Google isn't even accessible in the biggest country with the most people on the internet. So the HN title is misleading, in that it isn't 20% worldwide.
You don't know that, even when you count in more Chinese people it could still not change the world average. The title is fine since it represents an extremely big sample on the most visited page on the Internet.
There is no "right to purchase an electronic device without replaceable parts". You just made that up. But I'll answer your question anyway.
Because it's a giant waste that is destroying the planet, and is economically irresponsible and noncompetitive?
Why should the arseholes who produce things that break in one year have a competitive advantage over companies that do the right thing by their customers and by the planet?
There is also no right to have companies build products that are easy to repair. The EU and a bunch of internet activists made this up.
You have the right to try to repair something. If it was built so that it was hard to repair, well you shouldn't have bought it in the first place.
Almost all rights are "made up". Anyway, I really hope this law passes because it will fuck up even more small businesses in the EU and drive them to the US.
People have (or should have) the right to manufacture whatever products they want, and other people should have the right to buy whatever products they want. The only restrictions should be to prevent fraud (product has to work as advertised) and protect consumer safety (product shouldn't blow up).
You already have the right to pay extra for an extended warranty, or go shopping around for a version of X product that is user-maintainable. You also have the right to pay less for a shorter warranty, or buy a compact, tightly-integrated, non-repairable product. The EU's "right of repair" is merely a ban on the second category of product.
Also Australia is one of the most expensive places on the planet - in the urban centers. They already have space near the wind farm for very cheap. As a bonus you don't have a giant Samsung Galaxy situation near so many people.
Tesla sold a financial product. The government needed to cover some of the risk of when power lines go down, or if something goes wrong in another part of the network. It needs to cover this risk quickly for political reasons.
The chance of another similar storm knocking out the power lines again, which now have bigger maintenance crews, is very small. But if there is another blackout and they didn't do anything? They'd be in big trouble with the newspapers.
So Tesla really sold a risk product. Since SA could have spent the money on more generation. But not all people understand that.
The 100MW stage of that wind farm cost $250 million, and took some years to reach agreement, and some years to build. By promising to build the battery quicker, they have covered that risk during the time they need it.
They could have installed another wind farm the same size in a different part of the state in order to reduce the risk, and fill up the valleys of power generation. That has been proven to work too, and the benefit is you have more power generation in the peaks.
The cost of the blackout was estimated to have cost $367 million to business. 12% of the businesses had backup power generators themselves, and about a third of the businesses had bought insurance for such situations. Life critical systems are required to have independent backup power.
By the time it's built there will probably be a similar amount of solar power installed as the battery (by current rates of installation). There's 2,034 MW of industrial solar being constructed in Australia for 2017. This doesn't include stuff going onto roofs of houses, of which there are millions of houses already covered and more being done. 5KW solar installed in Australia can be done for $5,000AUD or less for a 5KW system. That's $100 million AUD for 100MW on 20,000 homes.
There's also a lead smelter which is being upgraded, so it will have modern equipment which lets it use power more dynamically... effectively making it a battery. It can take in power, or not, as it needs. They can also shut down their power hungry desalination plant if needed (which they don't really need when there is not a drought).
So now they have a backup battery, a backup gas power plant, and backup power lines to another state, more efficient industrial power users, and hundreds of thousands of small independent solar power generators.
It's not just insurance if power goes down. It'll knock the edges off the price-peaks, which SA suffers badly from.
Gas fired power stations don't fire up until they can get the maximum price possible, and often try to drive the price higher by stopping producing power. SA is very vulnerable to that because there is no backstop of coal prices. OTOH, the minimum price of wind power and solar is much lower.
These batteries will kill the peaking gas generator game.
>They could have installed another wind farm the same size in a different part of the state in order to reduce the risk.
From a macro level, wind and solar makes the most logical sense when twinned with battery storage, the nature of the power they produce and to a lesser extend how users consume that power is unpredictable, so the battery is used for peak shaving the demand and supply.
Whilst not overtly disagreeing with any of your major points, the alternative to this 'financial product' as you term this infrastructure investment (an asset on the ground is hardly a financial product, because a financial product is worth nothing once it's term ends, whereas even when the cells can hold no more charge they're going to be worth a residual in recycling) is an alternative where we are actually building more infrastructure - gas or coal.
This one arrangement has the potential to totally change the completely derailed energy policy discussion in australia, which continues to default to a coal or gas fired immediacy and future, out of fear over rationality.
So If you need to give history access to your client I guess you can put up a "entity_history" function that will generate a snapshot entity table from his request and the log table.
It all depend on your need, RDMS schema are customely build to meet customers needs, I don't believe in proverbial Swiss knife tool anymore.
I guess Conda is the most popular one. In the python world, we glue all sorts of things together. So I guess it's natural it'd come from there. But now it supports all sorts of stuff other than python.
They don't need to back it up. It is up to the person making the original claim to back it up.
There's half a century of research and practice into this topic. Anyone in the industry _should_ know about this. Anyone who doesn't can find it on a search engine within 30 seconds.
No, it's a well known problem. The old lines of code joke still applies. You can introduce metrics, but those will just be gamed because software is a multidimensional optimization problem with complex trade offs. So, you can't translate that to a single measurement and call it productivity.
