KillingTimeItself @ KillingTimeItself @lemmy.dbzer0.com

Posts

0

Comments

4,358

Joined

2 yr. ago

I still haven’t set up an automatic mount point for my shared NTFS drive to load on boot, both because I don’t have a good grasp on the fstab and because Windows does a chkdisk every time I mount it in Linux. Dual access storage still seems iffy as of 2025.

i've been fine mounting my C drive under linux using ntfs3g under arch linux (similar enough to manjaro) though this was prior to ntfs being natively supported in the kernel, so that may have different consequences, realistically i would advise you to use a network storage for inter device compat since you can run samba or something, which is well integrated into linux and windows (though it's a little fucky in linux, it does work, and it works reliably) It makes life so much easier. Either that or use an external drive that you intend to be intercompat, not running NTFS, but using ext4 or something. That's another decent option.

My best advice to you going forward is be thoughtful about the devices and software you spend time and money on, it's really easy when you're in the windows environment to just use whatever exists, but on linux you do have to spend a bit more time thinking about it, but that's just the nature of the beast.

why doesn't everybody understand that it's ALWAYS the year of the linux desktop, you just haven't been invited yet, that's the only problem.

i can understand the thought process, especially if you're going to do a full DC and no AC at all setup. The problem that i have is that switching from AC mains, to DC mains is such an incredibly tall order that you have to think about literally everything you integrate fairly significantly, otherwise you're going to end up implementing AC mains as well, and then you're not in a much better spot, even though you may now have more losses, chances are you could just offset them with more production and storage, or better inversion.

It's an interesting project for sure, just not likely to be one i would ever invest time into lol.

personally im not a fan of IoT devices being on my lan, so i would prefer to use things like zwave or zigbee, or just ethernet, minimizes attack vectors which is good.

You really can just put a network connected raspi on just about anything and integrate it into some form of centralized automation.

uh, you clean the panels for one. Outside of that, you import external energy, or use other generation sources.

im pretty sure most of the will do a yearly breakout over the months? A really big reason to use them is to figure out maximum and minimum production throughout the year, so idk what calculator you're using, but any good ones should be able to calculate that.

I've used PVwatts before, and it does spit out monthly data, though it can also bring in some more complex data, it's a whole field of research, and it's worth investing time into if you're curious about it.

we've tried literally everything, nothing has worked, the only thing we can do at this point is be content in ourselves, try to offer people help when they need it, and laugh at those who perish by their own musings.

It's sink or swim, and if you aren't going to swim, you're going to sink.

destruction of uranium mining is far less than the mining of rare earth metals, coal, oil, gas, iron, copper, bauxite, can i keep going? You need VASTLY less uranium than ANY of these other materials. It's quite literally a non concern at scale.

the toxic cooling water

you clearly understand nothing about nuclear power, Do you live next/nearby a nuclear power plant? If so can you tell me what plant it is so i can do some research on it? Even if i grant you this argument, in the BWR design, which is ancient and hasnt been used in 20 years, which is technically going to have radiation products in the primary turbine loop (the cooling loop is mechanically isolated and has ZERO radiation products in it, unless it fails, and even if it DID fail, it would decay so quickly the chance of it causing harm is going to be almost zero, not to mention that the plant would probably shut down very quickly.

If we're talking modern reactor designs, like the PWR, they have a primary pressurized loop, which is going to have radiation products in it, however this is also a pressurized loop and unsuitable for running a turbine, so it's going to be coupled to a heat exchanger for the turbine loop, which is then also going to be coupled to another heat exchanger so the chances of BOTH of these loops failing and releasing radiation products is quite literally, impossible. Even TMI had zero known radiation products released, there have been groups and studies claiming that there was, but those were not suitably backed up, and provide no significant proof, there's also tons of evidence against these claims, notably the reactor PCV wasn't penetrated, meaning it was entirely contained, so it's extremely unlikely any amount of radiation got outside of that containment, and if we did, we would know about.

Fukushima is probably the go to point out here, but fukushima was a BWR reactor, and uh, fucking exploded. I only know of three nuclear incidents where reactors exploded, one being chernobyl, an objectively bad reactor core design, SL1 which was user error, and a bad design. And well, fukushima, which was user error, bad design, bad regulation, and bad handling. TMI just melted, so nothing funny happened there.

little bonus tidbit here, if we're talking modern designs, which are going to be either gas or metal/salt cooling based, where it's practically impossible to have a significant failure event, especially with designs like the SSR. Even if you did manage to spill metal/salt fuel it's going to be self contained within the fuel itself. The SSR design takes this one step farther and puts the fuel into fuel rods, which then sit in a salt pool.

spend radioactive fuel rods

these are only a problem for certain reactor designs, designs like the CANDU reactor, and other fast reactor designs (any molten salt/metal reactor is by definition a fast reactor btw) can actually burn the spent waste from PWR designs as fuel, bringing it down to a much safer less significant point in the product chain, by that point encasing them in concrete is going to entirely absorb all of the radiation emitted, and any sort of criticality incident is going to be impossible. And if you're REALLY concerned about these casks, go put them far underground in a big deep hole.

