Slashdot Mirror

One thing about the potassium in our bodies - unless you get the levels seriously out of whack, it won't kill you.

And neither will external materials that have low-level radioactivity for 10,000 years.

Polonium 210 is an alpha emitter (you know - the kind you toss about as not being able to penetrate the dead skin on our bodies). Unfortunately 89 nanograms, ingested, is the median lethal dose.

Let's be clear for a moment: Litvinenko was poisoned. He didn't accidentally ingest 10 micrograms of Polonium 210 any more than you or I have accidentally ingested 5 mg of Pu-238. With a half-life of about 1/3yr, a temperature that easily exceeds 500C, and a heavy weight that prevents it from becoming airborne, Polonium poses little risk outside the laboratory or industrial environments where it is used. In addition, Polonium is a highly stable heavy metal that is unlikely to chemically bond to common materials and/or make it into the water or food supply like the more concerning Su-90 or I-131.

The greatest concern with Polonium-210 is that tobacco fertilizers contain the material, probably from natural Uranium decay in the soil. The tobacco plant absorbs the chemical and thus it gets into cigarettes. The quantities are miniscule, even by Polonium-210 standards (partially owing to the short half-life), but enough to eventually lead to lung cancer.

And while it is obvious to anyone versed on the subject that a coal plant belches out far more radioactive material than a properly operating coal plant, when a nuclear plant goes south, it can do it in a big way. TMI let some 40,000 curies of radioactive Krypton out. Chernobyl was far worse and directly killed a lot of people, contaminated a huge area of the Ukrane, and spewed contamination across Europe.

Let's count up the deaths, shall we?

Three Mile Island: 0 deaths
Chernobyl: 47 deaths (there were also 4,000 cases of Thyroid cancer that were successfully treated)
London Great Smog: 12,000 deaths

That last one was caused by burning coal. 12,000 deaths from a disaster caused by burning coal. Versus a maximum impact from nuclear power of ~4,050 people. (Only a small handful of who directly lost their lives.) And that's DESPITE the USSR building a sub-standard facility, DESPITE the USSR requiring untrained personal to safety test the facility, DESPITE the lousy and late evacuation job, and DESPITE the massive release of radioactive materials.

If that's not sinking in, read it again. Coal is MASSIVELY more dangerous than nuclear power plants. Period, end of story. If you have your brain even half-way engaged, you should be demanding that every one of our coal plants be ripped out.

(The 125,000 death figure, BTW, is a myth.)

I think it's pretty convenient and disingenuous that you and your other proponents of nuclear power continue to blame every accident on "bad designs".

TMI was not a "bad" design for its time. By modern standards it is, but then it was acceptable. And guess what? NOBODY DIED. Chernobyl on the other hand lacked BASIC safety measures. Like concrete for example. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that putting a solid concrete bunker around a super-heated boiler is a good idea in case it should explode. (Boiler explosions are a VERY common industrial accident, regardless of nuclear materials.) For some stupid reason, the bunker wasn't there. Furthermore, the untrained techs who performed the tests actually DISABLED the shutdown systems by cutting wires so that the reactor could not auto-sc

• IANANP (I Am Not A Nuclear Physicist)
• YMMV (Your Mileage May Vary)
• TANSTAAFL (There Aint No Such Thing As A Free Lunch)
• GIYF (Google Is Your Friend)

Is there some forum or wiki, that will will allow for a collaboration of ideas for revamping of the internet?

I have begun a blog to promote discussion of the social and political ramifications of Stanford's Clean Slate program. It links back to this very Slashdot discussion at the end. You ideas and suggestions are welcome. At the bottom of the page you will find a button to send me feedback.

Stanford University states their research program can be characterized by two research questions: "With what we know today, if we were to start again with a clean slate, how would we design a global communications infrastructure?" and "How should the Internet look in 15 years?"

A new internet architecture such as proposed will open vast new markets and endless business opportunities - in short - a potential gold mine for the seven industrial sponsors. The fear is that the Stanford research program will trade off attention to social and political issues for expediency in the impetus to get the new infrastructure up and running quickly.

How do we ensure that those questions don't get switched around to, "...if we were to start again with a clean slate, how would we design a better conduit to more efficiently funnel revenues to our sponsors?" and "How should their profit margins look in 15 years?"

See my blog "The Internet is Broken" for an answer.

You mean I can finally patent my bubble sort algorithm? Oh boy!

My prime number generator algorithm finds all the primes in the 64 bit number space in 100 lines of C. Tried to post this, but I guess it got filtered out by the lameness filter.

