Jump to content

Tuco

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    3503
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

5958 Surly 10%

About Tuco

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Nebraska's Chuck Hagel is the last one I can remember who openly bucked the Republican leadership, and that was due to the Iraq War. I think he eventually went Indy after deciding to not run for re-election, and then served in Obama's administration.
  2. Sorry, meant grey market. Got my colors confused. The grey market is just the resale market of new equipment. If/When the AI bubble pops, it will result in many construction projects being canceled in both data centers and power plants. Both types of facilities require high voltage electrical equipment. Delivery of some of this equipment is what is driving the schedules, so it needs to be ordered early. It is very much a sellers market, so the equipment vendors are requiring large upfront payments. So, it is likely once projects are canceled - projects that are not completed - there will be equipment that is mostly or completely purchased that the owner doesn't need. They will sell it to resellers for quick cash, who in turn sell it to maybe a new widget factory that is being developed. Of course, if the whole economy tanks, there won't be many new buyers in the market, so the price will drop even further. (Unfortunately, I don't know of a good way to make money in all that.)
  3. As someone with experience in mission critical and power generation, that future is uncertain and way the fuck out there. I think big techs are just using it as a distraction from the near-term shit show that will absolutely happen, assuming the bubble doesn't pop first. And any thermal power plant, particularly nuke, will need to be tied into the grid. You can't cycle them to match a data center load. These have way more inertia than a diesel gen bank, so stand alone is impractical IMO. You also need to consider the siting issues onsite nukes would have. Show of hands - who would feel comfortable with Facebook installing a nuclear facility within 2 miles of their house? 10 miles? When folks use the term "small modular reactor", they imagine a miniature power plant. But the overall load of an AI data center will be consistent with a traditional nuke plant. SMRs have some advantages, but lose economies of scale if you are packing dozens of them on site. I am not confident they will win out against more traditional designs. I am intrigued by Terra Power's approach, which doesn't swap out fuel. But, again, way the fuck out there and uncertain. Keep in mind that AI is not the only thing driving the power demand increase. Two other big factors are crypto and electrification (mainly electrical vehicles, but also industrial and heat pumps.) I think when the bubble bursts, you will see a contraction on the power side, but not as desperate. And I think you will see the independent power providers to retire old assets while holding onto the more efficient (energy and cost) newer assets. That may be the silver lining in all this - the new plants being built are just better, environmentally, than the old stuff that will get mothballed once the market contracts. So, yeah, you could swoop up a bunch of 50-year old shit that still has some life in it. The real value buys will be in equipment ordered, but not operating. Electrical gear will be pennies on the dollar on the brown market. Some of it could be used in other industries or in replacements, although much of it is custom.
  4. That was always the case. The right wing focus on pedophilia and sex trafficking was always the replacement for calling their opponents faggots. As gay marriage became more accepted by society as a whole, pedophilia accusations is what they started attacking liberals with, despite there being zero evidence liberals are more likely to be pedophiles. They had to maintain this fantasy they were morally superior to the perverted liberals. And then they push into it into any kind of discussion of gay rights. I'm curious if the House can release whatever information they possess. I get they would need a law to compel the Executive Branch to release everything, but I wouldn't think the Executive Branch could restrain the House from releasing what they have. It wouldn't be a law, just a decision on how the House operates.
  5. Keep in mind, Trump is so pathologically narcissistic that he will mark up a hurricane map rather than admit that he was wrong. He's never going to concede anything that makes him look bad.
  6. I would have liked to see another week, but just so Trump could continue to try to cut off SNAP benefits at the detriment of many Republican and non-voters. All philosophical arguments for or against the filibuster aside, I would really rather have Trump not have a filibusterless Senate for the next 3+ years. The short term sucks right now and that would make it worse. I have no idea what is going to happen in 2028, but I want the Senate Republicans to have an excuse for not passing whatever crazy shit Trump reads on Twitter. Granted, in order for it to matter, Democrats need to use it, which will piss off Trump, and thus endangers it. So it's a game of chicken.
  7. I think you vastly underestimate how much the Republicans hate the ACA. They would have eliminated the filibuster well before funding the ACA.
  8. Compromising definitely cost the Democrats support and opened up their left flank.
  9. Yes. I think the Dems would have done roughly the same in the non-Federal elections during a Federal shutdown. I think the results demonstrate an intensifying trend: Democrats now do better in off-cycle elections. Trump is able to bring out the voters when he is on the ballots, but much of MAGA doesn't care about anything but Trump.
  10. And the next CR, in January, will be the first month they are actually paying for the premiums.
  11. And Trump is still trying to starve families. It also gives Democrats a path to fight again in three months, when SNAP isn't in jeopardy.
  12. I'm not overly pissed off over this. What does irritate me is the timing. The Trump administration was in the middle of deciding not to feed poor American families. That wasn't some inevitable outcome of the shutdown, it was a choice he was fighting at the highest level for. If the Democrats can't message that, then I just don't fucking know what they can win on. Did anyone see any Republican Senator asked about that: "The government currently has the funds and the legal obligation to feed American families below the poverty level: do you agree with the President's decision to not feed them as a way of pressuring the Democrats?" Give it another week for that play out. But, while this is a fight that the Democrats needed to fight, it was obvious the Republicans were not going to give up the ACA firebombing. So what did the Dems get? To me, the big thing was a short timetable until the next fight. Come January 30th, we come to another decision point. But during that fight, SNAP will be fully funded. And while I think Democrats win on Trump defunding SNAP, I also get that Democrats don't want poor kids going hungry. The biggest problem with the Democrats here is that they would rather govern than battle. They need to get ready to battle, because it's either fight or capitulate.
  13. Removing the subsidies is already law. Having a majority in Congress wouldn't be enough to override a veto. (But it would be enough to force the vote and the veto.)
  14. That would probably explain the slow play on the charges or even releasing his name.
  15. Literally in "Whitestown." Looks like a suburb of Indiana, that is going from cornfields to cookie-cutter housing development. The ABC story has a little more detail, including that it was shortly before 7 AM.
×
×
  • Create New...