You don't need peak power all the time. The point of trains is that they're extremely efficient; most of the time they're essentially coasting, they only need a lot of power when accelerating or ascending.
If you want hard numbers, SBB used 1685GWh for passenger trains in 2025 [0].
The bigger problem with this idea is solar in Switzerland. It's fantastic during the summer but close to nonexistent during the winter [1]. Trains need to run year-round, so you'd need to overbuild solar monstrously to power SBB during the winter, or you'd need to solve seasonal electricity storage, which isn't easy. Pumped hydro is great but Switzerland has already built about as many artificial alpine lakes as the population is likely to tolerate.
Init7 (the ISP in question) is pretty fantastic for peering. They're good to start with but there have been times I've just written them an email and said "hey, I know you and ASABCD have a presence at BLAH-IX, could you peer directly" and it ends up working.
I can download from Usenet at consistently around 10Gbps and I've determined the limiting factor is the combination of client/server behavior and TCP windows. With some customization I've saturated the 25Gbps pipe.
Online games (e.g. League of Legends, Path of Exile) typically have a ping of around 8ms.
25Gbps is available but not common. Most average people will buy 10Gbps P2MP from Swisscom, Sunrise, Salt etc., the really big companies with marketing all over the cities. Then they'll use WiFi with the default modem and not reach anything like 25Gbps.
25Gbps requires pretty unusual hardware to use (see [0] for example) and you need to pay a couple hundred francs for installation so even among the geeks and nerds, it's not common.
I have it myself but recommend to friends and colleagues to use Init7 but 10Gbps instead.
Not quite. There are some homes where P2MP was installed before the court order that are still P2MP. These still have fiber but only 10Gbps shared, not 25Gbps dedicated.
Also, the only ISP that offers 25Gbps is Init7 and they need to have their equipment at the other end of the fiber to offer 25Gbps. I don't think they quite have 100% coverage yet.
It's not always possible, or at least trivial. For example how do you enforce "prefer to reuse existing code over making a copy"? Is there a static analysis tool that will detect two pieces of code that do the same thing?
No, my point is that the price is inaccurate because it reflects peak/best conditions output and in Switzerland that isn't accurate. To generate the nominal output in winter, you need 6x as many panels as you would need in another climate.
Right now, solar and other renewables produce enough energy to meet about two thirds of our demand. Solar alone produced around 55GWh of the needed 169GWh yesterday.
Look at new year's day though: consumption was 192GWh (14% higher than yesterday) and yet solar only produced 11.4GWh and that was an unusually good day for winter.
You can't talk about the price of solar, even solar with storage, without talking about the climate it's in. Assuming your prices are for summer or a mild climate like California, you need to multiply those by around 6x to get a system that can replace nuclear for a baseline load in Switzerland.
That brings the price to $180-$510/MWh.
FWIW: I live in Switzerland and have solar panels and a battery on my house. I sell the obscene amount of excess solar I generate in summer to the grid which covers much of the cost I incur buying from the grid in winter. That power is generated by nuclear.
> [...] a scandal in which the city was sharing Flock camera data for immigration enforcement apparently on accident [...]
This is surely the first time I'm seeing "on accident" from a journalist. I get that it's used in casual speech but it's never been normal in formal contexts where "proper" use of language is considered important.
To back up my words with evidence, take a look at [0]. If you look at some of the examples from the late 90s [1] you'll see that most of the uses of "on accident" that did exist weren't even used in the "accidentally" sense but in contexts like "on accident compensation" or "on accident rates" - to introduce a topic. To eliminate that, we can do something like [2] and see that this modern construction basically didn't exist until 2010.
If you play with the corpus, you can see that it's not really used in English English, only American English.
Most clocks drift. If you've ever used a normal watch (not a smartwatch connected to a phone) or a battery powered clock, you may have noticed that you need to correct the time every month or so, as by that time, it's lost accuracy.
The problem is due to the quartz oscillators these devices use, which are the same ones we use in phones, computers etc., which have the same problem as a result.
You don't notice this because just about every network-connected device these days uses NTP or something similar to keep its clock constantly up to date, but the clock itself is still inherently inaccurate.
There are also other mechanisms to keep clocks in sync by the way. Some mains-connected devices keep time using the 50Hz/60Hz mains voltage. Various countries have radio broadcasts that devices can be used to keep time (DE, US and JP run them, I believe).
What's expensive? PTP is widely supported on commodity hardware these days. I think most Intel NICs support it, quite a few Realtek and a lot of embedded stuff, down to even MCUs like STM32.
Even if you want a NIC with a stable oscillator or GPS inputs to act as a grandmaster, you can buy an E810 with the necessary hardware from eBay etc. for a few hundred or DIY something yourself much cheaper.
