Slashdot Mirror

Other than "kinda cool" blerb.

  - They've already got nuke power up there.

Some of it quite old and not exactly working. Let's hope when this nuclear plant reaches it's EOL, they're a bit more responsible about decommissioning it.
http://englishrussia.com/2009/...

Like all those that apologized for communism?

Actually launching and retrieving flying vehiclies from massive airships is nothing new. the US Akron and US Macon were blimp aircraft carriers carring multiple planes able to both launch and retrieve.

http://www.airships.net/us-nav...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
http://www.history.com/topics/...

the russians even built planes that other planes could launch from
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

and Darpa still wants these:
http://www.popsci.com/article/...

and both the russians and Lockeed developed concept aircraft based on nuclear powered super planes with runways built into them:
https://forums.spacebattles.co...
russina surface effects nuclear powered sea skimmer concept:
http://englishrussia.com/2015/...

Check out this "pork distributor" (scroll down)
http://englishrussia.com/2007/...

The USSR doesn't even call it "World War 2" - it's "The Great Patriotic War". And yes, the USSR was tremendously important.

But who was arming (and feeding) them?

Yup, America, World Police -

http://englishrussia.com/2008/...

http://www.historynet.com/russ...

And somehow, Obama thought he could bluff the people who were willing to spend *lives* to advance their national aims. Bottom line, Putin is playing chess, and Obama is playing connect 4.

The Russians already have about half a dozen nuclear powered ice breakers, and they used to use nuclear power* for remote lighthouses.
*(As far as I can tell, the light houses used RTGs rather than a nuclear reactor)

Are there any Western records of mice that act like this?

http://englishrussia.com/2013/08/19/strange-creature-no-the-mouse-line/

English Russia is indeed very fascinating, if a bit prophetic in their urban exploration sections where they visit places that have been abandoned since the Soviet collapse, including places that shouldn't have been completely abandoned!

http://englishrussia.com/2012/08/19/abandoned-chemical-weaponry-plant/

You know what's a more interesting site?

English Russia. Mostly photo-essay / slideshow style, but with really high quality, large images. Tons of urban exploration themed stories, for example. Very neat.

One of the reasons that I think the mainstream press has been biting it online is that many of them still think 300-pixel-wide images are acceptable for covering a story. I have a camera where I can shoot someone's photo from a block away and practically see their nosehairs, news photographers are shooting with the same or better, and they're posting crappy, overcompressed, over-contrasted, tiny garbage.

The Boston Globe's Big Picture posts images 990x660, and they're so much better it's astounding. They're standard newswire photos - just not compressed to hell and shrunk to the size of a postage stamp like they are almost everywhere else!

You know what's a more interesting site?

English Russia. Mostly photo-essay / slideshow style, but with really high quality, large images. Tons of urban exploration themed stories, for example. Very neat.

One of the reasons that I think the mainstream press has been biting it online is that many of them still think 300-pixel-wide images are acceptable for covering a story. I have a camera where I can shoot someone's photo from a block away and practically see their nosehairs, news photographers are shooting with the same or better, and they're posting crappy, overcompressed, over-contrasted, tiny garbage.

The Boston Globe's Big Picture posts images 990x660, and they're so much better it's astounding. They're standard newswire photos - just not compressed to hell and shrunk to the size of a postage stamp like they are almost everywhere else!

I know you americans like to use "communist" to mean "anything we don't like", but seriously, what does being against porn have to do with being very left wing to the point of saying everyone should share everything equally?

Most Americans base their understanding of communism on our nations history with the U.S.S.R. and China, rather than any specific definition. To that end -

http://englishrussia.com/2010/08/16/anti-alcohol-soviet-posters/

Doesn't take a major Puritanical leap to go from demonizing booze to demonizing sexy pictures.

By that I mean things like this. Standing in line for hours to get milk for their children.

And this. Again standing in line for hours, this time just for bread.

And take note: these pictures were obviously far, far more recent than "early in the Soviet Union's formation". Actually, they aren't all that far from the Soviet Union's collapse.

By that I mean things like this. Standing in line for hours to get milk for their children.

And this. Again standing in line for hours, this time just for bread.

