Google is/was in a somewhat special situation that they could show you ads that were relevant to what you are looking for. In 95% of the websites I visit this is simply not true.
As usual just because Google uses it and seems to be successful with it doesn't mean that it will work for normal companies as well.
ChatGPT in theory has the potential to show relevant ads as there service involves the user stating what they want. So they could actually present relevant ads. We'll have to see how it turns out.
British building regs literally require insulation? It is not a law that old builds have to be brought up to code, but there were government schemes where you got free loft and cavity wall insulation in old houses.
Depends what you expect, people still have problems that need solved by software, if you expect to be the next Google the odds are not in your favor but if you aim to have a sustainable income from software that should be viable.
Hi, these projects already have grid connection dates so no new grid upgrades are required to deliver. The developers of the wind farm have to factor in transmission charges (tnuos) into their bids that pay for these.
I guess we are. But who are the plants owned by, who built the and where did the components come from, are we also switching them off because our grid cannot handle transmit huge volumes of renewable energy from Scotland to London, and turning on gas power plants to make up for it.
You also have situations, like today, where a German developer has handed back a seabed lease for 3GW of offshore power because they didn’t get a contract for power from government (CFD) and their lease fees are approx £400m/yr if they want to continue developing the windfarm. This is after spending £1B already on lease fees with nothing to show for it.
Their price was too high because it had to include paying back £1B of lease fees that were made as part of another government policy. Comes back to priorities being confusing, if the intention is lower bills why the lease fees, if the purpose is good jobs and independence, why compete on price? If their purpose is national wealth why not partial state funding / ownership?
Chinas policy around energy works and it has allowed them to become the world’s engine for renewable power. They get the benefit of energy efficiency and being a critical trade partner for every country in the world.
My experience is that the UK (for example) doesn’t really know why it is building offshore wind. Is it to reduce bills to consumers (OFGEMS remit), is it to create local jobs in manufacturing (Clean Industry Bonus Scheme), is it to stimulate national wealth by ownership of projects (British Energy). It’s a mess unclear picture for me.
It would be nice if politicians could spend some time trying to work together, cross parties a come up with some sensible resolutions and long term plans instead of trying to score points for soundbites and clips.
We're building offshore wind to provide clean power, that will be cheaper than gas and we won't have to rely on largely autocratic countries for that gas
Got a long way to go as electricity is only a portion of our energy consumption - heating and transport are still largely fossil fuel based ATM
The cfd auctions are competitive on price, but things like clean industry bonus and supply chain plans expect some local content. You can’t compete on price and also use expensive UK suppliers.
It’s something normal people understand - everyone who uses a desktop/laptop computer will have rearranged an icon. If they read this it will likely trigger some thoughts about what it could do for them.
The actual transactions around this deal will be interesting - will Google simply withold $1B from their search deal, will they pay it then Applepay it back (or a split). I doubt we’ll even know.
If it helps anyone I take antidepressants and have had a positive experience with them. Depression can be caused by a chemical imbalance and no amount of exercise or talking about it will fix it.
One of the most frustrating things when your really low is people giving advice like do exercise to feel better - please don’t do this.
> Depression can be caused by a chemical imbalance and no amount of exercise or talking about it will fix it.
This is a debatable. As far as I understand things: 'chemical imbalance' has no tests to confirm that's actually true, That's just a story they tell to relax people.
Which is orthogonal to the point that antidepressants can work for some people.
We don't know how depression works. It very well may be many little things dressed in a trench coat.
Jim Carey had the best way to think about this:
“I believe depression is legitimate. But I also believe that if you don’t exercise, eat nutritious food, get sunlight, get enough sleep, consume positive material, surround yourself with support, then you aren’t giving yourself a fighting chance.”
I wonder what his thoughts are on post natal depression? Of course those things help but there can be factors outside of people’s control that can lead them down this path…
People talk about depression all the time.
The difference between depression and sadness is sadness is just, you know, from happen stance. Whatever happened or didn't happen for you...
