Readit News logoReadit News
cbmuser commented on Debian's Git Transition   diziet.dreamwidth.org/204... · Posted by u/all-along
MarsIronPI · 19 hours ago
What I've always found off-putting about the Debian packaging system is that the source lives with the packaging. I find that I prefer Ports-like systems where the packaging specifies where to fetch the source from. I find that when the source is included with the packaging, it feels more unwieldy. It also makes updating the package clumsier, because the packager has to replace the embedded source, rather than just changing which source tarball is fetched in the build recipe.
cbmuser · 18 hours ago
> What I've always found off-putting about the Debian packaging system is that the source lives with the packaging.

Many packages have stopped shipping the whole source and just keep the debian directory in Git.

Notable examples are

- gcc-*

- openjdk-*

- llvm-toolchain-*

and many more.

cbmuser commented on Debian adds LoongArch as officially supported architecture   lists.debian.org/debian-d... · Posted by u/cbmuser
renewiltord · 3 days ago
Wow man. Back in the day the Godson processors were supposed to be these MIPS chips from China that ran Linux. I wanted one just for the sheer curiosity of it all but couldn’t get one here in the US.

I wonder if there is a way to get them from Taiwan / Korea. I can’t go to mainland China.

cbmuser · 3 days ago
You can buy LoongArch hardware on AliExpress, for example.
cbmuser commented on The time has finally come for geothermal energy   newyorker.com/magazine/20... · Posted by u/riordan
thinkcontext · a month ago
It could be but the US and EU have so far been unable to build commercial fission reactors without going 2x+ over budget in time and money. China is having success but even they are not projected to have nuclear account for more than single digit percentages of their generation.

Maybe SMR's, thorium, 4th gen, etc will work out, but maybe not.

cbmuser · a month ago
»It could be but the US and EU have so far been unable to build commercial fission reactors without going 2x+ over budget in time and money.«

The EU also forgot how to build airports and train stations on budget and on time.

Should we stop building airports and train stations?

As for nuclear power plants: Germany and France built most of their reactors on budget and on time.

cbmuser commented on The time has finally come for geothermal energy   newyorker.com/magazine/20... · Posted by u/riordan
nagisa · a month ago
The options in the '70s were much different from those of today. And for France specifically what they have underground (lots of uranium, no oil, no gas & no coal) strongly suggested exactly one way forward.
cbmuser · a month ago
Wind and solar existed in the 70s as well.

Plus, Germany invested 500 billion Euros in its energy transition and is STILL heavily dependent on coal.

cbmuser commented on The time has finally come for geothermal energy   newyorker.com/magazine/20... · Posted by u/riordan
toomuchtodo · a month ago
They dabble in nuclear, but it is not their focus. China can do what the developed world cannot because they are a command economy with less expensive labor, which will only last for a bit longer due to their structural demographics. Unless the developed world no longer has labor regulations, developed world wages, and capital based allocation systems, my statement stands with regards to investment. If capital and labor does not matter, certainly, anything is possible (Paraoh demanding pyramids, for example).

Your citation comes from an organization with pro nuclear bias.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakthrough_Institute

Can China Break Nuclear Power’s Cost Curse—and What Can the US Learn? - https://rooseveltinstitute.org/blog/can-china-break-nuclear-... - September 17th, 2025

China built more solar power in the last 8 months than all the nuclear power built in the entire world in the entire history of human civilisation. And even if you adjust for utilisation rate to compare against nuclear utilisation China built more solar power generated per hour than all the nuclear power currently in operation generate in an hour - and did so in 12-18 months - https://bsky.app/profile/climatenews.bsky.social/post/3lggqu... - January 23, 2025

China is installing the wind and solar equivalent of five large nuclear power stations per week - https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2024-07-16/chinas-renewa... - July 15th, 2024

Nuclear Continues To Lag Far Behind Renewables In China Deployments - https://cleantechnica.com/2024/01/12/nuclear-continues-to-la... - January 12th, 2024

Nuclear Energy & Free Market Capitalism Aren’t Compatible - https://cleantechnica.com/2023/11/06/nuclear-energy-free-mar... - November 6th, 2023

https://x.com/MoreBirths/status/1910780131318374524 | https://archive.today/iu9jx (China demographics citation)

cbmuser · a month ago
»Your citation comes from an organization with pro nuclear bias.«

Go and throw all your money into renewables stocks and ETFs if you’re so convinced.

I bet you’re not doing that because you realize that the industry isn’t doing well and it’s nuclear power nowadays where all the money goes.

cbmuser commented on The time has finally come for geothermal energy   newyorker.com/magazine/20... · Posted by u/riordan
toomuchtodo · a month ago
Enough renewables are deployed annually to replace the global nuclear fission fleet, year after year, even when accounting for capacity factor derating (to make a like for like comparison). The race is over, and renewables (with batteries) won. If you can find someone unsophisticated to invest in a fission reactor that takes billions of dollars and 10-15 years to build, more power to you. There will be no need for it by 2035-2040 when it prepares to send its first kwh to the grid.