And take note: these pictures were obviously far, far more recent than "early in the Soviet Union's formation". Actually, they aren't all that far from the Soviet Union's collapse.

http://englishrussia.com/2012/04/30/photoshop-of-the-soviet-time/

Here's something that's pretty extreme.

http://englishrussia.com/2012/03/01/ask-her-how-to-lose-some-weight/

Read the whole story. Being buried in peat was a bigger help than any other factor.

http://englishrussia.com/2006/09/17/russian-tank-recovered-from-the-lake-after-50-years-been-there/

That said, yes, I agree with your general point about the Russian approach being merely different rather than better or worse.

I'll leave you with this quote:

"Somebody said that T34 was reliable. The answer is: absolutely not. Soviets lost more of them to breakdowns than to German tanks. And Sherman vs. T34 the winner is Sherman. Sherman was more comfortable, more reliable, had sight stabilizator, made less noise due the rubber tracks."

Have a look at how they fixed recurring issues with police in Georgia (the caucasian country, not the US state) under Saakashvili.

They started by firing every cop who did something profoundly stupid or illegal. In the latter case, they also racked up heavy prison time (like 5-10 years) - even for "small" things like bribes. After several months, they've either imprisoned or laid off about 85% of the workforce.

Then, they've started a hiring campaign. Very stringent standards (all remaining employees also had to qualify), but also fairly high pay (the average salary in Georgia is ~$350, cops get $500-700).

End result? According to the polls, almost 90% of the people trust police - the only organization that ranks higher is the Church.

From my research contrails are a completely normal part of air flight. My Grandpa was flying commercial passenger planes long ago. I asked him about it and he told me... "All engines emit water vapour, usually invisible. Given the right atmospheric conditions the vapour will condense into cloud. In the same way that normal cloud appears in many different forms, so contrails can be persistent, non-persistent, thick or thin and so can be short, long, narrow or wide and can remain as cloud similar to the Cirrus that you see at high level on a sunny day. Contrails are usually of ice and at high altitude. I must have released many 1000s of tons of water which became ice and cloud. So far no lumps have fallen on my head!"

I've also found plenty of evidence that chemtrails have been created in many different countries.
Here's a Germany news report which describes how the German Federal Army have been creating chemtrails: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51FcITBszj8
There are subtitles in the video.
I don't think this is strictly chemtrails, but the Russians perform cloud seeding by adding silver iodide, dry ice and liquid nitrogen to the clouds to cause immediate precipitation: http://englishrussia.com/2011/05/18/manipulating-the-weather/

So far I have been unable to figure out if there is a way of visually distinguishing the difference between chemtrails and contrails.

Really my point is... when you see artificial clouds in the sky it /might/ be a chemtrail, but it is much more likely to be a completely normal contrail.

I found a pretty neat site that has a lot of cool pictures of what appears to be a modern Russian plant.

In this picture we see the control panel and yeah, it looks like it is big fucking analog panel meters and red buttons. But there's a display that is obviously some sort of digital status..not sure if it's electrical or some valve array thing, but as OP said there is already apparently some digital already.

I found a pretty neat site that has a lot of cool pictures of what appears to be a modern Russian plant.

In this picture we see the control panel and yeah, it looks like it is big fucking analog panel meters and red buttons. But there's a display that is obviously some sort of digital status..not sure if it's electrical or some valve array thing, but as OP said there is already apparently some digital already.

I found a pretty neat site that has a lot of cool pictures of what appears to be a modern Russian plant.

In this picture we see the control panel and yeah, it looks like it is big fucking analog panel meters and red buttons. But there's a display that is obviously some sort of digital status..not sure if it's electrical or some valve array thing, but as OP said there is already apparently some digital already.

How about some mobile nuclear reactors, or as Wired titled an article:

In Soviet Union, nuclear reactors finds you!

  Russian mobile nuclear reactors

There are Power station ships, but given the power requirements of Japan, they would need 30 of these.

Though it looks like the future is going to be Modular nuclear reactors, which are smaller than the conventional 3 GigaWatt reactor, but can be strung together and transported by container.

