Poor thing. I get that it’s hard to prevent some animals, like birds from doing it, but I wish there’d be better ways to prevent this sort of thing.

If you think you can set up mail infrastructure with on premise everything that is available to your not on premise workers safer than Microsoft, you will be spending a huge amount of money to do so.

It just turns out that the US has become a rogue state that alligns with the type of war criminals and dictators that the ICC wants to prosecute. I really don’t think anyone would have predicted this 10 to 15 years ago when this mail choice was made.

Oof, will be double painful if inters turn out to be the correct choice in the end still.

Damnit just turning in now and seems like I missed it.

Indeed, and the environmental factors aren’t the only problem with gas turbines. I’m not going to pretend I am an expert at what is the best solution but interviews I’ve read with experts that speak about the Belgian context. (Which is so densely built there’s not much room for anything) It was the best way balance the grid if more investments were made in solar and wind energy. The reason it didn’t happen is because it was deemed uninteresting because not profitable enough.

So the alternative that was chosen was doing nothing an extending the life of nuclear plants that are working way beyond their planned life and giving the commercial company managing them guarantees they’ll continue making money. Building new nuclear capacity will take longer than a gas turbine and they can’t just be shut down and torn down for something else when better alternatives come along. And this is usually cheered on by people who think they’re smart by pointing out that if you’re in favour of renewables you can’t be pragmatic about dealing with it’s current problems. While those people very often are against more renewables and just want unending nuclear as if that’s a magic bullet.

The fact that making money is one of the, if not the most important, considerations in this equation is the main problem with this. It simply should be a public service.

That won’t automatically solve all of the other problems but many of the solutions to this problems aren’t considered because they are not profitable, even though they exist. An easy example being gas turbine plants which are much easier to spin up and down as required. But perfectly meeting the needs of all people means there’s no artificial scarcity and thus lower profits.

Yeah, sounds fun as well. Though I hope it’s less free in manufacturing drama as DtS.

Sounds like a weird way to reason though, no? That’s what should be called a race incident if they’re both partially at fault.

Can’t remember seeing it, but I must admit to spending time here too when it looks slow because I am happy other people on Lemmy also like F1.

Great overtake by Leclerc, bad way direction showed it live. It basically didn’t even show the actual overtake. They had to do a damn replay for it.

And Hadjar again too!

F1TV international feed with Palmer etc. I know they’re not the most neutral and I don’t expect them to be. I just enjoy the hype they’re good at bringing. But I do think many people let their opinion on the race be influenced by them. (Just like if you watch MMA you’ll be influenced by the often very dumb opinion of Rogan).

I’m Flemish, so the accent of any Dutch person grates too much for me. ;-) (‘g’ doesn’t have to sound like a failed gear change every damn word ;-) )

Probably expecting Hamilton to box a lap earlier.

The 5s penalty does almost nothing for anyone. It’s way too low a penalty for anything. Regardless of how good your car is. It’s only annoying if you got lucky earlier with a car where you’re actually out of position where your car should be.

Fair enough, I do listen to the British commentators since they are just more pleasant to listen to vocally for me than the Dutch speaking ones. But their commentating is just always anti-Verstappen. Yet even they ceded after the replay of the incident that Piastri is lucky he just barely got control of his car in time.

Did you see that replay on the international feed just now? Piastri was going to divebomb force contact if he didn’t go off. I think both their behaviours are fair play to try in racing, but saying this is classic unsportsmanlike behaviour seems like you’re being influenced too much by British commentators.

It was literally the other way around with Hamilton in Monza but somehow both situations were his fault? He is ofcourse a driver that will race on the edge of the rules so of he gets punished for something he’ll force others into it.

While I agree he should have given it back, Piastri also either steered into him/lost control and went deep into the corner further than a normal racing line. So curious what the stewards would think.

Edit: 5 penalty seconds for this, if you think it’s penalty worthy, remains stupid. It should always be at least 10.

Ding ding ding! (Doesn’t look likes it’s his fault but still involved)

Verstappen and Piastri, leaving Norris to win after a luck safety car caused by a Stroll crash. (Crazy predictions cost nothing!)

Edit: Norris starting on hards makes me believe they’re on Lemmy too!

I do wonder how accurate these are but they’re crazy fun. Seeing the difference in how aggressively Max takes the corners and very often the full curbs is super interesting. It does make me realise that the McLaren is again the fastest race car, so if Piastri can get ahead he’ll drive off into the sunset.