jnxx

52 ms·

451.
by jnxx 6y ago
> You're still running it at a 100% duty cycle, you're just shifting the generation times. While you can do an emergency shut-down quickly, normally adapting the power output of a nuclear plant takes many hours: https:/&#
452.
by jnxx 6y ago
> When there is zero wind and zero sun then it doesn't matter how much over provisioning there is: your output will be zero. A lot of energy use is room heating. But nobody wants their bedroom and living room in the night warmer tha
453.
by jnxx 6y ago
> From what I understand this makes grid management much simpler and reduces storage, transmission, and conversion losses. That's not so simple. Demand for energy is fluctuating hugely, and nuclear power cannot be freely switched on
454.
by jnxx 6y ago
> When there is zero wind and zero sun then it doesn't matter how much over provisioning there is: your output will be zero. That does not really happen over large geographic regions, within which one can distribute energy via the e
455.
by jnxx 6y ago
> Nuclear power is a zero emissions source of power. That's not exactly true, apart from mining for example the construction of a reactor building requires huge amounts of concrete. Also, mined uranium needs to enriched by centrif
456.
by jnxx 6y ago
> There are 4 billion tons of Uranium dissolved in Earth's seawater. There are also many tonnes of gold dispersed in rivers and seawater. It is however not economical to extract it. Also, uranium mining is often causing a lot of he
457.
by jnxx 6y ago
> the depleted Uranium(10-100x mass) can be converted into Plutonium as drop in replacement. This needs breeder technology which is a different kettle of fish. The only existing plant was the Japanese Monju plant which was closed due to
458.
by jnxx 6y ago
> It's gonna cost money. It's gonna require work. It's going to not only be opportunity cost, but require us to do stuff. This is what it means to have climate change as a priority. It's a priority above money, above
459.
by jnxx 6y ago
Hydrogen can be generated by electrolysis from excess wind power, and fed into natural gas distribution networks. This is already happening. It is possible to add a significant part of hydrogen. The advantage of this that no completely new,
460.
by jnxx 6y ago
> Perl is extinct in comparison. Which is a good example that the decrease in use can go a lot faster than you think. Perl was widely used in 2000, and thought to be on par with Python. Similarly Visual Basic which nobody seems to rememb
461.
by jnxx 6y ago
> Guix is a Linux only solution, and the whole point is not to build anything from 3rd party dependencies. First, GNU Guix requires a POSIX system, and it will happily run e.g. on top of Debian in a suitable VM. (It will also run as a st
462.
by jnxx 6y ago
That's really surprising if one considers for a moment how many things Python has in common with Common List, a language which can be compiled to run near C speed (albeit with some sacrifices on safety i.e. "unsafe" optimizat
463.
by jnxx 6y ago
If it is a common package, you could use Guix to retrieve binary library packages for your architecture. (It will build from source if there is no pre-built package).
464.
by jnxx 6y ago
> Is there a non-root way to build and a way to install at least some of the packages in my $HOME Yes. You can install Guix as a package manager on top of your POSIX OS. Then, you have profiles, and you can install packages into your pe
465.
by jnxx 6y ago
Install Guix as a package manager on a POSIX system. It really solves these problems.
466.
by jnxx 6y ago
I am sure that a GCC implementation will happen, as there are already discussions to allow Rust modules in the Linux kernel. But wait, are you saying that Go and Python are not serious languages?
467.
by jnxx 6y ago
What's also good is that one can combine cargo with Guix as an OS/multi-language package manager, for example when other tools or C libraries (say, alsa-lib) are needed. Guix provides currently 15,000 packages including many rust
468.
by jnxx 6y ago
I think that Clojure does something interesting here, but I can't quite put my finger on it. Apparently, it uses very small and abstract libraries and seems to lead to narrowed down dependencies.
469.
by jnxx 6y ago
To avoid double-posting the same content, please see my other reply here on about the same topic: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24821043
470.
by jnxx 6y ago
> Your example about vector<bool> is not really surprising. Do you want the iterator to be efficient, or consistent? The thing is, what cppreference says here is that this innocent-looking code might either not compile or cause und
471.
by jnxx 6y ago
> Low-level and high-performance code is not "pretty" by modern standards, as it often requires DMA and tight control over data placement in order to fully leverage instruction-level and hardware-level parallelism. This is true
472.
by jnxx 6y ago
> Parallelism in C++ is most often used for scientific applications and other forms of mass number crunching. There are two aspects. I agree to the aspect that today, C++ is used often for such tasks. Now, what are the reasons why C++ is
473.
by jnxx 6y ago
For me, that disillusion has been one of several steps. Scott Meyers book was one point. Then I started to learn Clojure, motivated by the idea that we need better concepts for the upcoming massively parallel hardware (a big influence for m
474.
by jnxx 6y ago
Many thanks for the explanation!
475.
by jnxx 6y ago
> C++ can be vastly simpler and more readable, while retaining 100% control over memory and layout. But unlike assembly, you don't have control over CPU flag registers and special instructions. Can you explain why and when, exactly,
476.
by jnxx 6y ago
> So first, C++ in a small codebase with a small team, is a very powerful language that really does produce the best code. Does it? https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/...
477.
by jnxx 6y ago
What are the cases where you would use specifically Ocaml instead of C++ or Rust?
478.
by jnxx 6y ago
> Of course you can do a data table representation in almost any language, but once you benchmark the implementations, the languages that gives you full control of memory and are good at moving bytes are the ones that lead in performance
479.
by jnxx 6y ago
> That assertion makes zero sense if we take into account that parallelization is one of the most basic performance techniques there is I would not support that stance. There are areas where parallelization is helpful, like numerical wea
480.
by jnxx 6y ago
> Any software where you will need to develop serious things for will suck. Well, "serious things", that is, larger, robust programs need a lot of experience and discipline. This is true in any language and if people do not wat

More ›