How's your electricity? Over on my side of Lake Michigan a coworker has been out for over a day, and outage stats are worse your way.
I was joking. No way I would ever attempt to cut up a tree that size. Looks like it's gotta be a couple feet in diameter at least. Hell of a storm last night. We didn't lose any trees but some neighbors did. And my brother did in Chicago the previous day from the same system.
This happens. My sleep cycle is all kinds of horrid for the last month, and it was never too healthy to begin with. Changed medication but this time took second opinion because holy shit it's like the goal went from getting me out of languid stupor though making sure I feel fine and energized to assuring I feel constant discomfort. All those tiny annoyances, from yawning and dry mouth to faux-alertness and impaired reflexes, won't make me stop medicating, but come the fuck on, I still don't get why it had to be changed in May despite multiple pleas for explanation. From that point, it's been progressively worse for no apparent reason. Hopefully, I'll get to go back to old meds, because the way I feel right now I could use either sedatives for uninterrupted chunk of sleep or meth for exhausting me into collapse. Either's fine. If this will continue, not my state but poor communication, I'll simply change a doctor to someone whose only mode of conversation isn't "ETHOS, BITCH!" Still, I'm moving steadily on with my work, so that's something. Adviser told me to start drafting some of the stuff that's unlikely to change, so everyone's standard chapters 1-3 (intro, theoretical basis, research motivation). The others are now a background noise.
Celebrated vaxxed life yesterday by finally experiencing one of the things I missed most in the past two years, which is to go on a badass rollercoaster. Pure bliss that I unironically loved every second of. I actually bought the action photo for once because it so perfectly captured the moment.
Two big things: 1. I've started taking vacation time regularly. 2. My big rugby event is this weekend, and it's shaping up to be epic. So, as a tech guy who grew up in Silicon Valley and learned that you are your job and nothing else... it took me a long time to realize that I EARNED vacation time and DESERVED to take it and the company would be JUST FINE without me for a few days here and there. Having, once again, maxed out my vacation accrual, I've made it a policy to take time off regularly. So I've got a series of long weekends planned now through November. I'm taking three days this week - Thu, Fri, and Mon - to give myself time to produce the rugby event. Then a weekend to do special effects for a friend's documentary he's shooting in the desert. Then a really long weekend in Vegas for the USA v Ireland rugby match (and my sister-in-law's birthday). And going to the Jet Sprint Boat races another weekend. And I'm really happy about all of this. Tomorrow we go into crunch mode on the National Rugby 7s Championship tournament we are hosting here in Tukwila, WA. I'm building several structures for the event, managing all of the 15 vendors, and all of the Media for the event. Fun fun fun! My wife is running all the volunteers (over a hundred of them!), and infrastructure stuff like signage, hospitality for the broadcasters and referees, etc. The event will be streamed live on The Rugby Network (which currently has our ad on the front page), and will be shown overseas on Sky Sports, apparently?!? Over 500 players. 43 teams (both mens and womens). 100+ games, on 3 fields, over two days. $20 for a ticket, or watch online for free. It's going to be epic.
Staring down the barrel of a 3.5 project handoff meeting. I feel nothing in particular. I think nothing insightful. I am a receptacle for the edge-cases of small Midwestern businesses. I am, most importantly, a series of neural pathways that conveniently remember how to provision Azure resources I've got two weeks of PTO starting on Monday, and my plans begin with staring at the ceiling until I feel something...and idk, probably kayaking or something?
Feels a bit like Twelve Monkeys to me... keep going back to the same time to try and fix something multiple times, with limited success each time. The only issue I see in your dream story that would make it difficult to nail down, is that knowledge of what is going to happen in the future then changes your actions in the past... which changes the future. So when you "go back", you don't know what future you are going to. Which could be the hook, actually, now that I think about it. A time-traveler goes back to fix something, but his knowledge of the future then changes the future he returns to... so he needs to store his time machine in some sort of remote place where war/pestilence/etc can't change the environment he returns to. (Don't want to teleport back to the fifth floor of a building that is no longer there!) And that resilient location for his time machine then lets him go back and forth as much as his addiction desires... until the world is completely messed up from his constant tweaking and messing things up. He winds up in a worse world than he left........
Should it say "yearly water consumption could fill a 4x3x1 kiddie pool, it's at most about as loud as most people play music, clothes might be damp-ish but don't need more than 10 hours on a drying rack, and consumes about a fifth electrical power you'd use for illuminating an average house" instead? That's a good guideline, if admittedly it takes a bit of work to develop an intuition.
The manufacturers can provide that long description if the customers want it. I think the simple color-coded report card is a great way for people who don’t buy appliances often to compare energy use in models. Brussels seems not to have anticipated that equipment would continue improving, so the original A to G scale was expanded up to A+++ and ratings below D were “virtually empty.” [Trigger warning: “Implicit consent was working admirably”, but .eu sites often take two cookie clicks.] Eventually customers would have to take the log of the number of plus signs after the A, so they are switching back to A-G, and during the transition customers see two labels with different scores on the same machine. Surely you agree this is confusing? Under the new scale, it is expected that no appliances will score an A, leaving that space open to future improvements, until it eventually becomes crowded. Why not recalibrate the scale every year, instead of waiting until the scale becomes useless? Customers could quickly compare new models without consulting a database or studying physics.