All of the copy seems to be built around Solana, "Web3" and crypto. It doesn't seem to have any appeal outside of that. It's not clear what the software even is. The docs [0] seem to indicate it's just Android, with some SDKs for interacting with the "Web3" stuff.
This isn't a "serious attempt at creating an app store that can compete with apple or google", it's just another "Web3" project. It's exciting to people within that ecosystem and utterly uninteresting to anybody who isn't.
I don't think the protocol is necessarily the problem. For example we don't say the HTTP protocol is the problem when spammers abuse website comment forms or forums, we say it's the server on the other side.
I think the answer is somewhat the same as where we've gone with many HTTP servers: proof of work. Just like Captcha and more recently Cloudflare turnstile required you complete a task before you'd be able to access as website, senders should be required to complete a task before you'll accept their email.
It can even be a sliding scale: the higher you want the chances of the recipient seeing it to be, the more work you need to do.
However this also break emails considered "legitimate" by businesses, like marketing newsletters and other nonsense, which is why it'll likely never happen.
How do you get email addresses? Do people freely and explicitly choose to sign up to your mailing list, or is it baggage that you're forcing on them without their consent?
I notice that when I go to https://fontawesome.com/ and click "Start for Free", I'm asked for my email address. This isn't necessary for me to use the icons. I just need a page that tells me to add the necessary tags for cdnjs [0].
I think your problem is dissonance between what you think your users want and what they actually want. If I had to sign up for a mailing list in order to use every frontend development library I've ever used, and their emails actually made it past my spam filter, I'd never see anything else.
I think Google's doing the right thing here. You need to separate your newsletter and product updates from people who just want to set up the icons and move on with their lives.
I find much reporting similarly painful. The style where they start with something like "John Smith was riding a bus to work [...]" and go on a whole narrative journey really annoys me too.
No legal mechanism with such breadth exists in Australia. There was a great deal of overblown media reporting but the law [0] makes it explicitly clear that any request that requires a "systemic weakness", "systemic vulnerability" or anything of the like is null and void. Those terms are defined [1]. Note that it doesn't say the government can't request such a thing, it says that such a request "has no effect". It's simply dead on arrival.
My understanding is that the government could compel Facebook to publish a version of WhatsApp with a special mode that sends all messages to the police if the user ID is 1234567. This introduces a vulnerability but it is limited to one specific person. If your user ID is not 1234567, you're completely unaffected.
However my understanding is that the government cannot compel Facebook to compel a version of WhatsApp that, when it receives a special message, silently starts sending plaintext copies of every other message it receives to the police. Such a mechanism would be a systematic weakness that affects people other than those for which a warrant has been issued, so the notice would "have no effect".
The government could also not compel a source-available app with verifiable builds to stop distributing them so that it can add a secret user ID branch like the one I mentioned above for WhatsApp.
The thing I've learned is that headphones and IEMs can sound completely different to different people, just because of differences in the shape of your ears and ear canal.
I bought some custom IEMs and had the opportunity to test ~10 of the super high-end options from several different brands. I found that there was no correlation whatsoever between price or even brand and how good they sounded to me. The technician I was working with said he observed the same thing all the time in the professionals he worked with. He'd have musicians on the same instruments in the same roles in the same group come in and all walk put with completely different products.
IEMs are the most personal but even headphones have the problem.
Because of this, my recommendation is that you make purchasing decisions in one of two ways:
- Learn how to EQ to get a sound you like. Purchase based on objective measurements like frequency response curves to find products that require minimal EQ to match your preference.
- Only buy after listening, or buy, listen and return if that's an option for you.
I recommend avoiding purchases based on reviews that make subjective judgements about the sound.
If you want to learn more, I like the videos/articles/forums of Headphones.com and Crinacle.
1) I wouldn't 100% agree with this. It's not that speakers sound "better" than headphones, it's that speakers don't require any tuning to match a person's specific physiology (e.g. shape of their ears, ear canal) but the other things do. When you use headphones, you still use your whole ear canal but the sound is distorted by how the headphones interact with your ears, particularly the pinna. When you use IEMs, you only use part of your ear canal and skip the pinna entirely, so the sound can't sound as natural as speakers do unless you compensate to reintroduce the effect of the pinna/canal. This is all possible to varying degrees. EQ helps a lot and there are ways to measure HRTF as well.
If you want hard numbers, SBB used 1685GWh for passenger trains in 2025 [0].
The bigger problem with this idea is solar in Switzerland. It's fantastic during the summer but close to nonexistent during the winter [1]. Trains need to run year-round, so you'd need to overbuild solar monstrously to power SBB during the winter, or you'd need to solve seasonal electricity storage, which isn't easy. Pumped hydro is great but Switzerland has already built about as many artificial alpine lakes as the population is likely to tolerate.
[0]: https://reporting.sbb.ch/en/sustainability?=&years=5,6,7,1&s...
[1]: https://energiedashboard.admin.ch/strom/produktion