> Given the lack of blackouts around here, I've not bothered to investigate if home PV systems can still charge batteries, or if the inverter dependence on the grid for phase-locking the AC prevents that.
The technology is called "islanding mode". It adds a little extra cost to the inverters, and you have to specifically request it, but the tech exists.
That part is the obvious part. I want to know how they got all the entrenched landowners to let new builds in their neighborhoods and drive down values. The NIMBYs are usually the problem.
Tons of San Diego houses have a ton of land thanks to the mid-20th century lawn fetish back when everyone was pretending that there was enough water so there are a lot of places where someone can turn some dead grass into as many as 5 ADUs.
If you are an owner of rental houses, I would think that it's in your interest to be able to build ADUs on those properties. Even if everyone does it and prices go down a bit you're still making a lot more per property than you were before, assuming reasonable building costs (and if building costs are not reasonable then not many owners will be building ADUs and prices won't go down).
Well, once you loosen up building codes to allow apartment buildings instead of single family homes then suddenly the developers will come with a lot of cash to buy those homes from NIMBYs. And cash is always convincing.
Unfortunately, it's not actually obvious. There are heaps of people, even and especially in the most expensive housing markets in the US, who will outright argue that supply and demand doesn't apply to housing.
Yeah it seems like there is a widely held belief that people are freeloaders looking for any opportunity to take something they perceive to be free, so they go do things they would not otherwise do. A much simpler explanation is that when the cost is low they do what they wanted/needed to do, and when the cost pushes the ROI too low they do without something, or find a workaround. The demand is still there, just unmet.
The problem with roads is that cars are really really inefficient and drivers don't have to pay for the road, so a driver can extract government subsidies by driving more.
You run into the same problem with free or heavily subsidized public transit. The trains were crowded in Germany when the government instated a temporary 9€ ticket for all public transit (buses, subway, tram, regional trains, etc) in all cities.
It is more complicated than that, for sure. I definitely pay for the roads in my city. And I pay for the mass transit in my city despite almost never using it.
It does not seem controversial that if you raise the cost for something, less people will make that choice. That does not mean that the underlying demand actually did not exist to begin with. If you made the cost zero, you would find the real demand.
Maybe renters were such a crazy high percent that despite the fact they were all wrapped up in their jobs and children vs retirees with nothing else to do in their $1M house than show up to meeting to influence the political apparatus they they still finally balanced out at the planning and zoning meetings.
California also passed a ton of laws that effectively upzoned the state in various ways. Minnesota did the same thing a few years back.
This seems like the only real path - you cannot beat out these skeezy local homeowners and landlords at the corrupt local politics game. You need statewide politicians who have political ambitions to build off of solving these problems.
plenty of renters ask for rent control instead of increasing supply. Often they make the mistake of seeing high prices for new apartments and mistakenly believe those high prices mean the rent is going up over all.
You will have to be way more specific. Every time I see a post bringing up the topic of sideloading (like this one), it is a complaint that either another product is locked down or Google itself is trying to lock everything down.
Look at the flippant dismissal in these threads (follow the discussions - don't just scroll past the parent comments). There's a shocking amount of disagreement:
Here's a few of the worst-aged comments, from a glance:
Absolutely no need to wail and rant about Apple and their App Store practices constantly. Just use Android.
You don't hear about 14 million iPhones being infected by malware
But this is the argument with the cookie banners again, isn't it?
There's a reason Louis Rossman constantly berates his audience for having the attitude of "You fucking moron, you should've gotten [insert thing here]." He calls it elitism because it's not about commiserating and working to find a solution, it's about putting yourself above someone else for having made the "correct" decision on which multi-billion dollar corporation's fishhooks you decided to drag your skin over.
Which minute of which day did he say that? Trump doesn't know what he is going to do in the next 5 minutes. What I find rather interesting is that China started building the world's largest strategic supply of petroleum at the beginning of 2016. China anticipated Trump's Iran war a decade before Trump did.
They're preparing for an invasion of Taiwan, and if they do that the US will cut off their oil supply, so they need the reserves. They're betting they can take Taiwan fast enough that they can present a fait a complis, and negotiate a re-opening of trade routes before their reserves run out.
Thanks, I was so concerned about all the current wars, I had completely forgotten about the wars-to-be. But I had figured that Taiwan was safe after announcing the self-destructs in the chip fabs. Hope springs eternal.
I don’t see why Xi should care about the fabs, we’re more reliant on them than he is. I think his goals are more political and historic.
I don’t think and invasion of Taiwan would work, especially with a committed and competent administration in the US, but nobody can take that for granted nowadays. It would be a grave error anyway IMHO, but there’s no guarantee Xi sees it that way.
Hopefully the example of the grave errors made by Putin in Ukraine and Trump in Iran will persuade him that Taiwan would be far too risky.
https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=mondomondo
reply