I went to the store yesterday pretending I knew nothing about my house, just a vague estimate of electrical bill. That was enough for the seller to recommend me something that wasn't far off from what I'd pick with full knowledge. Of course he went for the pricier model with features I'd probably never use, but by that point you get a benchmark to look around for and an idea which might fit or not. Some questioning later (which is better for cotton/poliester? which uses less water?), he presented the one I'd pick. Is it fair? Like, can most people be expected to know if they need a washing machine with a dedicated setting for washing things made with down/fluff or not? What's the minimum, 'cause I can go and repeat, if only to go away from N=1 stigma. Sorry if it seemed like I'm shutting the lid on the discussion, but for me it's another entry on the "when will I use it in life" argument list. Now you've got the ball.
Oh, that. Yeah, it's pretty stupid alright. The label on the right is a more modern, rescaled version, though. Intuitively, yearly classification cycle seems like an overkill. Decade? That'd be closer to the mark. There's a QR code on the new ones helping at estimation, or at least that's the intention, and most people even semi-aware of their meter readings could probably do it in their heads. There's convenience and assistance, and there's lacking the bare-bones bedrock level of knowledge about your (household's) needs. Jab on studying physics aside, it hardly demanded of people to convert electronovolts to kWhrs in their heads. Don't think I defend it on principle or that it's perfect the way it is, I simply don't mind them and replacing appliances isn't something people do all that often either. Is the one on the left silly? Yeah, sure. Something to grind your gears on? Hardly.Eventually customers would have to take the log of the number of plus signs after the A, so they are switching back to A-G, and during the transition customers see two labels with different scores on the same machine. Surely you agree this is confusing?
Customers could quickly compare new models without consulting a database or studying physics.
The labels were introduced in 1992, the scale was updated in 2010 to add A plus and beyond, then the scale was updated again in 2017 (effective 2021) to go back to A to G. Every ten years or so is probably about as often as a customer needs to replace each appliance, so instead of learning how to interpret the sticker de la décennie they might as well do their own research. If customers don't care about energy use, they will ignore the stickers. And if they do care, the manufacturers can provide that information. One source suggests that customers care about water and energy consumption, but not the energy sticker. "One of the great mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results." Here is the sticker-pair that came with the refrigerator we bought. Pass or fail? Will the QR code help the customer compare models? It's just a link to a local-language version of the specs for this model. The same information is already available on the manufacturer's website. Meanwhile, there is an 15,000-word agreement between the EU and the EPA intended to coordinate use of Energy Star stickers in Europe, so the Energy efficiency directive was updated so public bodies' procurement policies would reflect the new guidelines. No, cancel that, the agreement expired in 2018, so Energy Star stickers may no longer be applied and databases and websites and bureaucratic paperwork must be updated again. Are we still saving? This seems like the most reasonable response to the energy stickers.yearly classification cycle seems like an overkill. Decade? That'd be closer to the mark.
There's a QR code on the new ones helping at estimation, or at least that's the intention
I simply don't mind them
Depends on many factors. For my needs? Huge overkill. Doesn't do anything to prove your point or weaken mine. I wonder what you'd say if I supported my claim with some 3rd-rate slideshow originating from a defunct one-person consulting firm. Yes, it sources data of other agencies, but I think neither of us can do more than speculate. You don't like it because it wastes taxes or something, I find it a good shortcut for many people of lackadaisical attitude. Cool. I, too, can drop vaguely related quotes and leave it at that. Observe: "and when men have been educated in such a manner that even the legislator himself cannot trust them, there is real danger." Now, did I mean it literally, in original context, or in context of commentaries of Aristotle's writings? To stop cluttering the other thread, regarding your other comment, this doesn't answer my questions. I didn't mention EnergyStar or who/why/what funds it etc. I inquired the priorities, you read whatever you think you wanted from it.Pass or fail?
source
"One of the great mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results."
By "pass or fail" I meant to point out that our appliance scored both A++ and F at the same time, to reiterate the point that what could be a simple and useful guide can be confusing in practice. If you provided evidence of how much people value energy stickers from a 3rd rate slideshow from a defunct one-person consulting firm, I would consider it weak evidence, but better than no evidence. But public opinion is not as important as the real outcomes of the program. The "vaguely related" quote is in response to your statement "at least that's the intention" behind adding QR codes to energy stickers. If the ultimate purpose of the program is to save energy, then we should judge it on how effectively it saves energy, not on intentions. I think Friedman is correct in observing that public programs are often judged by intentions rather than outcomes. Whenever I research a government program, I find gaps between intentions and results. Women, and Infants Children program Intention: "safeguard the health and well-being of the Nation’s children" Result: The program is dominated by three corporations that make infant formula. Subsidized infant formula relieved malnutrition, but also reduces breastfeeding, harming child health. Paid Maternity Leave Intention: "to balance the demands of the workplace with the needs of families, to promote the stability and economic security of families, and to promote national interests in preserving family integrity." Result: A 1% payroll tax is deducted from all California employee income. Some of this is used to replace income for new parents on leave (affluent parents are more likely to participate). Three-quarters of people in low-income groups do not know that the paid leave program exists. Clean Air Act (suggested at my request for "an example of regulation done well") Intention: clean the air Result: The air is cleaner, but costs of the program were enormous, and government authority worked closely with industrial interests for decades to promote and defend leaded gasoline, now recognized as one of the most harmful atmospheric pollutants. Several cities banned lead for health reasons in the 1920s (against the advice of the Surgeon General), but the EPA did not enforce a national ban until the 1970s. As to your questions, I do think it is fine for people to make some effort to find legal ways to save on their taxes, and I also think people shopping for appliances would do well to become informed about energy and water consumption. These activities probably pass a cost-benefit analysis, especially for people who enjoy being informed. As you point out, an hour or two of research can pay off with years of savings. (If you want to prioritize one or the other, I guess it would be the one with the greater expected payoff per hour of research.) I question whether the energy stickers are sufficiently effective in assisting this research to justify the considerable energy used to run the program.