stinkbeetle

The alternatives are the L0 emulates a hypervisor-privileged mode to the L1 which would be a performance cost (and does not really avoid the problem since the L0 would have to emulate vmenter/vmrun and therefore be aware of the L2 anyway, or the hardware would have to provide some nested virtualization facility which seems like it would be complicated and expensive for little benefit, though I could be mistaken.

Does anything do a "real" nested virtualization in hardware? s390 might but I know ~nothing about it and it probably does not expose its bare metal hardware layers to Linux/KVM anyway.

I can almost guarantee it would not be an improvement.

Tell me exactly what part of what I wrote you're struggling with and I will try to make it simpler for you.

China produces far more absolute emissions than USA.

I love how the intelligentsia claim without evidence that that per-capita is the important and moral metric when you talk about total emissions, then all of a sudden absolute emissions are the important thing when you point out that western countries are not at the top of the per capita lists either!

And the consumption habits of the USA are responsible for how many more tonnes of CO2 emissions that are not onshore within the USA ?

Probably quite a few thanks to globalist politicians among all major political parties to offshore production to countries with fewer regulations and much higher emissions intensity of production. But it would not be the highest emissions per capita.

Much the same as the EU.

The handwringing and self-flagellation still does not suffice for actual evidence for blaming one idiot politician in one country performing a political stunt. You clowns think this is a Captain Planet cartoon where there's a few evil moustache twirling dudes setting out to wreck the environment and you just need to defeat them and everyone around the world joins hands and its smooth sailing for the rest of eternity. You must be forever bewildered about the state of the world and shocked at the news of completely normal and foreseeable things happening, like energy being very valuable, and people wanting to buy things cheaply. I can assure you if Mr. Snowball here had never been born, there would be absolutely no difference to the current situation. If the North American landmass did not exist at all, fossil fuel use would still be causing the same kind of global carbon pollution.

The USA was far and away the very worst global source for a very long time, that only changed by offshoring the processing and manufacture that feeds US consumption.

Petrostates have been much worse by emissions per capita.

USA is around 18th country in CO2 emissions per capita, and has reduced emissions per capita around as much as the combined EU since 2000, or a little more.

Can't see how some random politician is "to blame", that's pretty absurd claim, and not supported by the claimed evidence.

Well the metric you replied to was rail network size, and was correct about the USA having the largest. "Rail performance" would more typically be measured by ton miles or tonne miles, not "tonnage". Australia still does a bit better there per capita there.

But in either case it is almost entirely these isolated short private coal and ore export lines that have no interconnection or interaction with the rest of the country's freight nor does it remove freight from any roads that the rest of the population would be using. These are virtually entirely in isolation from the rest of the country or economy or transport network and are built by and for mining multinationals. In the context of a country's governance or transport infrastructure or general rail networks, they don't say anything. If they were there or not there or private road and oversize road trains instead, it would not change anything about the rest of the country's transport.

"Australia" doesn't really set records, multinational mining companies do. The records might as well be set on another planet. There is virtually no population, roads or utilities, no agricultural land beyond low density cattle stations that need up to 50 hectares per head, no mountain ranges, no large rivers, and employing people to work on site out there is might be 3x more expensive than the rest of the economy. The records are set on private lines that operate outside normal rail regulations by agreement set down by state governments that are beholden to the mining companies.

Comparing USA's freight rail network to Australia's on those numbers paints a misleading picture. 3/4 of it is iron ore and coal being carried relatively short distances (few 100s of km) from inland out to the nearest coastal port, and most of that is away from any significant population centers.

By ton-mile, USA takes 5-6x more than Australia and much more interesting and varied conditions and freight types and destinations - not just ferrying it from a hole in the ground, across highway 1, then into a bunker at a shipping terminal.

The cap would be around the point where marginal cost exceeds benefit.

This is great, speed running the meme.

1. There were no labs.

2. There was no gain of function research being funded.

3. The baseless lab leak conspiracy theory is hateful extreme far right Russian disinformation that is very dangerous to our democracy and it has already been debunked by the science and 72 intelligence agencies and CNN. Fauci is a Saint!

4. There was a lab leak and it's Trump's fault and you're still a dangerous conspiracy theorist for having previously questioned "the experts" integrity or the possibility of a lab leak.

You really believe some billionaire oligarchs propaganda corporation over foremost self-proclaimed expert Anthony "I am the science" Fauci? Something an agent of Putin would say.

That does not follow. Many things have diminishing returns curves.

No that was a conspiracy theory fueled by Russian disinformation, the scientists and experts testified that there was no gain of function work being done and debunked it.

Seems like a reach. Not that economies were particularly ever designed, at that level, but they were also "designed" around sailing ships, horses, rail locomotives, steam power, hand harvesting wheat, weaving fabric by hand, mail for communication. Lots of things that rapidly melted away and changed entire economies and even structures of society in much shorter time than governments have been pretending to fail to address carbon pollution.

All the?

All the.

We barely regulate CO2 at all.

Not sure who the "we" is, but many jurisdictions do regulate CO2 heavily. Not only immediate direct taxes, but subsidies to competitors, increased regulatory impositions and effective moratoriums on approvals, sovereign risk factors with many countries legislating and committing to CO2 phase out.

If we started charging $100 per ton we'd see some massive changes.

Again not sure which we you are talking about, but lots of places have carbon taxes. They do make massive changes when they are priced to do so -- see, the EU. That was the point of my comment. I didn't argue markets don't respond to economic incentives, I clearly was agreeing they do. The effect has not been to solve climate change, it has been to move production offshore to markets that have much higher carbon emission intensity of production!

And it's not hard to stop those loopholes.