... and depression is your body saying fuck you, I don't want to be this character anymore, I don't want to hold up this avatar that you've created in the world. It's too much for me.
So, a friend of mine who's a spiritual teacher has a really good take. His name is Jeff Foster, and his take on it is that they should change [how we think of] the word "depressed" as "deep rest"
deep rest - your body needs to be depressed, It needs deep rest from the character that you've been trying to play.
If you say that to a depressed person, they are going to sink deeper into despair. Most people (even those who are not depressed), are not meeting that bar.
Always remember, being true is not the same as being helpful.
Exercising can help. It's not bad advice or inappropriate to suggest it. People shouldn't suggest it as if it's a cure all and certainly shouldn't suggest you just need to buck up, but the study is showing it can really help.
Context: I'm "using" SSRIs, talk therapy, psychotherapy, strength training and endurance training -- all in parallel right now.
It can be inappropriate depending on where the person is, when I was diagnosed I could barely get out of bed. Feels a bit like telling an anorexic person to eat something.
I support people taking antidepressants if it helps them.
But I have to say the "chemical imbalance" theory either means no more than "depression responds to an antidepressant (sometimes)" or it is false/meaningless. Neither neurologists nor psychologists have a sufficiently detailed understanding of the workings of the brain to make such a claim.
Again, I'm glad drugs work for you. I would note that there three ways drugs can go for people; working with few problems, not working, working but with significant physical and/or psychological side-effects. Especially, taking any substance daily for the rest of one's life can stress the organs responsible for digesting/processing regardless of whether than substance is otherwise a great fix.
So I think we need to look beyond a glib "this fixes it for everyone" rhetoric even if this fixes it for you (and yeah, some of my friends should at least drugs, I'll admit).
Yes, exactly. I have exercised daily (either weight training or cardio) for nearly 20 years. I've also had anxiety and depression for that entire stretch of time.
Exercise was how I stayed mildly sane for a good majority of those years, but when I started taking medication it was like the entire world changed. I wish I had started earlier in life. It helped me to become a lot more introspective as well, being able to better examine why I was feeling the way I did.
There are some things that no amount of exercise or "healthy living" can fix, that's unfortunately just the human condition. It's nothing to be ashamed of.
> Depression can be caused by a chemical imbalance
And yet many other times, it can be caused or exacerbated by situational and psychological factors, including "being stuck at home all day".
> One of the most frustrating things when your really low is people giving advice like do exercise to feel better - please don’t do this.
Worse, antidepressants actually cause significant harm to many people who take them, often without even improving their depressive symptoms. This is very bad, and I would say significantly worse than giving general advice that might be inapplicable to some people.
There's no one-size-fits-all solution, and some people probably are legitimately just in need of more motivation to go running or biking or whatever else will get them the exercise they need.
Usual antidepressants (reuptake inhibitors) have specific chemical and clinical effects. Some forms of depression, mostly with stress, respond heavily, others, like refractory and bipolar, show no effect. It's like saying a knife cannot cut an arbitrary material. It depends. Studies of ADs must start to differentiate at least a few subtypes of depression.
Maybe so, but I also cut m finger quite badly on NYD, I went to an urgent care centre had it looked at, x rayed and dressed and some antibiotics. The next day I had an appointment with a consultant and then went in to surgery to have it inspected to see if I had cut the nerves or tendon (thankfully I had not), had it swen up dressed, and a follow up appointment to have the dressings removed and final check. All at no cost.
The £9 is for the administration of the prescription - if th drugs are super expensive heart medication or whatever, it would still be £9 (or free).
I stand by NHS being the only great thing we have left.
I'm not even talking medication, talking about cost of therapy it's like $200 per session sometimes but yeah all depends
I had to pay $3K for an MRI in cash one time, which yeah you get what you pay for but my buddy pays $2.8K/mo in insurance for his family, like that's a big chunk of his monthly pay
Oh I want to be clear no snark towards you this is the cliche topic of healthcare in US
Regarding the topic at hand though, yeah I lift 5 days a week and do a half hour of maximum inclined walk for those days as well. Mental health but also I want to be ripped. Helps my job has a gym and I'm the only one in there in the mornings. We also walk like 2 miles at work, in circles around the parking lot, talking to co-workers 4 days a week.