The real disease is: those vast botnets. Really, it's a scary thought. We are lucky that they only being used for spam and the usual phishing scams and the like - as far as we know! Imagine if the terrorists buy themselves some botnets for some nefarious purpose, or the Chinese or North Korea government corner the market on them to run millions of bots to steal corporate secrets or IDs or who knows what? What I'm saying here is that the large increase in spam should be triggering off alarm bells everywhere. The spam is not the problem - it's the botnets. Why in the world don't responsible world governments unite to put a swift end to this problem? Really - it could be dealt with swiftly and effectively in a hundred different ways that I will up to the imagination of the reader. I am just astonished this hasn't happened. I mean - couldn't our friend and champion of democracy George W. include this in his initiative against terrorism? He would probably have more luck tackling this problem then he is having in Iraq. What if he put that on his agenda - and set loose all his military might along with the help of some coalition of the willing? Perhaps he could salvage what's left of his image? Are you listening Mister Bush?

I find that the people who gripe loudest about the problems with e-mail are the ones who have poor or no spam filtering.

I guess I'm lucky that I have an ISP who takes spam blocking seriously, using a combination of Brightmail and a user configuarable Spam-Assassin install that seems to block 98% of spam and which has virtually no false positives. On the weeks when I monitor it, they may mis-label one in several tens of thousands of messages, usually from mailing list or other source that just barely triggers the filter.

Most people assume that the lousy, error prone spam blocking offered by many ISPs is the best than can be acomplished. That's simply not true.

Unlike the article author, I still find e-mail a reliable and essential tool, and can't see a need to make significant changes at this time.

Old post of mine:

'uranium reserves' only includes discovered resources: The more good locations we discover, the more our reserves increase.

From http://www.uic.com.au/nip75.htm [uic.com.au] Current usage is about 68,000 tU/yr. Thus the world's present measured resources of uranium in the lower cost category (3.5 Mt) and used only in conventional reactors, are enough to last for some 50 years. This represents a higher level of assured resources than is normal for most minerals. Further exploration and higher prices will certainly, on the basis of present geological knowledge, yield further resources as present ones are used up. There was very little uranium exploration between 1985 and 2005, so a significant increase in exploration effort could readily double the known economic resources, and a doubling of price from present levels could be expected to create about a tenfold increase in measured resources, over time.

From http://www.magma.ca/~jalrober/Chapter14c.htm [magma.ca] Large amounts of uranium exist: it is about as abundant as tin. At the current rate of consumption (35,000 tonnes per year) and prices, known uranium resources of four million tonnes represent about 65 years consumption at current rates, comparable with about 42 years for oil and 62 years for natural gas.

I read a lot of estimates of the 'true' amount of uranium, so I'm not sure anyone really knows. Most estimates are around a couple hundred years (more than fossil fuel, but still not a long term solution)

...even though nuclear power releases less radioactive material than burning coal.

Right. Try telling that to the folks who used to live in Chernobyl.

Beautiful straw man there. Read this: How many died? Oh, and while we are at it, lets compare the number of deaths due to the mining of coal....

I think you will find that Nuclear power (as long as it is not used as a weapon) is considerably safer than coal on the whole.

In addition to what you said, it's also my understanding that 'uranium reserves' only includes discovered resources: The more good locations we discover, the more our reserves increase.

From http://www.uic.com.au/nip75.htm
Current usage is about 68,000 tU/yr. Thus the world's present measured resources of uranium in the lower cost category (3.5 Mt) and used only in conventional reactors, are enough to last for some 50 years. This represents a higher level of assured resources than is normal for most minerals. Further exploration and higher prices will certainly, on the basis of present geological knowledge, yield further resources as present ones are used up. There was very little uranium exploration between 1985 and 2005, so a significant increase in exploration effort could readily double the known economic resources, and a doubling of price from present levels could be expected to create about a tenfold increase in measured resources, over time.

From http://www.magma.ca/~jalrober/Chapter14c.htm
Large amounts of uranium exist: it is about as abundant as tin. At the current rate of consumption (35,000 tonnes per year) and prices, known uranium resources of four million tonnes represent about 65 years consumption at current rates, comparable with about 42 years for oil and 62 years for natural gas.

Iv'e seen a lot of estimates of the 'true' amount of uranium, so I'm not sure anyone really knows. Most estimates are around a couple hundred years (more than fossil fuel, but still not a long term solution)

Magma has incredible service and support and in my experience is about as rock solid reliable as you will find.

If there has ever been an e-mail outage I certainly haven't noticed it in several years. And I rely a lot on e-mail.

Great anti-spam filtering too.

Just remember to read the this.

One key breakthrough will be to give computers the ability to take an intentional stance (short definition or longer essay) with regard to users. If Google could infer why I am searching instead of just what I am searching, it would be able to do a much better job. This would move from search-as-data-retrieval to search-as-intelligent-dialog.