And the fact that these not-hard-to-stop loopholes are not stopped still doesn't make you stop to think? The taxes aren't going to solve problems or pay for externalities, they are funding graft and corruption and stifling competition.

The problem is regulations like these rarely "pay for externalities".

They impose compliance costs or costs to skirt the regulations.

CO2 emissions have not been solved despite all the regulations and taxes, quite the opposite they keep increasing and will continue to do so for a long time before even thinking about coming down. In large part because production was moved off shore to countries which have less regulation and higher emission intensity of production, which actually has the opposite effect.

Workers rights were not solved, the abuses were just off-shored to countries that still enslave people and abuse workers and allow child labor.

Tax evasion has not been solved, it's just permitted under complicated legal structures.

All these things are a godsend for bloated multinational corporations who can pay the compliance costs without blinking, and have little to worry about organic competition.

Space regulation and taxes won't solve anything. If the government had any kind of track record you might be a little open minded about it, but at this point the burden of proof would be on the people claiming that this time, taxes won't be used for corruption and graft. If there is money to be had in it, the government will take their cut and in exchange allow multinational corporations to offshore the problem to other countries.

I think you might be confusing what the issue is.

As we see in this case, the (likely) person in this case was actually found from the relatively small number of people who fit this criteria, so police were (likely) right to suspect these people.

The issue is not who the police may or may not suspect. it is about reasonable expectation of privacy. If they had obtained this exact same list of people who were near that bank for that time by a means that did not violate their reasonable expectation of privacy, then the evidence couldn't be challenged on that basis.

I have it on good authority that it is a handwritten notebook.

PA Semi group did the logic designs. I think they're talking about physical design though.

The evening peak is well on its way to being a solved problem in Australia.

https://reneweconomy.com.au/big-batteries-took-a-bite-out-of...

You realize that doesn't address the sum of what I wrote though? That is batteries taking over from gas peaking. Fossil fuels sit somewhere north of 75% of national generation when the sun is down.

And average prices in the Australian national electricity market are going down as a result:

And electricity peaking is well suited to batteries because it is very high prices and not a long period. It's great if they can be used here to reduce prices, possibly they could be used independently of solar (though solar does make them a lot cheaper to charge).

But you presumably do understand how that is not removing fossil fuels from generation with just "solar and biogas turbines for a few % of peak", or no?

Solar farms come with batteries

So it's no longer "just solar" with a biogas turbine for the remaining few % demand, is it? It's solar with batteries to cover 3x the current daily solar output plus perhaps more to deal with multi-day fluctuations.

That's a new trend and easy to miss

It's not new and not easy to miss, it's obvious they need storage to cover any more demand. This has literally been the biggest issue for solar for at least 20 years.

but it will push out coal and gas.

Maybe. How much more credible are these claims than the "solar killed coal" idiocy from years ago? I mean solar and battery tech does continue to get better so you can mindlessly point to that and yes if it kept continuing surely it would push out fossil fuels (everywhere including airplanes and ships). But if we are talking actual timeframes and realistic technology projections?

A biogas turbine for the last few percent of demand??

Peak electricity demand occurs when solar generation has dropped to nearly zero. It's not the last few percent, it's the last 90 something percent demand. This is the entire problem with solar (and wind, though slightly different patterns).

If you're going to "they should just" it, you really need to know at least that. It's just a hard problem even in Australia. The reason these "dirt cheap renewables" have not been pushing electricity prices down to historic lows anywhere in the world is that you've kind of been had by the marketing.

Solar and wind are very important and very cheap where applicable, and with more storage, better grids, and consumers that are better adapted to them they should gradually improve. But they are not going to "just" anything.

Remember how wind and solar was so cheap that it had already killed coal? That was a common mantra I heard maybe 20 years ago. Since then solar panels and wind turbines have become even cheaper and better so surely they must be moving on to just about killing off natural gas too... But no, it turns out 60% of Australia's electricity is generated by fossil fuels today, 40% being coal which is twice the amount that solar generated. How could that be possible decades after coal had been killed by solar? Really was some pretty wild propaganda.

This is not due to government corruption and incompetence and a cabal of coal barons preventing renewables. Nuclear maybe, but solar no. There is electricity generation surplus when solar is working in Australia, they turn off wind turbines and solar panels and try to give the electricity away for free. Cost of solar panels being zero would make approximately no difference to those 20% solar and 60% fossil fuels numbers.

stinkbeetle, welcome to my | hide | section, I have no more time for this level of credulity.

Wonderful, I can not stand this kind of pathetic bloviating pearl clutching, so you're doing me a real favor.

That was not your question, you asked about "we" not curious people. For the latter, there is no should about it, they just do. That is the nature of curiosity.

Lots of uncurious people don't care about understanding the world around them. This story probably isn't for them, and I'm certainly not here to try to change those kinds of attitudes.

Just because we can't solve all current problems doesn't mean we shouldn't solve any current problems.

Obviously not, but solving problems is always a cost benefit and we went from all spoofing is impossible to some spoofing is possible. What is the benefit of doing this and what is the cost?

If you want to prevent replaying as well, add a counter.

It's not clear that would be able to prevent spoofing if the attacker could overwhelm and degrade the real signal.

Yes that's what spoofing is, but why wouldn't they be able to?

(EDIT: I see the other reply thread is already asking the same thing, didn't intend to ask about the same thing)

Why would that make spoofing impossible?

I'm not asking you to believe anything. I noted that anonymous internet partisans, politicians, or anybody else with vested interests and who fail to offer any evidence or reasoning for their claims are not trustworthy. Not even when they become unhinged and start ranting about Jewish conspiracies.

Would you expect progression to cease if not reverse if the cause was cleared?