My main problem is anxiety, like I wish I could walk downtown in a city and do street photography but I fear that someone will ask me for money or get robbed. The funny thing is I'm a big guy, like 6', I bench almost 300 lbs. I'm not like a stick. I have a fear of crowds too I can do shopping but sometimes in like a WalMart that's a lot of people and of course I'm terrible with women, the fear even if I have the bod. I'm just scared of eye contact and low self-esteem even having a six-fig job my self-determined value is whether a woman will say yes to me or not, it's funny. I don't have a fear of speed I can drive 160mph+ on the highway, helps to have a good car.
But for the moment I'm working towards freeing myself from debt and then being able to live a life where I'm not in fear of losing my job. I'm a privileged person, this is brought on by myself eg. dropping $1.2K a night at a strip club or $600 Venmoing a band to play song requests. I'm complaining about therapy cost lmao.
Do you think they're stupid and just don't realize that they pay for it with taxes?
You're not factoring in the most critical piece of financing - the mental burden. You don't want to be stuck figuring out how to get enough money to pay for mental health services when you need them the most. That's when your earning potential is at its lowest, and every minor obstacle to getting help gets magnified ten fold.
That may as well be a death sentence unless you're privileged enough to be able to easily pay for it with savings. Realizing that you need help, figuring out how to access it, and actually following through is hard enough as it is without any added financial burden.
> It’s a double edged sword - secrecy leads to accidental damage by fishermen & anchors, so generally you want your cables and pipes charted.
Yeah, and the other edge of the sword is on display in the Baltic Sea nowadays, where "fishermen" accidentally keep dragging their anchors for miles across the sea bottom, always somehow exactly where the communication cables are.
I have license for boat and use nautical maps. They show me a cable, but not the hierarchy of the infrastructure. I see a cable, but can’t evaluate if half of town stays without electricity or only an island with dozen houses if I damage it.
However the available maps do not stop russian ships regularly dropping anchors on European infrastructure in Baltic see. Obviously charting them does not help. Maybe they should stay secret at the end.
You can hide the position of the cables from fishermen and the public. But if someone knows where they are, it is the KGB, I mean, FSB.
We should make information about infrastructure public.
There was a power outtage in Berlin, due to to an attack aginst a 'secret' cable bridge. If the map of cables would have been public, then the public may have had a chance to realize that having no backup cable is a bad idea for critical infrastructure.
There were backup cables. The bridge carried 5 cables, redundancy configuration would have been 3+2 afaik. But only for purposes of maintenance, not to protect against hostile action. For that, one should have taken care to not have all redundancies on the same bridge ;)
And in most environments, you cannot hide the location of those cables. Either they are visible directly, like all overhead power lines. No use in hiding those. And for the underground ones, you could try to hide them. But every backhoe operator will rightfully want a map of those anyways, so the information will come out in some way.
The only environment where hiding this kind of infrastructure would be possible is some state-does-everything soviet-like police state. Where comrade backhoe-operator wouldn't get a map, but he would get accompanied by a secret police supervisor who would tell him where to dig and where not to.
Would you feel comfortable making a decision on putting an anchor down on a cable if you knew it would only take out a few hundred houses worth of power.
I would imagine that any body that issues you a license should inform you to not anchor in proximity to cables, regardless of size / spec etc. if you put an anchor down on a charted cable, and the cable is where it should be, I think you’d be responsible for the cost of damage.
I anchor very carefully on the rocks or sandy seabed. I don’t anchor in seaweed areas and on pipes or cables. Additional attention from local newspaper is not desired.
I struggle to understand people getting butt hurt about a free service showing its users adverts, that will keep the service free.
They should have done this earlier, so their adds would be better by now, and they have a better chance against Google.
reply