I'm not sure if this can happen by 2015, but it seems like a key goal that is much more important than adding "Genuine People Personalities" to computers

You're wrong when you say there are no other options to Rogers and Sympatico in your area. You just need to look a little harder. There are plently of DSL providers in Ontario (Magma is one that comes to mind). There's also the option of a non-residential high speed connection if you want to use Vonage. True, it is more expensive, but it doesn't come with the restrictions that residential connections are weighed down with. Residential connections are, in part, more lucrativily priced because there are no service guaruntees attached to them. The ISPs don't have to deliver 24/7 access with minimum bit rates, and in return you get to pay less.

I'm a Vonage and a Rogers customer in Ontario and if Rogers plans to block Vonage use on its network when it launches its own VoIP service late this summer I'll be thanking my lucky stars there's no service contract with Vonage or Rogers. So I can jump either ship as suits my communication needs.

I think 90% of what's been discussed here can be resolved with: if you want no-strings-attached internet acces, don't buy a residential connection.

The helmet issue is almost as controversial as the one about global warming.You cite the bike helmet safety institute, which sounds kind of biased. Here are some other links:

• There is no direct evidence that the wearing of cycle helmets has led to fewer deaths amongst cyclists.
• the tests on which these standards are based mimic a fall from a cycle rather than collision with a fast moving vehicle, which is most likely to harm an adult cyclist.
• Helmets which could provide significant protection (if they existed) would be of such construction that few would care to wear them.
• John Franklin's Cycling Digest on helmets - plenty of studies.

I have been hosted by Magma Communications in Ottawa for many years and have nothing but praise for their support and service. Not the cheapest company but superb service and extremely reliable.

Great spam filtering too!

"Now, if you said you prefer virtual desktops, as is implemented in most Linux GUIs, then I would understand."

Desktop Manager Alt

Virtue Alt

Virtual Desktop Pro Alt

Virtual Desktop Alt (not the same product as above)

You Control: Desktops Alt

Virtual Screens Alt (not quite a VDM, but it works)

I know that a lot of our clients and feiends are using e-mail less and less. They are finding that they are buried under a growing deluge of spam and virus laden messages, and are moving back to telephone calls, faxes, and even paper letters.

We are lucky in having an ISP with superb and effective spam filtering, so only see a few dozen messages a day that fit that description.

Likwise we're very vigilant about virus protection and use a firewall, so have thus far avoided any virus infection.

Still, most casual users aren't at this level, and they are finding that the Internet is less useful than it used to be.

I don't hink that the Internet will collapse, but I can see a time when we start seeing casual users abandon it as more trouble than it's worth.

And just to throw in a very frigtening idea, what happens when one or more spammers successfully sue ISPs for blocking their mail? Even if it can't be done domestically, various international trade agreements may support such and action.

The added value of wearing a helmet while biking is usually overestimated.. (Google around to find more information from advocates and skeptics)

The requirements for a bicycle helmet are that an object the size and shape of a human head should not be exposed to harmful deceleration when dropped from 150 cm (or so). A helmet is typically a piece of styrofoam designed to be completely crushed by such an impact. Problems with this approach are:

• In a realistic accident, it is not just a separate head, but a 5 kg head with 70 kg of body behind it. A fall from 150 cm corresponds to a velocity of 20 km/h upon impact. Most lethal accidents happen when a cyclist collides with a motor vehicle going at a much larger speed. All this means that in most lethal accidents, the helmet can only absorb a small fraction of the impact energy. Only in very few cases this will make the difference between lethal and nonlethal.
• The brain is a bunch of soft tissue surrounded by a hard skull (that incidentally can handle much more abuse than that piece of styrofoam we call helmet). The brain cannot be compressed easily because there are no air pockets, but it can be torn apart relatively easily. Hence, a shock such as in the helmet test is much less likely to cause damage than a sudden rotational motion of the skull. The chance of the latter happening actually increases if you wear a helmet, since your head gets "bigger" and can more easily make a "sliding" contact.
• The chance of dying due to head injury per hour of travel is about the same for someone in a car as for cyclists. Why don't automobilists wear helmets?

Asinine is defined as "Utterly stupid or silly." Doesn't that disqualify true statements? Caffeine is more toxic than plutonium.

I have to wonder about some of these estimates of the number of deaths due to Chernobyl. There are some sources that give much smaller numbers, such as this short summary. The World Health Organization only seems to predict that there are 3500 deaths as result of the accident, and there is the fact that there are other towns that have natural radiation levels at almost the same level as most parts of the area around the reactor (as long as you are not standing right next to the reactor building). Although I don't mean to say it was something trivial because there were fewer deaths, or that either source is absolutely correct, as it was a mess no matter how many people died.

