6 ms·

Texas's separate grid dates back decades, and was driven by a conscious desire to optimize for the needs of manufacturing. It doesn't have anything to do with c

Texas's separate grid dates back decades, and was driven by a conscious desire to optimize for the needs of manufacturing. It doesn't have anything to do with climate-change denial or the current governor. By allowing your evaluation of the situation to be influenced by that sort of thing, you are engaging in a kind of recency bias -- imagining that the future can cause the past.

mannykannot 6y ago
All of today's grids started with smaller, less-connected entities. That is not an adequate justification for the current situation. The idea that Texas alone is somehow constrained, by forces beyond its control, from changing with the times, is absurd. Is Texas doomed by its history to live with the cold-vulnerable infrastructure that led up to these problems, on account of the way things were decades ago? Of course not - things will be fixed.
- solidsnack9000 6y ago
  Texas's policy decision, to remain separate from the other grids, dates to the 1930s. It's not about being constrained, it's about this policy choice. ERCOT, the current organization that manages Texas's electricity, dates from the 1970s. Trying to explain this policy choice in terms of the current political climate is ahistorical and a little strange. How could an informed person believe the current governor has anything to do with decision dating to the 1930s? However, that's the kind of explanation you were offering, and that's what I'm objecting to: this curious recency bias, so prevalent in tech forums, where everything that happened more than 10 years ago is not real.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - mannykannot 6y ago
    I see you are still pusuing the ridiculous idea that Texas, unlike literally everywhere else on Earth, has been constrained* from upgrading its infrastructure on account of decisions made nearly a century ago. *Denying that it is a constraint does not alter the fact that your argument, such as it is, depends on it being one.
    - solidsnack9000 6y ago
      What you posted earlier is ridiculous because you're trying to explain the Texas grid in terms of current political trends, like the decision was made in the last few years.
      - mannykannot 6y ago
        So, despite your argument being in tatters, you insist that something I wrote must be illogical, somehow? well, you are at least doggedly wrong, I'll give you that. If you are tempted to post further (I am sure you are), I suggest that you first read what I actually wrote in my original post in this thread.
        solidsnack9000 6y ago
        I suggest you read what you wrote in reply to me, and what I replied to.
        deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
        mannykannot 6y ago
        Unsurprisingly, nothing has changed. Not only are you arguing against a statement I did not make, but if someone else had said that, your response is nonsense because it requires that Texas, alone, has been completely constrained by decisions made 40-90 years or more ago.
        solidsnack9000 6y ago
        What is that leads you to say that?
        mannykannot 6y ago
        The stream of nonsense with which you have replied to me with, of course - and maybe you know it is nonsense, as you have stopped trying to defend it. At this point, it would be better for you to acknowledge it is nonsense, rather than give the impression that you still cannot figure out that it is.
  - wglb 6y ago
    The political climate of Texas is at least a generation old, the current governor is part of that set of folks.
542354234235 6y ago
> was driven by a conscious desire to optimize for the needs of manufacturing. Wasn't it so Texans could continue to live in the fantasy world that they could secede from the US any time they wanted?
- krapp 6y ago
  Surprisingly, Texas' pathological urge to secede every time a Democrat wins the White House seems to have been abated by recent events[0]. [0]https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2021-02-17/texas-severe-weather-power-crisis-secession https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2021-02-17/texas-seve...

mannykannot 6y ago

All of today's grids started with smaller, less-connected entities. That is not an adequate justification for the current situation. The idea that Texas alone is somehow constrained, by forces beyond its control, from changing with the times, is absurd. Is Texas doomed by its history to live with the cold-vulnerable infrastructure that led up to these problems, on account of the way things were decades ago? Of course not - things will be fixed.

solidsnack9000 6y ago
Texas's policy decision, to remain separate from the other grids, dates to the 1930s. It's not about being constrained, it's about this policy choice. ERCOT, the current organization that manages Texas's electricity, dates from the 1970s. Trying to explain this policy choice in terms of the current political climate is ahistorical and a little strange. How could an informed person believe the current governor has anything to do with decision dating to the 1930s? However, that's the kind of explanation you were offering, and that's what I'm objecting to: this curious recency bias, so prevalent in tech forums, where everything that happened more than 10 years ago is not real.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- mannykannot 6y ago
  I see you are still pusuing the ridiculous idea that Texas, unlike literally everywhere else on Earth, has been constrained* from upgrading its infrastructure on account of decisions made nearly a century ago. *Denying that it is a constraint does not alter the fact that your argument, such as it is, depends on it being one.
  - solidsnack9000 6y ago
    What you posted earlier is ridiculous because you're trying to explain the Texas grid in terms of current political trends, like the decision was made in the last few years.
    - mannykannot 6y ago
      So, despite your argument being in tatters, you insist that something I wrote must be illogical, somehow? well, you are at least doggedly wrong, I'll give you that. If you are tempted to post further (I am sure you are), I suggest that you first read what I actually wrote in my original post in this thread.
      - solidsnack9000 6y ago
        I suggest you read what you wrote in reply to me, and what I replied to.
        deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
        mannykannot 6y ago
        Unsurprisingly, nothing has changed. Not only are you arguing against a statement I did not make, but if someone else had said that, your response is nonsense because it requires that Texas, alone, has been completely constrained by decisions made 40-90 years or more ago.
        solidsnack9000 6y ago
        What is that leads you to say that?
        mannykannot 6y ago
        The stream of nonsense with which you have replied to me with, of course - and maybe you know it is nonsense, as you have stopped trying to defend it. At this point, it would be better for you to acknowledge it is nonsense, rather than give the impression that you still cannot figure out that it is.
- wglb 6y ago
  The political climate of Texas is at least a generation old, the current governor is part of that set of folks.

542354234235 6y ago

> was driven by a conscious desire to optimize for the needs of manufacturing. Wasn't it so Texans could continue to live in the fantasy world that they could secede from the US any time they wanted?

krapp 6y ago
Surprisingly, Texas' pathological urge to secede every time a Democrat wins the White House seems to have been abated by recent events[0]. [0]https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2021-02-17/texas-severe-weather-power-crisis-secession https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2021-02-17/texas-seve...