barsoap

If your balcony collapses due to 800W worth of solar it'd also collapse due to a couple of planters or a fat friend coming over so I guess you should take such worries as an admission on their part and withhold rent until they prove that the balcony is safe to use.

There's plenty of fixed fees in German electricity bills, on top of that the Wh price contains infrastructure levies. As the network changes so will the mix between fixed and consumption-based prices.

That said yes the Green party and its core voting demographic are notoriously bourgeois. "Let them install heat pumps" they said, caressing the one they installed, completely ignoring that at scale district heating is much more sensible. Their non-bourgeois core voters (the ones with a permaculture garden in the countryside) will then defend that by "but we don't want centralisation" MFs municipality-level is not centralised.

It's not illegal you need to talk to your utility. For one, they probably want you to produce three-phase.

Yes in principle to male plug, no to 240V unless the inverter sees a frequency to sync to. They won't power anything during a power outage that requires the whole electrical installation to be set up for it so you don't leak power to the outside and fry a lineman. Also that inverter attaches to one phase only which means that its power won't even reach 2/3rds of your circuits. It does make the power meter go backwards though which is the point.

That said, ideally you're using Wieland plugs and not Schuko so you won't have exposed prongs. The VDE certified Schuko for feeding in up to 800W though and that's exactly the amount parliament said doesn't require a permit or even talking to your utility. If you're doing everything new going with Wieland is the sane choice those outlets don't cost a fortune, if it's an existing installation though a) your landlord might not like it and b) electricians will demand more in travel costs than the outlet is worth.

German law. To be more precise for a court to accept a company's claim that continued employment would be an undue burden they want to see a) at least six weeks in a year b) negative prognosis, and c) how impactful the whole thing is for things like scheduling, that also depends on company size. Seniority also plays into it but noone at Tesla has any kind of seniority. That is, if healing from a burst appendix takes seven weeks no you don't have a case because appendices don't tend to burst twice, if your employee first breaks their leg and then goes base jumping again and breaks their arm and then does it again and breaks the other leg, different topic.

Companies are of course not forced to terminate you and a car manufacturer might be well-advised to retain a hard to replace star engineer, a random replaceable accountant, not so much.

IG Metall has a page about it. It also pays to pay your union dues because they all come with legal insurance. Thinking of it IG Metall might have the second largest army of lawyers in the world, right after Oracle.

The company had identified about 200 members of staff who were still being paid but had not turned up for work at all this year. “They submit a new sicknote from the doctor at least every six weeks,” he said.

...then you don't have to pay them. Company is on the hook for the first six weeks, then the health insurance, then disability, and you can generally terminate people after those six weeks.

In short: You should fire management for gross incompetence. Can't blame a worker for getting paid more because of company stupidity.

Or, different angle: They really must be desperate for workers if they're trying to retain those people. Paying well and having good working conditions would be a way to achieve that, yet another reason to fire management, up to and including Musk, for gross incompetence.

I was talking about East Germany, I'm not deep into the Swedish data just as a note though expansion and replacement don't necessarily exclude each other. From the anecdotes I heard though Sweden has basically been breeding Banlieues, which by definition aren't replacements but new developments, and then there's the country side where there might actually be replacement but nobody cares because Acke is happy that an Indonesian nurse now works in the hospital because she's cute and all the Swedish women went to the city.

The most dastardly thing I heard is the situation of Swedes with immigrant background who were in their early twenties or such when shit started to hit the fan: Previously they were perfectly well integrated, now they get lumped up with the problematic folks.

On the upside: Every country seems to go through a phase of messing it up. In Germany first we didn't care about integration of e.g. Turks at all, assuming that they'll go home one day -- then they started to open greengrocers and Döner shops, they're an enterprising bunch. Then we told them to make sure to talk German with their kids at home, with disastrous results: Kids ended up speaking neither proper German nor proper Turkish: If you don't become properly proficient in a language -- any language -- as a kid your overall language processing capabilities are going to stay stunted forever, and we did that to a whole generation while thinking we were doing good. The right advise to give is to tell parents to speak their native language at home, the kids will learn German playing on the streets, in kindergarten, at school, no issue. Now we've progressed to more advanced fuck-ups, like not screening refugees for PTSD: If we don't, ISIS will be happy to do it with less than desirable results.

Swedes simply seem to have more talent at messing it up than even us. As said: Start to complain early, before shit hits the fan. Leave it to a Swede to be shocked at a German complaining about a pothole, "but we've got procedures for that I'm sure the town knows about it they're terribly busy you really shouldn't say anything they'll get around to do it"...

And that really, really doesn't mesh with a government which doesn't go out of its way to figure out what people are worried about, thinking they could know what's up by looking at statistics.

It's not just immigration policies, those are just a common ignition point. Say, in Germany after reunification the east lost lots of people, looking for opportunity in the west as the west sold off and destroyed the eastern economy for scrap, people grumbled, now there's immigration into those areas from outside of Germany, and not just from the neighbourhood (Poland, Czechia, etc) either, at ultimately quite low levels but at a higher speed, as a percentage of population, than has ever been the case in the west. And people do more than grumble.