"They'll probably bomb the heck out of Chechnya again"

LOL! Chechnya is currently THE biggest acceptor of federal help in Russia. Grozny has been rebuilt from ground up in the recent years and now it's a very nice city (if one ignores its inhabitants). Kadyrov (the governor of Chechnya) calls Putin "his best friend".

Here's a post with pictures from several years ago: http://www.englishrussia.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=700

So please, do some bit of research before posting.

yeah! What could possible go wrong? Not like http://englishrussia.com/index.php/2008/03/25/darvaz-the-door-to-hell/

Are they native to an urban area like Chicago?

At least as native as dogs are to the moscow subway.

For all the curious types. Here is a series of pictures claiming to be from inside of the UVB-76 station. The authenticity is not guarranteed and readinbg the Russian inscriptions on the pictures does not provide any hard evidence it actually is the station. It might be any old military/comms building of the days long gone. Some inscriptions have been redacted... which still does not prove anything. See for yourselves: http://englishrussia.com/index.php/2010/08/28/inside-the-mysterious-uvb-76-station -- insignificant

You might lead the casual reader to think that merely throwing a switch has no real world consequences, which is anything but the truth. When you are dealing with systems of such magnitude of energies even the smallest delay in rectifying an issue has a very lasting effect. e.g http://englishrussia.com/index.php/2009/08/17/hydro-electic-power-plant-explosion/ There are any number of ways to force mechanical failures simply by using 'control' software. Any mechanical system can be forced to fail if you know how it is built, and what problems plague the internal design of that system. The US is vulnerable to many such attacks against the control systems (e.g. SCADA ) and these threats should be taken VERY seriously until such time that we know the internal control networks are unreachable from any outside influence. http://www.securityfocus.com/news/11465

These are the folks who thought nuclear lighthouses were a great idea... http://englishrussia.com/index.php/2009/01/06/abandoned-russian-polar-nuclear-lighthouses/ (and they were...except for the abandoned nuclear reactor part of it)

Locals repair roads!

http://englishrussia.com/index.php/2010/04/07/vladivostok-road-repair-flashmob/

Go, Russia!

Much of the area around Chernobyl was evacuated immediately; see the photos here of schools, businesses, equipment and homes abandoned on short notice and never reclaimed. A succession of workers continued at the power plant, both to reinforce the rapidly deteriorating "tomb" which had been hastily assembled around Reactor #4 and to keep other reactors operating as you've noted. While animals and even some people have returned to the area, it has not become "safe" nor will it be for many years to come. The Chernobyl reactors used an inherently unsafe design chosen primarily because it was cheap; the bills eventually do come due; it can be argued that Chernobyl contributed significantly to the collapse of the Soviet Union, due both to the enormous direct cost of the disaster and a desire by the government to divest itself of the very long term responsibility. Chernobyl is now Ukraine's problem; Russia simply walked away and moved on.

The prize is 1 million USD and Perelman is this guy in the picture http://englishrussia.com/index.php/2007/06/15/perelman-in-a-subway/

Be warned, you'll lose productivity for rest of the day.

That's nothing, compared to English Russia.

... than this guy.

And that "Asian lady lying on a bed who wriggles and moans suggestively when you rub your finger over her. " is exactly the Axe Feather game; wonder if they actually ported Flash to that phone.

http://englishrussia.com/?p=998

Especially if you have one of these: http://englishrussia.com/?p=3163#more-3163

I wouldn't blame it on 'government' as a concept. The Russians recently blew up a hydro plant. They're just naturally good at making things go boom.

The summary says a transformer blew up. But in these photos, I see what appears to be a couple of generator stator poles lying loose in the rubble (second photo down). The transformers (shown lower down a ways) appear to be relatively intact) Meanwhile, this video shows what appears to be water escaping a broken penstock or turbine. Not oil (although some arcing is visible for a moment over on the left). I'm wondering of the oil leaks are secondary to the initial failure.

EnglishRussia.com has some pretty stunning pictures of the damage.

Sure you will!

Yes.

Alternatively, for a very small investment, your enemies can make it impossible to detect all their nukes.

You apparently don't understand how we know where their nukes are. Good thing you're not in charge, eh?

