.
Getting to 200 was mostly a matter of upgrading tracks that needed maintenance anyhow in the 90s, in the 90s however cargo traffic wasn't causing as many disruptions and congestion as today and the talks about "new exclusive" lines is mainly meant to shift air-traffic to faster AND non-congested lines, but new lines are far more expensive/prohibitive both due to new land requirements and making it a "big-bang" build.
That "minor" detail seems to have been outside of all popular reporting I've read on the subject, any links to how large a part the EU would've contributed?
Having been on a board of a European non-profit(Scandinavia) in a "tricky" situation, I can kind of sense the issues between the lines, the letters of law commonly around non-profits and following strict interpretations of them _did_ make me raise an eyebrow at Collabora people being on a board awarding contracts.
At the same time, laws sometimes leaves wiggle-room to not totally shut down every interesting non-profit.
So already there we have a bit of friction, now add the friction of startup/company type people vs "nonprofit believers", both tugging at the interpretations (plus whatever mentioned issues that has been carried over from early days of SO/OOo)
In truth, startup/company type people too often see wiggle-room as carte-blance for doing things that can be illegal or deterimental for a nonprofit without an extremely loose interpretation of the laws. At the same time non-profit believers can be a bit of a pain to deal with on a personality side.
Without too much context, I joined the board of the nonprofit since I had been part of an outreach arm and thought that there needed to be some perspective from that side on the board whilst others on the board came from other parts or had no previous affiliation.
So my experience was being caught in the middle, trying to sort out issues with useful people in the outreach arm (creating needed momentum for the organisation) using the wiggle-room in questionable ways, yet managing panicking non-profit believers that couldn't see the conflict they were creating by going overboard would be very deterimental in the long run (people doing "boring tasks" but also not good at creating momentum).
Something like the LibreOffice foundation also needs to exist in "both worlds", and from my perspective both sides are probably at fault here, but in the end they need to spend more time understanding the problems seen from "the others" perspective and realize that the drama they are creating will benefit everyone but them if cannot they find "smooth" ways to resolve things.
> Collabora people being on a board awarding contracts.
That is indeed problematic. I think it was particularly problematic that we had a chairperson of the board who was also the CEO and (part?) owner of a company, Allotropia, that would participate in tenders (it was bought by Collabora a couple of years back).
But - that situation is resolvable, and was resolved, by him no longer being on the Board of Directors; and beyond that - is resolvable by a strong separation of the body managing tenders from the BoD, so that employees and stockholders from Collabora can't participate in the process. What happened instead is that tenders ended altogether.
> now add the friction of startup/company type people vs "nonprofit believers",
There is a third group, which is foundation employees and contractors. Our last Board of Directors contained 2 foundation employees, one person who is a regular contractor or freelance service service provider to the foundation. He has since resigned, although so have two non-employee directors (with two of the three resignations being for mysterious reasons not disclosed to the trustees).
Add to this the fact that the Directors aren't physically at the offices, and that the foundation is managed mostly by the Executive Director, who also prepares the budget, handles official correspondence (hidden from the trustees of course) etc - and you get a very interest group.
> but in the end they need to spend more time understanding the problems seen from "the others" perspective
The thing is, that it isn't two sides, one against the other. It is one powerful clique which, so as to solidify its power, expels a large group which it perceives as difficult to control. And the majority of the LibreOffice contributors are passive here. Now even more passive with the expulsions and the abrogation of the electoral process.
It probably depends on how young one was, I was young enough to play it for a year or two before Doom appeared (also Doom was kind-of sluggish on my machine at the time).
Fond memories. I remember going to the local YMCA (sub-2000) and going from DOS terminal to DOS terminal typing in (IIRC) `exec wolf3d.exe` and finding one of the few PC's that had it loaded to play it.
Now, yes, as long as natural gas is cheap(inbetween US or Soviet wars) it'll probably be the core for hydrogen, however batteries won't help much in the north since the transmission rather than usage is the cap even with batteries so excess production could be redirected towards hydrogen production.
reply