My house is a relatively normal size (1800 square feet), and it still takes more than three full minutes for water in my shower to reach full temperature when I run it straight hot. If I also turn on both faucets in my bathroom, I can get that down to about twenty or thirty seconds, which is barely tolerable.

At my mom's house in Tennessee, the distance the water has to travel is comparable, but it takes only ten seconds or so.

It's a huge downside to all the water-saving showerheads and faucets that were forced upon us here in California decades ago. We waste a lot of time and energy to make up for a water shortage that exists only because of decades of politicians being short-sighted and kicking the desalination can down the road over and over so that the money doesn't get spent on their watch.

Translation: A company that has the potential to benefit from regulation by squeezing out competitors wants more regulation.

I'm not saying they're not right, just that it seems awfully convenient for a company specializing in pumps that recirculate data center water to want efficiency regulations that would push customers towards their most efficient (and thus presumably most high-margin) pumps.

Instead of having your hot water fan out in a tree, you wire it like a token ring with a return pipe, where each faucet only has a short bit of pipe between it and the ring. Then, you have a pump to circulate hot water through the ring-shaped pipe network. That way, it takes half a second to get hot water instead of half a minute or more.

Sure. I'd imagine most hardware vendors will want it. I'm just saying that the wording, at least as described in the summary, is... problematic at best.

I've seen people make that argument before, that there is no difference. You can make that argument if you want, but if you can't provide a viable candidate then you're not helping anything.

Let me be extra direct here. I have never seen a candidate in a race I could vote in that I agreed with 100%. Frankly anytime I meet someone who tells me they agree with a politician 100% of the time I tend to want to tell them they need their head examined (unless they are themselves a politician, in which case doubly so). Even politicians like Bernie Sanders I don't agree with 100% of the time.

Complaining about the rules is not productive. We've seen what the SCOTUS will do about such arguments, we can't get help from them either. The only way to advance is to support someone who will actually do something useful. Pretending that they all do the same shit doesn't help either; there are meaningful platform differences. Just because Drumpf has held every position on every issue doesn't mean he doesn't stand for anything, either - he's actually followed through on some of his (very worst) initial promises.

Not really. It's more like requiring all vendors who sell cash registers used in restaurants to support checking photo IDs because some restaurants also serve alcohol.

There's no safe way to prove your age to a website. Any scheme requires trusting some arbitrary third party that could secretly be the government doing timing comparisons between the verification and DNS queries and stuff to unmask anonymous users. At least with operating system or browser vendors, they presumably have a strong commitment to minimizing the risk of someone publicly posting "John Doe just visited sexwithseaturtles.com" or whatever.

It's not really that terrible. If you're going to do age verification, you have two choices: browser or operating system. All else is all but guaranteed to be either a privacy disaster, a usability disaster, or both. And either way, every operating system needs to support multiple users, or the "I used dad's iPad to browse porn and buy firearms" problem makes the verification useless.

And major operating system or browser vendors that cater to the general public should make it available by default, because doing so prevents the "You downloaded the AdultCheck module, so you must be a pervert" logic that some people might use to attack people.

What's terrible is the idea of mandating that it be performed at the OS level, rather than just mandating that the OS doesn't get in the way. Browser-level verification is actually far preferable, because there's no need to bake that into an authentication framework when you can just send it out to a browser window. Leave that tiny bit of integration complexity to the companies that actually require it. But this only works if the OS supports multiple users, so that the browser's cookies and storage are not shared across multiple users.

For devices that don't have multiple users, baking it in at the OS level really is the only way, but it could just as easily be solved by baking it in at the browser level and changing the OS to allow multiple users per device. Unfortunately, such technical details are way too subtle a point for most lawmakers to understand, so obviously they did it in the most wrong way possible.

Wait 'til they realize that Android is distributed under a license that allows people to copy, redistribute, and modify it.

As usual, a law created by people who didn't think of the consequences then got modified to fix some of the worst consequences, but because they still did not think of the consequences, the modification created different consequences. And this is why we need better lawmakers.

Your post history contradicts that. The correct statement is that you are against governments that are not run by your Lord and Savior. For you, the first rule that needs to go is the separation of church and state, you want to fuse the two forever together.

500 panels per 1000 m^2 is pretty achievable, accounting for whatever roof penetrations and facilities that need to be there. Some of those buildings are outright colossal. Plus, nobody is saying the data centers needs to be completely powered by solar.
Here's the thing: the lions share of power consumption on the grid traditionally comes from cooling. Most cooling needs, outside of the context of data centers, coincides with the sunniest, highest production times for solar panels. There is a great synergy to take advantage of here. It might be that a such a data center / solar farm farm actually produces net power for a portion of the day, covering for residential use or car charging etc. but is a net consumer off peak hours, when it's more efficient to use other means to supply power when most other consumers aren't using as much. Net effect is better grid utilization and reduced costs all around.

Don't pretend you wouldn't celebrate it as a great step forward if your Lord and Savior were the one promoting it, instead of the current leader.

Though ultimately, this could be an improvement for drivers and trucking companies. The logs truckers are legally required to keep and carry are a substantial burden. If the government can track it instead that could allow the drivers to spend more time actually driving and less time doing paperwork. You should be celebrating that as it means they have more time to do actual work.

Under strict supervision, yes. Unfortunately there is no supervision left as there are only two people working for slashdot and they both have real jobs in the outside world that pay the bills (Taco of course left years ago).

And don't ask about the unicode support they were working on 20 years ago...

Right now the contest is between fascists and cowards. The "independents" cannot compete with the way the system is set up. I'm sorry that is the case, but we all know it's true. Yes third parties can win governor's races and other such non-federal seats but they don't exist where national policy is made. You can go vote for your favorite third party candidate or for Mickey Fucking Mouse if you want. If that makes you feel better about yourself, great. It's marginally better than not voting at all, but only marginally.

Smart money is on a Lenin-style mausoleum for Trump with a body permanently preserved in a top-secret cocktail of preservatives. Not that he hasn't already begun that process with his diet...

This has to be the most obnoxious demonstration of why open source software culture is the greatest impediment to mainstream adoption of open source software that I've seen in a while.