Agreguesi i feed

U.S. battery storage installations hit a record 57.6 GWh in 2025, and Texas is now poised to surpass California as the nationâ(TM)s largest storage market in 2026. Electrek reports: According to the US Energy Storage Market Outlook Q1 2026 from the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) and Benchmark Mineral Intelligence, installations are now four times higher than totals from just three years ago. The US had a total of 137 GWh of utility-scale storage installed as of 2025, plus 19 GWh of commercial and industrial systems and 9 GWh of residential storage. Analysts expect the growth streak to continue. More than 600 GWh of energy storage is projected to be deployed nationwide by 2030, even as the Trump administration targets clean energy industries. Two-thirds of utility-scale storage installed in 2025 was built in red states, including nine of the top 15 states for new installations. Texas is projected to surpass California as the countryâ(TM)s largest battery storage market in 2026. Standalone battery projects accounted for nearly 30 GWh of new capacity in 2025, while solar-plus-storage installations made up about 20 GWh. Residential storage deployments reached 3.1 GWh last year, a 51% increase year-over-year. Analysts say virtual power plant programs in states such as Massachusetts, Texas, Arizona, and Illinois are helping drive adoption by reducing costs and easing strain during peak demand periods. The supply chain is shifting to support the boom. In 2025, some battery cell manufacturers pivoted production from EV batteries to dedicated stationary storage cells, converting existing lines and adjusting future plans. Lithium-ion cell manufacturing for stationary storage reached more than 21 GWh in 2025, enough to power Houston overnight, according to SEIAâ(TM)s Solar and Storage Supply Chain Dashboard. Meanwhile, US factories now have the capacity to manufacture 69.4 GWh of battery energy storage systems annually.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Its moments of change that remain striking in your memory when you look back. I feel like i’m in a long period of change, and if like me you participate in the tech industry and open source then you probably feel the same. It’s going to be a wild time to look back on.

As humans we’re naturally drawn to exciting new changes. Its not just the tech industry. The Spanish transport minister recently announced ambicious plans to run trains at record speeds of 350km/h. Then two tragic accidents happened, apparently due to careless infrastructure maintenance. Its easy (and valid) to criticise the situation. But I can sympathise too. You don’t see many news reports saying “Infrastructure is being maintained really well at the moment and there haven’t been any accidents for years”. We all just take that shit for granted.

This is a “middle aged man states obvious truths” post, so here’s another one we forget in the software world: Automating work doesn’t make it go away. Lets say you automate a 10 step release process which takes an hour to do manually. That’s pretty great, now at release time you just push a button and wait. Maybe you can get on with some other work meanwhile — except you still need to check the automation finished and the release published correctly. What if step 5 fails? Now you have drop your other work again, push that out of your brain and try to remember how the release process worked, which will be hazy enough if you’ve stopped ever doing release manually.

Sometimes I’ll take an hour of manual work each month in preference to maintaining a complex, bespoke automation system.

Over time we do build great tools and successfully automate bits of our jobs. Forty or fifty years ago, most computer programmers could write assembly code and do register allocation in their heads. I can’t remember the last time I needed that skill. The C compiler does it for me.

The work of CPU register allocation hasn’t gone away, though. I’ve outsourced the cognitive load to researchers and compiler teams working at places like IBM / Red Hat, embecosm and Apple who maintain GCC and LLM.

When I first got into computer programming, at the tail end of the “MOV AX, 10h; INT 13h” era, part of the fun was this idea you could have wild ideas and simply create yourself piece by piece, making your own tools, and pulling yourself up by your bootstraps. Look at this teenager who created his own 3D game engine! Look at this crazy dude who made an entire operating system! Now I’m gonna do something cool that will change the world, and then ideally retire.

It took me the longest time to see that this “rock star” development model is all mythology. Just like actual rock stars, in fact. When a musician appears with stylish clothes and a bunch of great songs, the “origin story” is a carefully curated myth. The music world is a diverse community of artists, stylists, mentors, coaches, co-writers, producers, technicians, drivers, promotors, photographers, session musicians and social media experts, constantly trading our skills and ideas and collaborating to make them a reality. Nobody just walks out of their bedroom onto a stage and changes the world. But that doesn’t make for a good press release does it ?

The AI bubble is built on this same myth of the individual creator. I think LLMs are a transformative tool, and computer programming will never be the same; the first time you input some vaguely worded English prompt and get back a working unit test, you see a shining road ahead paved with automation, where you can finally turn ideas into products within days or weeks instead of having to chisel away at them painfully for years.

But here’s the reality: our monkey brains are still the same size, and you can’t If your new automation is flaky, then you’re going to spend as much time debugging and fixing things as you always did. Doing things the old way may take longer, but the limiting factor was never our typing speed, but our capacity to understand and communicate new ideas.
“The future belongs to idea guys who can just do things”. No it doesnt mate, the past, present and future belongs to diverse groups of people whose skills and abilities complement each other and who have collectively agreed on some sort of common goal. But that idea doesn’t sell very well.

If and when we do land on genuinely transformative new tool — something like a C compiler, or hypertext — then I promise you, everyone’s going to be on it in no time. How long did it take for ChatGPT to go from 0 to 1 billlion users wordwide?

In all of this, I’ve had an intense few months in a new role at Codethink. It’s been an intense winter too — by some measures Galicia is literally the wettest place on earth right now — so I guess it was a good time to learn new things. Since I rejoined back in 2021 I’ve nearly always been outsourced on different client projects. What I’m learning now is how the company’s R&D division works.

Version:7.0-rc1 (mainline) Released:2026-02-22 Source:linux-7.0-rc1.tar.gz Patch:full

You've probably heard that Wireguard is simpler and more secure. That sounds good, but it doesn't answer the question you actually have to deal with, which is whether it changes your risk profile or just rearranges it.

You all know that librsvg is developed in gitlab.gnome.org, not in GitHub. The README prominently says, "PLEASE DO NOT SEND PULL REQUESTS TO GITHUB".

So, of course, today librsvg got its first AI slop pull request and later a second one, both in GitHub. Fortunately (?) they were closed by the same account that opened them, four minutes and one minute after opening them, respectively.

I looked.

There is compiled Python code (nope, that's how you get another xz attack).

There are uncomfortably large Python scripts with jewels like subprocess.run("a single formatted string") (nope, learn to call commands correctly).

There are two vast JSON files with "suggestions" for branches to make changes to the code, with jewels like:

• Suggestions to call standard library functions that do not even exist. The proposed code does not even use the nonexistent standard library function.

• Adding enum variants to SVG-specific constructs for things that are not in the SVG spec.

• Adding incorrect "safety checks". assert!(!c_string.is_null()) to be replaced by if c_string.is_null() { return ""; }.

• Fix a "floating-point overflow"... which is already handled correctly, and with a suggestion to use a function that does not exist.

• Adding a cache for something that does not need caching (without an eviction policy (so it is a memory leak)).

• Parallelizing the entire rendering process through a 4-line function. Of course this does not work.

• Adding two "missing" filters from the SVG spec (they are already implemented), and the implementation is todo!().

It's all like that. I stopped looking, and reported both PRs for spam.