(and to stay on topic for this thread, geothermal is a component of this when geothermal potential exists, cost is competitive, and dispatachability is a requirement to push out fossil generation in concert with renewables, hydro, legacy nuclear, battery storage discharge, and demand response)

https://www.google.com/search?q=baseload+is+a+myth

https://cleantechnica.com/2025/11/15/coal-killing-sodium-ion...

https://ember-energy.org/latest-insights/q3-global-power-rep...

https://ember-energy.org/latest-insights/solar-electricity-e...

https://ember-energy.org/latest-insights/solar-electricity-e...

https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/economic-aspec...

https://www.lazard.com/research-insights/levelized-cost-of-e...

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/solar-pv-prices

https://ourworldindata.org/battery-price-decline

https://ourworldindata.org/data-insights/solar-panel-prices-...

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44513185 (lfp battery storage cost citation in 2025)

cbmuser · a month ago
»Enough renewables are deployed annually to replace the global nuclear fission fleet, year after year, even when accounting for capacity factor derating (to make a like for like comparison).«

Wind and solar do not replace conventional power plants and never will.

Heck, Germany tried that on the small island of Pellworm and failed and yet some people think this will work out for the whole country.

It does not work.

cbmuser commented on The time has finally come for geothermal energy   newyorker.com/magazine/20... · Posted by u/riordan
toomuchtodo · a month ago
Geothermal is fission, and wind, solar, and batteries are fusion at a distance. In both cases, the failure scenarios are benign vs traditional fission generation. It's fine to keep striving for fusion humans control, but the problem (global electrification and transition to low carbon generation) is already solved with the tech we have today. It took the world 68 years to achieve the first 1TW of solar PV. The next 1TW took 2 years. Globally, ~760GW of solar PV is deployed per year (as of this comment), and will at some point hit ~1TW/year of deployment between now and 2030.

Geothermal is a great fit for dispatchable power to replace coal and fossil gas today (where able); batteries are almost cheaper than the cost to ship them, but geothermal would also help solve for seasonal deltas in demand vs supply ("diurnal storage").

https://reneweconomy.com.au/it-took-68-years-for-the-world-t...

https://ember-energy.org/data/2030-global-renewable-target-t...

I also love geothermal for district heating in latitudes that call for it; flooded legacy mines appear to be a potential solution for that use case.

Flooded UK coalmines could provide low-carbon cheap heat 'for generations' - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45860049 - November 2025

cbmuser · a month ago
Look at Electricity Maps and realize that France is the only large industrial country where electricity generation is permanently carbon-free and cheap.

https://particulier.edf.fr/content/dam/2-Actifs/Documents/Of...

cbmuser commented on The time has finally come for geothermal energy   newyorker.com/magazine/20... · Posted by u/riordan
bryanlarsen · a month ago
Baseload generation is useless in 2025. It's in the name; it's called "base load", not "base generation".

Base generation was a cost optimization. Planners noticed that load never dropped below a specific level, and that cheapest power was from a plant designed to run 100% of the time rather than one designed to turn on and off frequently. So they could reduce cost by building a mix of base and peaker generation plants.

In 2025, that's no longer the case. The cheapest power is solar & wind, which produces power intermittently. And the next cheapest power is dispatchable.

To take advantage of this cheap intermittent power, we need a way to provide power when the sun isn't shining and the wind isn't blowing. Which is provided by storage and/or peaker plants.

That's what we need. If added non-dispatchable power to that mix than we're displacing cheap solar/wind with more expensive mix, and still not eliminating the need for further storage/peaker plants.

If non-dispatchable power is significantly cheaper than storage and/or peaker power than it's useful in a modern grid. That's not the case in 2025. The next cheapest power is natural gas, and it's dispatchable. If you restrict to clean options, storage & geographical diversity is cheaper than other options. Batteries for short term storage and pumped hydro for long term storage.

cbmuser · a month ago
Or just build out nuclear like France and pay just 20 Cents per kWh.

https://particulier.edf.fr/content/dam/2-Actifs/Documents/Of...

cbmuser commented on The time has finally come for geothermal energy   newyorker.com/magazine/20... · Posted by u/riordan
jamescrowley · a month ago
Baseload is traditionally about generation, not consumption. And baseload generation only makes sense when it is the cheapest option.

When solar and wind produce at near-zero marginal cost, running inflexible baseload beside them just forces cheaper generation to switch off, driving up system costs.

What the grid needs is dispatchable capacity - batteries, hydro, gas peakers (if we must) and demand shifting - that can plug the gaps when cheaper forms of generation cannot.

cbmuser · a month ago
It sounds great in theory but doesn’t work in practice.

Just compare Germany to France.

u/cbmuser

KarmaCake day2224October 22, 2019View Original