HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Denzil_DC » Journal
Page: 1

Denzil_DC

Profile Information

Member since: Mon Sep 7, 2009, 12:57 AM
Number of posts: 640

Journal Archives

I always find it fascinating looking at this readout of what's happening on the UK electricity grid

http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/

It shows everything practically in real time, including the European interconnectors that shunt power back and forth as supply and demand fluctuate. Hover over the dials for detailed explanations. It particularly shows the over-reliance on coal and gas, especially with so many nukes out of service at present. I don't know whether the US system is integrated enough to have a similar site available.

It has to be said that October was a pretty shitty month with periods of very high winds. Problems arise when we have large high pressure systems stalled over the UK in cold weather, meaning there's little if any wind and the windfarms lie idle. Onshore wind needs to be a stopgap while offshore and tidal/wave power systems are developed and deployed (some significant developments already under way there), which will help to fulfill the baseload needs and overcome the still-air/cold-weather deficit. We also need to use less electricity, of course ...

Now you've found at least temporary help, I'll point out that "single-payer" isn't a panacea.

For instance, under the UK NHS, stories about having problems accessing certain drugs and treatments similar to your family's aren't unheard of, though there the gatekeepers aren't insurance companies, but local health authorities. We've been discussing this in the UK forum here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10885614

In answer to a question from steve2470 about NHS medication coverage, muriel_volestrangler replied:

For most medications, there's a standard per prescription charge of 7.85

Various groups get free prescriptions, such as children, over 60s, pregnant women, and people on benefits. If you're getting a lot of prescriptions, you can pay for a period for all of them.

http://www.nhs.uk/nhsengland/Healthcosts/pages/Prescriptioncosts.aspx

The controversy comes in because some medications are not covered by the NHS. NICE,the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, evaluates treatments such as drugs, and decides if they are effective enough for a type of treatment - an evaluation which considers the price to the NHS as well as the clinical effectiveness (and can also mean a drug is approved for some circumstances, but not others - it might be accepted as effective for one type of cancer, but still thought unproven for another, and so restricted to the first).

http://www.nice.org.uk/page.aspx?o=AboutGuidance


I replied:

Related to NICE's role that m_v's mentioned, there's also the pop phrase "postcode lottery."

See Google for its prevalence.

Basically, even if NICE approves a drug or treatment, if it's new and/or expensive, there's no guarantee a patient in a particular administrative area will be able to receive it, depending on the policies and priorities of their regional health authority.

You'll maybe notice if you visit that link that the term's especially popular with the UK's RW press as a means to pick away at the foundations of the NHS, but it's a real phenomenon, and here's a brief explanation from The Guardian (over ten years old, but not too inaccurate in principle):

What is the postcode lottery?
The postcode lottery is shorthand for seemingly random countrywide variations in the provision and quality of public services - the huge gap between the best and the rest. Where you live defines the standard of services you can expect. So if you live in the "wrong" area, and, in extreme cases, on the "wrong" side of a road, you may get a poorer service than your neighbour or you may not get the service at all and have to pay for it privately. The postcode lottery is a big issue in the NHS, where the gap between the rhetoric of a comprehensive and universal "national" service and the reality is increasingly stretched.

Some problems are universal, even with single payer healthcare systems (especially when they're subject to creeping and not so subtle privatization).

Problem Solution: Windows XP, svchost.exe using 99% CPU, very slow system

We encountered this problem the other day and the solution isn't obvious without some Googling, so I'm posting it here.

Symptoms: Your computer is running very slowly and networking may also be running at a snail's pace.

Confirmation: Hit Ctrl-Alt-Del to start up Task Manager. In the Processes tab, check out the CPU activity for svchost.exe. If it's running high, possibly even peaking or consistently at 99%, then you probably have this problem.

Solution: If you're running a version of Internet Explorer earlier than 8, update it, then apply security update KB2870699. (Even if you never use Internet Explorer as a browser, it's an integral part of Windows XP.)

How to do it: Since your computer is running so slowly, you're best to do this in Safe Mode with Networking, where your computer should run fairly normally.

To do this, reboot and keep hitting F6 until you see a screen that offers a range of boot options. Select Safe Mode with Networking.

Using either Internet Explorer or your usual browser, download IE 8 and install it. You can find it here:

http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/internet-explorer-8-details.aspx

or more directly from

http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/internet-explorer/downloads/ie-8

After installation, your computer will ask to reboot. Let it do so.

You'll now be back in your usual Windows configuration. If your system's still running slowly, you may need to reboot into Safe Mode with Networking again to do the following.

Download and install Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer 8 for Windows XP (KB2870699) from http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=40119

Reboot again. By now your computer should be running more normally.

After you've done that, visit http://update.microsoft.com/microsoftupdate/ and let it identify any other updates needed by your computer and install them. If your computer's running relatively normally by now, you don't need to do this in Safe Mode with Networking.

This resolved the 99% usage problem on one of our laptops which was originally still running IE 6. It also sped up another laptop which already had IE 8 installed but not the security update, and which was running less quickly than normal and showing intermittent 40% or so svchost.exe CPU activity even when at rest.

There may be other reasons why your computer might be running slowly, so you need to confirm that svchost.exe over-activity is the problem before applying this solution.


Afterthought: svchost.exe over-activity has been a recurrent problem with Windows XP for some years, usually tied to Windows Automatic Updates or sometimes installation of proprietary software (e.g. from Hewlett Packard) that uses an updater.

One simple solution doing the rounds is to disable Windows Automatic Updates, but that can lead to its own problems over time.

Other solutions require more tinkering under Windows XP's hood. At the time of writing, this particular instance of the svchost.exe problem does seem tied to IE and its security update, which is why I've offered this solution here rather than trying to address other possible causes and solutions that may apply now or later. It uses normal Windows processes and doesn't involve any great technical knowledge, so it's unlikely to do any harm, and it's worth trying it first before doing any more instrusive troubleshooting, as at least you'll have eliminated one possible cause.

My goodness, Chuck, you're a real big fan of this "Dan from Squirrel Hill's Blog"

judging by your journal: http://www.democraticunderground.com/~Chuck%20Smythe

I checked Dan's blog out: http://danfromsquirrelhill.wordpress.com/

Quite a RW libertarian paradise there, from what I've seen.

Rifffling though his categories and some of his comments, Dan doesn't seem to like leftists at all, among probably WAY more than 169 other things that many folks on DU generally stand for--unions, Barack Obama, the ACA, gun control, environmentalism ...

Funny that.

You wouldn't happen to actually be Dan, would you, Chuck?
Go to Page: 1