Which is to say: Yes, a part of the population has been replaced with immigrants. That much is demographic fact. It is not large, there are no signs of it ever getting actually out of hand but it's there, it's noticeable, and it's still growing. Failing to acknowledge it just plays into the hands of the right who then can spin all sorts of conspiracy theories about it. People want it addressed because it makes them uneasy, fearing to become a minority in their own ancestral home, and, sure, why not: Invest in those places so that the youth doesn't flee it any more, and that people who went away to work return. Integrating the newcomers isn't actually anywhere close to the main issue, while anti-immigration sentiment is quite high, anti-immigrant sentiment is not -- people like Abdul from the corner store earning a honest living. They're not worried about new things they are worried about the decay of the old and familiar, those are very different things.

And oh boy has there been decay under neoliberalism.

I just wanted to understand whether this plays right into the far right playbook once more.

The far right thing comes into play because Swedes are notoriously bad at complaining about things in public (one of the few things you can tell Germans and Swedes apart by aside from the quality of the beer), so as things began to get ugly it was taboo to talk about so it was allowed to fester, and fester badly. In come rightoids who have no qualms about breaking unspoken social norms about welcome culture and such things, actually naming the topic head-on.

Had the broadly SocDem majority be able to address the issue, even just silently, "let's increase funding for youth programmes and social mobility and not say why specifically we're doing it" things wouldn't have gotten out of hand, and the right wouldn't have had its opportunity.

I think you dont fully understand how c compilers ( gcc specifically ) work when using multi file projects

They don't. C compilers compile single files produced by the c preprocessor (resolving all #includes), they have no concept of multi-file projects. That's a thing for the build system, such as make, and it needs dependency information from the preprocessor to do its job (cpp -M), and once it has that it has to act correctly on them which is often completely broken because people don't understand make. Like using it recursively, bad idea. In the wild, a random C project at work you'll come across needs a full rebuild to build cleanly. Things have gotten better with things like cmake getting more popular but the whole thing is still brittle. GNU autohell certainly makes nothing better, ever.

Also, anything using IL will always have an abi,

Everything will always have an ABI because ABI is just API in the target language, whatever that may be. If your program is compiled and can run it uses an ABI.

Wasm is wasm, and you only need an exposed interface

The core wasm abi is less capable than the C abi: You get scalar values and pointers, that's it. No structs, no nothing, memory layout is completely unspecified. The component model allows compilers to say "so I'm laying out strings like this and structs like that" giving linkers a chance to say "yeah I can generate glue code between you two".

Again, i like the idea of rust, but it has a long way to go to be viable atm.

C isn't even close to being viable according to your standards people just have gotten used to the jank.

And it has many pitfalls to avoid so it doesnt become the hot mess that is any framework based on node.js

Rust doesn't have portable dylibs precisely because it isn't a hot mess. Because it's actual work to do it properly. Unlike everyone else. Meanwhile It speaks the local C ABI fluently (they differ by architecture and operating system, btw), which isn't a thing that can be said about many languages that aren't C.

Differently put: What, precisely, do you want to do? Have you any actual use-case for your doubts, or are they spooks?

Maybe start by assuming it's what was mentioned in the beginning of the post?

I also believe we have a duty to do our best to ensure that people all over the world have a chance to live a life worth living.

Which if you take a holistic view also includes things like not brain-draining developing economies. That's going to become an even bigger issue in the future as source countries complete their demographic transition and themselves start to shrink.

In an ideal world, immigration for economical reasons just shouldn't be a thing, and immigration for opportunity reasons rare, like joining a specific research institute as a scientist. Immigration should happen for curiosity, for love, such kinds of things.

create infrastructure in the countries of origin and help towards stable political systems

That is so much easier said than done. Without sane politics in place over there investing in infrastructure means the local grifters pocket everything. Stability alone is not sufficient, plenty of kleptocracies are plenty stable. Many are even democracies. It's always easy to blame colonialism but colonialism didn't destroy South Africa's electricity grid: The ANC did, and the ANC alone. What do you suppose we do against that kind of thing? Send cannon boats up rivers, like in the good ole days?

combat climate change

Definitely important, but also not sufficient on its own. It's just the crisis of the day, plenty of other sources of trouble in the world.

so in effect the political rightwing is very much causing the problems that they want to be racist about.

Let's not wash the hands of the left clean by missing that in practice, it's not addressing the issues either. The left is usually right in its material analysis, the right is generally (and frighteningly) right in its emotional analysis -- that's their thing, they slavishly resonate with people's worries -- neither is any good at actually fixing shit. If the left was, then the right wouldn't have anything to resonate with, or it would occupy itself with makeup trends or whatever. I agree, painted on eyebrows are a danger to what is good and proper, to civilisation itself.