But at least I learn something from a lot of these games. Maybe I had fun playing some of the WWII games, but I know I would never want to be there, especially since there is no Quick Load feature in a real war. I think as technology improves, games have fewer and fewer restrictions on the plot and subject matter allowing for some of these very important events to be covered in a serious and realistic light. That doesn't mean all of the games are going to be like that. Further more, it sounds like the nasty part with this game is the marketing ploys, and we all know how different the marketing can be from the game itself.

Anyways, I would rather an issue be brought instead of lost in time though. At least it may spark the interests to look into the real event (unless they actually believe the real event involved mutants and monsters and hence the game was accurate).

That's in direct contradiction to documented evidence. Do note that some wildly inflated figures have been circulating, for which there is absolutely no support. Note that it is very much in the interest of Ukraine to promote very high numbers of casualties in order to obtain increased compensation from Russia.

Some links include a summary of other published work, the report from the UN IAEA, and a summary from a nuclear power specialist.

Regarding this specific point: from the 'executive summary' report on a recent conference organised by the IAEA on Chernobyl,

16. The mortality of the clean-up workers and the inhabitants of the contaminated areas does not exceed average mortality in the three countries.

here ya go. Some info on the death toll. after reading that page I suggest your click around that site a little, it's a good read.
Here is the authors bio for reference. He does know (unlike most /.ers) what is BS and what is not.

here ya go. Some info on the death toll. after reading that page I suggest your click around that site a little, it's a good read.
Here is the authors bio for reference. He does know (unlike most /.ers) what is BS and what is not.

eventually result in laws requiring babies being surgicaly modified with helmets pre-attached and sheathed with bubble-wrap.

Getting there - The effectiveness of wearing pedestrian helmet while walking from home to school in elementary school children

Of course, something not mentioned in the promotional bits is that whenever the system goes on emergency power, the diesel generator is switched on, and fuel trucks are dispatched (flashing lights and blaring klazons anyone?) to the site for in-use refueling.

Broadband internet in Ottawa is actually the norm. I think I can name two people I know who have a dialup account (and everyone I can think of who I know right now has online access) in the area. Rogers Cablesystems provides Rogers@Home service to the area (which will change in the next little while I would imagine) and provided Rogers Wave before that. With Bell's HSE and local ISPs like Magma, Trytel, and TravelNet all providing DSL at a low cost, dialup as a connection type is silly.

I would like to mention that one of the reasons why @Home is probably dying is because of the amount of money they have to pour into support due to their horrible service. I have several friends who work for or have worked for Taima in Ottawa, a company that Rogers@Home uses to outsource support to (one of many) and apparently they have a lack of employees.

I wouldn't say Broadband is dead, just fairly mismanaged. :)

Broadband internet in Ottawa is actually the norm. I think I can name two people I know who have a dialup account (and everyone I can think of who I know right now has online access) in the area. Rogers Cablesystems provides Rogers@Home service to the area (which will change in the next little while I would imagine) and provided Rogers Wave before that. With Bell's HSE and local ISPs like Magma, Trytel, and TravelNet all providing DSL at a low cost, dialup as a connection type is silly.

I would like to mention that one of the reasons why @Home is probably dying is because of the amount of money they have to pour into support due to their horrible service. I have several friends who work for or have worked for Taima in Ottawa, a company that Rogers@Home uses to outsource support to (one of many) and apparently they have a lack of employees.

I wouldn't say Broadband is dead, just fairly mismanaged. :)

The package essentially consists of a layer of very heavy gauge Velcro strips attached to the steel walls of the vehicle to which the composite panels are mounted. On top of this is a covering of rubberized canvas, again with strips of Velcro attached to the inner surface, which gives the vehicle the unkempt appearance. If damage occurs to the ceramic panels, they can be pried off and replaced on an individual basis

;)

Cable however, isn't fast anywhere. ;) I live in an area of Ottawa near downtown and there are five buildings in the same place. Most of the connectivity in these buildings is through @Home. I was an @Home customer for a while and got tired of paying $40.00/mo. for 20K/sec on a good day. I have DSL through Magma Communications now and I get 120K/sec. consistently. *shrugs*

I was looking all over trying to find a really good link that i had read about flywheel stored energy systems. I am sorry I couldn't find it. To sumarize it was about some engineer who was out to make stored energy systems for cars based upon the use of a bunch of flywheels. I am really surprised that nobody else mentioned flywheels as the /. community is usually so up on science and new tech. for the curious here is an article at NASA's site about thier research on it. And here is some really good info on a hideously designed site. If someone finds the link i was talking about with the slick looking cars on flywheel systems please post it! Thanks :)

That thing (bow tie) looks like an amoeba http://www .nature.com/nature/journal/v405/n6783/fig_tab/4051 13a0_F1.html - a nucleus with protoplasm and tenticles.

We all knew that Internet was in its early development stage but I thought it was already closer to some multicelled trilobite then a single celled organism!