Further, your statement is wrong on its face anyway: if we did depend exclusively on satellites, and we could see them all through this method (which you imply), then we would still know where all their nukes were: we just wouldn't know which ones were the nukes and which ones weren't. So we'd bomb both. For a large country like Iraq this can be useful; for a small one like DPRK it's just asking for more of your country to be blown up.

You may be hubristic enough to risk a first strike against a nuclear power, but thank God the US President appears to have a few more clues.

/me shakes head

First, there's no risk to us. DPRK can't touch us.

Second, there's no hubris involved. At all.

Third, Obama would launch in a second if a. DPRK posed a direct threat to us or its neighbors and b. China would let us.

It sends a strong message to the DPRK military: "Get cracking on your ICBMs, you slackers - what good are your nukes if you can't deliver them?".

And we blow up any ICBMs they have that are above, or below, ground.

<sarcasm>
Sure you will! And you'll have no problem getting every last one, because they'll all be fixed in place, in plain view, and coated in fluorescent yellow paint. Plus there'll be enormous signs painted on the ground saying "bomb here".
</sarcasm>
Alternatively, for a very small investment, your enemies can make it impossible to detect all their nukes. You may be hubristic enough to risk a first strike against a nuclear power, but thank God the US President appears to have a few more clues.

(see http://englishrussia.com/?p=2198 [englishrussia.com] for an abandoned Soviet nuclear lighthouse)

This is inaccurate - the Soviet lighthouses did not contain nuclear reactors (would be ridiculous), but rather radioisotope sources. Basically, a clump of very radioactive material that spontaneously heats up and is used for generating electricity - the point being, it stays that way for decades, without intervention. So, very convenient for remote navigation beacons. But also pretty stupid: they got abandoned in the USSR's collapse and they're getting vandalized for scrap metal. Obviously a huge hazard - wish I could find the article I read.

The problem with nuclear power isn't really the fact that it produces toxic waste but rather (especially in a post 9/11, post USSR world) is the security aspect. The USA has enough space that we can effectively store a ton of nuclear waste for a very long time. However securing it is a challenge. There will always be unaccounted waste that could be in anyone's hands. You only need to look at some shocking photos from Russia to see that (see http://englishrussia.com/?p=2198 for an abandoned Soviet nuclear lighthouse). While the USA currently is a whole lot more stable than post-soviet Russia, it still raises a number of questions. While we might be able to secure it for 100 years, what happens after that? There are plenty of abandoned coal and hydro power plants in the world and abandoning nuclear plants is a bad idea. So how do you secure them fully to keep the waste out of the hands of people who wish to do harm while still providing for the fact that they -do- go obsolete after a time.

But we are already doing that. US/Russia unilateral surveillance system has been running since the age of internet meme.

http://englishrussia.com/?p=2449

I mean, talk about up and close surveillance!

well, sort of. you are right that it has been 50 years. the US Army had been successful with portable nuclear power plants. from the 60's to the 70's they have used 2mW and 10mW power plants successfully (about halfway down for info )
the russians are not unfamiliar with the concept it seems.
PBS had a great documentary on how the US Army could set up and safely use portable nuclear power plants in the arctic, however no linkie could be found...

In this case, transportation is a public hunk of bad, steaming feces

Roads, rails, sidewalks, buses, trains, planes and airports should be owned and operated by private individuals for profit. To believe that governments are able to supply them is to think that a monopoly is better at serving customers than a competitive market.

As to your statement that 'all transportation is subsidized and that's a necessary thing (...)", well, I can only laugh. Do you also think food prices would go up, or worse, we'd all starve, if farming subsidies were removed?

only if windows has actually been activated

Yeah, because pigged space missions are easy. You just need a cannon: http://englishrussia.com/?p=700

pictures or it didn't happen...
http://englishrussia.com/images/unique/1.jpg

The interesting point here is if you look at the last picture http://englishrussia.com/?p=2047 with the animated version of what they tried to achieve, it's a zoomed in snap shot of what's on google.

http://englishrussia.com/?p=2064#more-2064 http://maps.yahoo.com/index.php#mvt=s&lat=55.872849&lon=37.661707&mag=1&zoom=18&trf=0