for the rest of the migration I had to take it piece by piece, luckily my iPhone had enough storage, I got iCloud to download everything to my iPhone, then syncthing-ed everything to another machine. I then backed up everything that I just downloaded from iCloud to a Hetzner Storage Box via restic.
What are you talking about? Germany would be more energy independent if it had adopted solar and wind power when Greenpeace was advocating it fourty years ago, like China is showcasing today!
The question is not if renewables can replace nuclear. Obviously it is technically possible. The question is how many times bigger should be installed peak power of renewables. 20x? 50x? And of course if it’s economically viable. Because China does not gamble with renewables. They build nuclear capacity at unprecedented levels.
Check latitutes of largest cities in Germany, and compare them to largest cities in China. Have you noticed how all of major German cities are much further north than major Chinese cities?
Your argument is basically "It's only 80% as efficient as another country" so it has to be bad?
what if it's already 50% better than any alternative? Solarpunk is alive and well and economies of scale of panels and batteries will make it even more affordable and viable.
China connected 5 solar panels every second of last year. This is happening.
There is a significant difference in term of dependency when it comes to solar vs gas/oil. Solar panels are not consumables when int comes to energy production- oil and gas are. China can shutdown the supply of solar panels, but not the energy generation with existing panels. This gives you time to start building other supply channels.
> in term of dependency when it comes to solar vs gas/oil.
I don't agree. Oil and gas can be sourced from many different countries, you don't have to rely only on Russia. Russia is just the obvious choice if you are in the middle of Europe, but there are many other producers.
If China stops the supply of solar panels today, you are only good if you have already achieved 100% energy needs coverage with solar. No large country is going to be at that level anytime soon.
This will result in incorrect behavior when, between converting to UTC and back to the original timezone, the timezone database has changed, which happens more often than you think.
Depends what you're actually storing. There are plenty of cases where the timezone is not metadata; it defines how the datetime should be interpreted.
For example: your local mom and pop corner store's daily opening and closing times. Storing those in UTC is not correct because mom and pop don't open and close their store based on UTC time. They open and close it based on the local time zone.
You conflate different concepts here. The actual moment of opening and closing can be stored in UTC, because it's proper time. Scheduling algorithm is an algorithm, not time. You can use DSL similar to time to code this algorithm, but being DSL it can go only so far to implement it.
You don't need to store the timezone anywhere, you just need to know the current local timezone when the stored UTC time is used. And that's why storing in UTC is better, because it only takes one conversion to represent it in some arbitrary local time.
If you stored it as a local time (ie: with TZ), then if it's ever later translated to a different local time (different TZ), you're now dealing with all the quirks of 2 different timezones. It's great way to be off by some multiple of 15 minutes, or even a day or two!
Heck, even if it's the same exact location, storing in local time can still require conversion if that location uses daylight savings! You're never safe from needing to adapt to timezones, so storing datetimes in the most universal format is pretty much always the best thing to do.
The paper ceiling is a silly gatekeeping done by those who have made it.
I would be in favor of licensing knowing it would probably exclude me unless of course it does not require a university degree. I was not born into a family of means and being autodidactic allowed me to excel beyond my upbringing.
The best path would be to have journeyman type of pathway.
Basically you find a grad right now and make them do a coding test. Something is broken there.
A degree could include the vocational qualification as a 1 year study, but having the vocation qualification alone would save youngsters a lot of money and reduce the burden on hiring. You could even still interview coding questions but the application process can remove the spam/ai bullshit to some extent. "Can they code?" is answered.
It takes decades to build new nuclear plants. This won’t solve anything until they are built.
Renewables /are/ good for reducing CO2, as every kW produced by renewable is not produced by CO2-emitting alternative. Plus, they make you independent from foreign energy sources.
Yes, it takes decades to build new nuclear plants. And the Greens in Germany (amongst other political parties) have been blocking new nuclear power plants for exactly those decades.
More pertinently: those nuclear power plants they shut off were already running. Keeping a plant running takes exactly 0 years.
(You can't really blame German politics here: they just deliver what German voters want. Democracy working as intended.)
> Renewables /are/ good for reducing CO2, as every kW produced by renewable is not produced by CO2-emitting alternative.
Yes, that's exactly what I wrote?
> Plus, they make you independent from foreign energy sources.
That's a separate discussion. Wind energy in Germany and burning German coal is independent of foreign energy sources. Burning Russian oil or importing electricity from photovoltaic in the Sahara are both foreign energy sources as far as Germany is concerned.
As long as you make sure that your foreign imports come from a wide variety of friendly countries, that's not too bad. Eg Germany importing nuclear power from France or wind power from British off-shore farms doesn't seem very concerning to me.
It's Germany, they've already built them. About a decade ago they had 17 reactors in operation powering about a quarter of the country. Three years ago they had 6 in operation responsible for about 13% of produced electricity.
The decision to decomission them is a political one, made directly after Fukushima, and fully completed last year. Nothing to do with building them, public was against them and the government listened.
My point being when Germany says they're gonna stop using coal and go all in on renewables, there's historical evidence that they'll follow through. It's just gonna take some years to complete.
You need energy now. Nuclear was phased out. That's it. That was the decision. And in 2021 was "barely" producing 13% of electric energy with the last 6 reactors.
So either you follow one approach (= mix between imports and solar/wind) or the other (=import until 2032, then import and produce with nuclear energy), with the first approach being oriented to the long run (=independent from other countries, less co2 emissions, etc.).
The largest owner of wind power installations in Sweden is China. The 5 largest producers of electricity from wind power, 3 of them are foreign (Finland, Germany and Norway).
But the knowledge and systems for producing wind tech are well distributed. A blockade of Finland would be only a small bump in the road. Not like setting the Middle East on fire is for gas.