contaminated machinery.

we've literally been working with this shit since nuclear bombs, contamination is quite literally a solved problem, some reactor designs even burn straight unprocessed uranium, though the after products are particularly nasty, those can also be burnt off

Real clean…

compared to something like coal? Absolutely, even when comparing to the fabled wind and solar energy, it's still right up beside them in terms of the rankings. Nuclear power is only bad if you're scared of it.

i mean, i would also, but that's a weird way to phrase that statement

i think im good on tha one cheif

yeah, i'm definitely not as aggressive on that, but then again i also dont really like having a lot things on my network, or connected to my grid, so i suppose i just sort of optimize that problem out. Plus like i said, convenience, running 120v and 240v is going to be significantly more beneficial for me since i primarily use high wattage draw devices that would benefit from more efficient transmission and conversion (servers and any high power switching power supply basically) i've thought about doing a low voltage network, but that really only seems like it's going to be a bigger mess, for no real significant gain, i have to have central DC conversion and regulation now? I'm just not sure it's worth it, unless i'm pulling it straight from a dedicated battery bank or something, but that doesn't really make any sense to me. I might end up using lower voltage LED products for a lot of lighting, but i think i would rather have a handful of high quality high efficiency power supplies, rather than a global one and some weird ass 48v system where i need to convert from AC natively, unless i'm doing some really weird shit, and then down/up convert to any device as needed. It seems like a bit much for removing the AC conversion part of the problem, but that's just me i guess.

One of the nice things about 120/240 is that our grid is sort of designed for it, so there are some clever ways you can go about utilizing it appropriately. Certain plug specs use both hot/live legs, and neutral (plus ground) so you can technically pull 120/240 voltage out of a single plug, which is quite the trick. You could also fairly easily wire up both of these in more standardized outlet receptacles as well. (although i dunno what the electric code looks like for this one)

My ultimate goal would be doing a decentralized off grid production/storage solution, so high efficiency on higher draws is going to be really important, as well as the ability to standardize on a widely accepted voltage standard. The only real advantage i can think of to using DC grid, is that it would be safer, but like, that's a solved problem so idk.

personally im not huge on smart grid stuff, though i like the idea of smart grid management, being able to do "useful" things with excess generated power, or pull from storage banks at will given a certain rule set defined under a smart home system is way too convenient to ignore.

i still think the green party is nothing but a meme and should be completely abolished, just fucks up the voting outcomes.

it literally is clean, the only dirty thing about it is building a nuclear plant, and the mining of uranium, the only unique thing here being the mining of uranium, and technically the scale of construction, but im still not convinced that a nuclear plant produces more CO2 in construction phase, than it will offset in it's lifetime, maybe solar and wind edge it out, but again, nuclear energy already exists, it's a heavily established industry and well regulated, so it's not like it should be the first focus on the chopping block. Especially compared to all the modern problems we have with solar, like the rare earth metals, and mining conditions often experienced. Wind turbines are better, but have issues with scaling, and waste.

that was gen alpha that popularized that one, and im pretty sure the creator of the series is either late gen z or millenial, so maybe get your facts in chronological order before you make fun of the wrong person

no i understand perfectly what you're saying, it's just not your or my job to tell other people how to live their lives, if they want to ruin their lives, by all means they have the right to go and do it, but if you are going to listen to me, you better damn well take my advice because this should be paid. That's the point i'm trying to make.

yeah and uh, idk if you noticed, generally more than one person lives in an apartment building, it's about as good as it's going to get unless you're installing solar from tax payer money, or utility company money.

While tracking might let you collect more energy, you also lose more of your balcony, and you’re back to making the install expensive and complicated. Not worth it

dont use tracking on a balcony??? Also not all tracking setups are expensive and complicated, the entire reason you would want to do them is to greatly increase the total amount of power production throughout the day, and you can very easily calculate the complexity cost, maintenance cost, and additional install cost over to the potential saved/produced value of the array post installation.

I mean if you're doing 2 axis tracking, sure it's probably more expensive, but one axis tracking is still reasonably effective, especially if you're in a decent spot and able to take advantage of it. The other option is installing more panels total, and when you're space limited, that's going to become a constraint.

that is true, but it's pretty common for apartment blocks to have some sort of management and front of house staff, so it's not impossible. Even easier to deal with if you're in some sort of co op situation.

in an apartment specifically? Why would you build your own house when you can build a large building and then live in segmented housing blocks within that building?

It's literally just breaking the entire idea of apartment block housing for the purposes of providing less usable, less functional solar power. If you want to do your own install on top of an existing install on the apartment, go ahead, nobody is going to stop you, but you would see more returns if you managed to install solar directly on the roof of the building in the first place. Economy of scale is going to be advantageous for you in literally any case, that's just the truth.

There were people who specifically got themselves arrested to observe conditions within the concentration camps and then escape because some reports of conditions were too unbelievable

literally makes my point for me lol

yeah that sounds about right, someone should make an XKCD search engine i think.