Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
SixFigureSandwich
Oct 30, 2004
Exciting Lemon
I don't know exactly what a smart meter can and can't do, but my main concern would be whether it can send live readings. When (not if) the power company gets hacked, somebody can then essentially see remotely when somebody is or isn't home, since that correlates pretty well with power usage.

Doing a bit of reading it does seem like (some/all?) meters allow you to specify how often it sends updates, between half-hourly and monthly, so I would choose the longest interval that I can.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

SixFigureSandwich
Oct 30, 2004
Exciting Lemon

StarkingBarfish posted:

I saw some interesting analyses back in the day using half hourly data, where it could tell based on fingerprinting what the power consumption of your fridge, oven, kettle, shower etc was. This might be useful if you could then tell people eg: 'the fridge you have appears to be inefficient, if you bought a new one you'd actually save enough money over the next 3 years that it'd offset the cost'. Of course, that's hardly in the interests of a private energy supplier unless they get a kickback or whatever. As usual it boils down to nationalise everything.

Electric grids are expensive to maintain and update though, I can see why energy companies might rather get a few quid less from consumers if it means they don't have to upgrade their networks

SixFigureSandwich
Oct 30, 2004
Exciting Lemon

peanut- posted:

I did the census yesterday and there was a bunch of questions about where you primarily work, with them making it very clear that you should answer based on your current setup (ie. covid-driven WFH) rather than where you work in normal times.

What use is that data? You'd think for a decennial census it's gonna give a very distorted and useless picture.

A census is explicitly a snapshot of the current situation, it's not meant to have people guessing what they might be doing five years from now. I'm reminded of a Terry Pratchett quote along the lines of 'We are here and here is now, and anything beyond that tends to devolve towards guesswork'.

SixFigureSandwich
Oct 30, 2004
Exciting Lemon

Can someone smarter than me help me understand the article's explanation:

quote:

Because cold air is denser than warm air, it has a higher refractive index. In the case of the “hovering ship”, this means light rays coming from the ship are bent downwards as it passes through the colder air, to observers on the shoreline. Having evolved to keep things simple, the human brain is easily fooled. It assumes the light rays from the ship have travelled in a straight line, and so pictures the ship in a higher position than it really is – in this instance, above the sea surface.

If it's just a trick of the brain, then how come you can capture it on camera?

SixFigureSandwich
Oct 30, 2004
Exciting Lemon

Communist Thoughts posted:

i want a dog but my partner wants a cat so my plan is to get the worst cat they've got

it can't possibly backfire when i fall in love with the worst cat

Get a fox, which is basically a dog-cat hybrid

SixFigureSandwich
Oct 30, 2004
Exciting Lemon

MrNemo posted:

The basic reason public departments (but also somewhat large corporates too) are semi-staffed by contractors costing 3x as much is simply down to how budgeting works for these orgs and laziness on the part of managers. Permanent staff require pensions, expected longer term costs as well as all the relevant job protections and thus senior management require a fair amount of justification for why they need to increase headcount. The basic 'perfect sphere in a vacuum' reasoning is many tasks in these orgs are project based and require somewhat specialised knowledge/experience, therefore you want permanent staff to do continual tasks but contractors to work projects - thereby achieving the ideal balance of minimising costs to hire and get rid of staff you need for specific stuff and minimising running costs of staff to do the actual work. It also makes sense for specific projects because your regular staff have day jobs and, from my experience, it is a lot easier to get budget to hire a consulting team who are 100% focused on a change project than overloading existing staff. I'll allow this needs to be managed well or you end up with a bunch of consultants coming in, setting up some fancy new system/tools and then disappearing without anyone really noticing and then a year later you have to explain why this new fancy system isn't being used by anyone. That is a failure of the consulting team and the client's management though rather than necessarily some vampiric conspiracy run by McKinsey (further caveat that if this is happening consistently enough there might not be a functional difference)

This falls down for a couple of reasons - firstly project work often tends to run into each other i.e. frequently projects are actually related and skills needed for the first project transfer over to a project capitalising on the success of that, etc. so you can end up with the same contractor or team keeping on for a few years. Secondly is management laziness (plus institutional aversion to hiring people, which makes it a massive ballache). I've got a friend who took on a departmental management role in the Civil service and he basically spent his first year in post writing business cases to hire on most of the contractors in as civil servants, which almost halved his salary costs. That was basically his whole job for the first year or so he was in though.

Consultants make sense in the abstract, the problem is that institutions have gotten so phobic regarding growing internal talent or trusting their own planning to know how many people that they need that they relentlessly err on the side of just contracting out things. Government contracts are in some ways worse for this because basically the two factors are: Have you got a track record of winning these contracts and Are you the cheapest bid? The result is that work that could well be done internally by expanding and growing existing capability isn't being done because they don't want the risk of internal failure and don't want the commitment in budgets of hiring and putting in place teams to handle the work. Personally from an layman perspective, I'd have thought the best approach the government could take would be a Public/Private partnership style thing of setting up a civil service equivalent to all this crap - an internal tech/management consultancy that effectively exists to provide expertise running change and transformation projects within other government departments. gently caress, keep the same basic business model going to attract the same sort of talent (if that's important) but company 'profits' basically get returned to the Treasury. Of course that would mean not changing suppliers every 3-10 years, which obviously means that it won't be as cost efficient for *reasons*.

A a consultant I think this is fairly accurate, though a lot of contracts we bid on are scored on both quality and price, usually 30-50% quality versus 70-50% price, depending on how much budget the client has. This is in environment/infrastructure consultancy though so we are expected to actually do work and deliver something tangible.

SixFigureSandwich
Oct 30, 2004
Exciting Lemon

bump_fn posted:

what’s happening with eu citizens previously eligible to vote in local election? can they still post brexit

Yes

SixFigureSandwich
Oct 30, 2004
Exciting Lemon

learnincurve posted:

Also yes on the discount supermarket cheese btw, I have a freezer full of:



I love a block of proper null

SixFigureSandwich
Oct 30, 2004
Exciting Lemon

namesake posted:

BBC news at one finished off introducing a Syrian refugee who charted their journey over the water to get to the UK with 'they have described themselves as a Labour supporter' for no reason i can see other than attempting to bias the audience against them.

Now that's what I call entryism

SixFigureSandwich
Oct 30, 2004
Exciting Lemon
Can't help but feel that everything re: Liverpool was previously agreed between Starmer and the govt. As in, Starmer makes sure that the new mayor will be somebody they can control and who isn't a leftie, and in return the Tories only take over part of the council.

What's with the Tories pushing for local council elections being all-out instead of electing part of the council every year or two years? I'm assuming it benefits them somehow but I can't really understand how

SixFigureSandwich
Oct 30, 2004
Exciting Lemon

Failed Imagineer posted:

Hard to think of a worse sex word than "rumpy pumpy", but I'm sure the thread can surprise me

our duty to the Party

SixFigureSandwich
Oct 30, 2004
Exciting Lemon

Junior G-man posted:

Brand new podsode out for your delectation or abhorrence as we finally do the dreaded ScotPol:

https://twitter.com/PraxisCast/status/1376502366363602948?s=20

Thanks, for some reason ScotPol is what tempted me to give the podcast a try

SixFigureSandwich
Oct 30, 2004
Exciting Lemon

North London independence when

SixFigureSandwich
Oct 30, 2004
Exciting Lemon

:airquote: Historical :airquote: wrongs by the police and the state

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

SixFigureSandwich
Oct 30, 2004
Exciting Lemon

Ravel posted:

I managed to buy a one bed flat and the housing association who own the freehold have just given me and every other leaseholder in the building a charge of 30k to pay for further fire remediation. Is anyone else in this situation?

There are, and the Tories are loudly telling them to gently caress off

quote:

A plan to protect leaseholders from the spiralling costs of fixing fire safety problems in the wake of the Grenfell Tower disaster has been rejected in parliament after the government headed off a cross-party challenge.

Hundreds of thousands of homeowners are facing bills of up to £100,000 to repair dangerous cladding, fire doors and insulation systems discovered after the 14 June 2017 fire, but ministers opposed proposals from the House of Lords, Labour and some Conservative backbenchers to protect them from costs.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply