Slashdot Mirror

They probably started testing the technology: http://www.russiatoday.com/Top_News/2009-10-08/ufo-halo-sky-baffles.html

The cause.

The effect.

Is our children learning?

Deep Purple sued because they failed to pay royalties to themselves. . . ??!!

http://russiatoday.com/Art_and_Fun/2009-07-03/Deep_Purple_ordered_to_pay_royalty_to_themselves_.html

If a faith is getting gamed, what else is been dropped or pushed up on google?
Does google actively provide help with this faith based optimisation?
So the USA has used assassins and the UK wants to try OSCT funded apostasy?
From :
http://www.google.com/corporate/tenthings.html
"Placement in search results is never sold to anyone."
Someone at google just recalls the scary start up days and that wonderful visit from the nice people in suits?
" Instead of relying on a group of editors or solely on the frequency with which certain terms appear"
Google now uses a 200-strong Home Office unit?
"Google is able to determine which sites have been "voted" the best sources of information by those most interested in the information they offer"
Is "voted" now "selected by tame academics"?
http://www.russiatoday.com/Politics/2009-04-02/Bush_administration_accused_of_organizing_secret_assassin_cabal.html

Won't work here and now, of course. It's not, after all, hard to rent a car and drive past a place to take pictures years before you hit it.

Oh, we in the UK are well ahead of you! Hardened terrorists like this man are trembling in fear at our powerful new anti-photography laws, despite the efforts of some bleeding heart liberals.

Sigh. Even the Russians are scoring points off us.

I guess 50% of slashdot visitors do not even finish the summary to begin with :)
Even less are going to the linked source. And watching the video? Unlikely!

Here's "lost in translation" explanation from linked article comments:
http://www.russiatoday.com/news/news/36591

yes, it was more sensationalist and selective reading. It was more a bad simultaneous translation, as many Russians are noting. Plus it was not about Dell per se, it was "the IT sector" in general. see http://www.russiatoday.com/news/news/36591

Here.

âoeYou know, the trick is we're not someone in need of help. We're not invalids. Help is something that you should give to poor people, to people with limited capacities, to pensioners, to developing countries... As for Russia and our partners in Europe, in the United States, in some Asian countries, there should be a partnership of equals.â

I pointed out the Iraqi war, Afghanistan war and other atrocities of America just to demonstrate their hypocrisy in their international dealings. Once you invade another country (and ignore human rights by abusing and torturing other nationals), you lose the moral authority to pretend outrage when another country does it.

And like you have correctly pointed out, just because America has carried out these depraved attacks upon another country, it doesn't excuse any other country to do the same. So in that count you are right. But I'll repeat this again for your benefit. Russia did not invade Georgia, but rather intervened into a Georgia - South Ossetia conflict. Georgians killed about 2000 South Ossetians, and Russians sent their force to bring back peace. Thats why the casualty in Georgian side is so less (about 200). So in this issue, Russia did not do anything wrong.

By finding nothing wrong in Russia's response in this conflict, it does not mean that I'll support Russia unconditionally on whatever they do. I take sides based on the issue that we are discussing. Is it so difficult for you to accept that Russians can sometimes do a good deed? Or just because you don't hear about it, have you come to believe that Russians can never do something good? How about this story, in which an American was not allowed to say that Russians saved their life from Georgians on US television network? Do you have any comments on that?

I see that you mostly resort to flame bait. But I try to share my opinion. This discussion would be more pleasant if you can avoid name calling.

In South Ossetia there was a peace-keeping force consisting of members from 3 regions: Russian + Georgian + South Ossetian. This peace keeping force was in place because of previous conflicts between Georgia and South Ossetia. On 7-August-2008, Georgia conducted a surprise military attack on Tskhinvali, the capital of South Ossetia, killing the Russian peace keepers and also about 2000 South Ossetians civilians. They were bombarding the city in the night! Russia *retaliated*. Remember that lots of South Ossetians are Russian passport holders. And the casualty on the Georgian side was 200. And did you know that the fleeing South Ossetians are going into Russia for refuge? This simply means that they fear for their lives from the Georgians. The count of refugees is now about 30,000. And it is continuing to grow. In my opinion, Russians did not invade Georgia, but rather intervened in the Georgia, South Ossetia conflict. Without Russian intervention the death toll in South Ossetia would have been much more. How did Georgia dare to provoke Russia? Because of the assurances they received from USA. That is why I am blaming USA for the current conflict. American soldiers may not be there in the war zone. But American military trainers and strategists are with the Georgian military providing their valuable service behind the scenes. In this particular conflict, yes Russians are the good guys.

Americans are a very important reason as to why the current conflict in Georgia is happening. I encourage you to do your own analysis on this. The article, "How USA funds Georgian arms?" will help you understand it a little bit. It is not my wish that America be involved in Georgia, but it is going on for sometime now. Georgia has received considerable help (in terms of weapons as well as training) in recent times. Now they are putting them to use. America is not a reluctant benevolent international player, as you are trying to project.

In the course of the last 24 hours RTâ(TM)s website (www.russiatoday.com) has endured numerous DDoS attacks, which have made it unavailable for some time. Source

After doing some more research on the internet, I need to rectify some facts:
Since 1986, no more that two reactors of the Chornobyl plant, have been operative..

In 1991, one of the two reactors caught fire and was taken offline and was taken back online in 1995. Currently there's only one reactor operational, the second one was taken offline in 1997 because it exceeded it's lifespan. The remaining reactor, is in such a bad shape, that it needs a half year of service for every half year of operation. Ukrainia has scheduled the last reactor to shut down before 01-01-2000, but is now probably forced to use it until end Q2 Y2K, because they still haven't received any money to finish building their new power plants and winters are very harsh over there..

Currently, Ukrainia had only power 22/24 hours, before powering up #3 and the Ukrainain public transport is largly electrical powered.


In the first year after the accident, the number of cleanup workers in the zone was estimated to be 211,000, and these workers received an estimated average dose between 165-250 millisievert (16.5 rem). In total, around 600-800,000 workers have been involved since 1986 and around 8000-10000 of them died.

Right after the accident, the main health concern involved radioiodine, with a half-life of eight days. During which those 135.000 people were not evacuated.. Today, there is concern about contamination of the soil with cesium-137, which has a half-life of about 30 years.
It is true that the reactors themself are based on old analogue technologies, but the powergrid, auxialiary control units and power backup units aren't.

The POWERGRID and NOT the reactor itself perse, is THE main Y2K concern, according to the CIA.
If the powergrid fails or miscommunication etc, the 5 powerplants Ukrainia has, have to be taken off-line. The ironony is, that reactors need power from the grid to be able be be shutdown, as the Chernobyl test disaster prooved. It is feared, that the current power backup system takes to long to get online, altough it has been improved (providing it is not hit by a y2k problem).

America has offered to send batteries and power generators and also offered to improve current reactors.. But is hindered by politics.. I'm in general anti-America, but it seems like America is the only one who cares.. The G7 still hasn't payed.

How precare is the situation of #4 at the moment?
* In 1991, the Chornobyl plant suffered from an earthquake.
* There is leaking rain water into the "sarcophagus" of unit 4, causing massive corrosion and major damage of the structural integerity as robot surveying showed. There's imminent need of $700,000 todo some very short term repairs to #4, but money lacks...
* #4 contains still 70% of it's original fuel in dust form.. The roof of the 'sargophagus' is imminent to collapse. Does the term 'fall out' ring a bell to anyone? If it would collapse, the disaster would be much much bigger than in 1986.. Providing it won't ignite the nuclear fuel in #3, causing a real global disaster, which is a real fear.
And don't forget the 1991 fire..

Russia and Lithuania still also are using 14 RBMK light water graphite reactors such as at Chornobyl. The RMBK 1000 model VVER 440-230 in Novovoronezh NPP (Russia), the same as used in Chornobyl, has already failed 17 times, during it's life...
Some article on Sovjet reactors.
Some other articles: Russia today , more info this and this

"The odds of a meltdown are one in 10,000 years. The plants have safe and reliable controls that are protected from any breakdown with three safety systems." Vitaly Sklyarov, Minister of Power for the Ukrainian SSR., February 1986

After doing some more research on the internet, I need to rectify some facts:
Since 1986, no more that two reactors of the Chornobyl plant, have been operative..

In 1991, one of the two reactors caught fire and was taken offline and was taken back online in 1995. Currently there's only one reactor operational, the second one was taken offline in 1997 because it exceeded it's lifespan. The remaining reactor, is in such a bad shape, that it needs a half year of service for every half year of operation. Ukrainia has scheduled the last reactor to shut down before 01-01-2000, but is now probably forced to use it until end Q2 Y2K, because they still haven't received any money to finish building their new power plants and winters are very harsh over there..

Currently, Ukrainia had only power 22/24 hours, before powering up #3 and the Ukrainain public transport is largly electrical powered.


In the first year after the accident, the number of cleanup workers in the zone was estimated to be 211,000, and these workers received an estimated average dose between 165-250 millisievert (16.5 rem). In total, around 600-800,000 workers have been involved since 1986 and around 8000-10000 of them died.

Right after the accident, the main health concern involved radioiodine, with a half-life of eight days. During which those 135.000 people were not evacuated.. Today, there is concern about contamination of the soil with cesium-137, which has a half-life of about 30 years.
It is true that the reactors themself are based on old analogue technologies, but the powergrid, auxialiary control units and power backup units aren't.

The POWERGRID and NOT the reactor itself perse, is THE main Y2K concern, according to the CIA.
If the powergrid fails or miscommunication etc, the 5 powerplants Ukrainia has, have to be taken off-line. The ironony is, that reactors need power from the grid to be able be be shutdown, as the Chernobyl test disaster prooved. It is feared, that the current power backup system takes to long to get online, altough it has been improved (providing it is not hit by a y2k problem).

America has offered to send batteries and power generators and also offered to improve current reactors.. But is hindered by politics.. I'm in general anti-America, but it seems like America is the only one who cares.. The G7 still hasn't payed.

How precare is the situation of #4 at the moment?
* In 1991, the Chornobyl plant suffered from an earthquake.
* There is leaking rain water into the "sarcophagus" of unit 4, causing massive corrosion and major damage of the structural integerity as robot surveying showed. There's imminent need of $700,000 todo some very short term repairs to #4, but money lacks...
* #4 contains still 70% of it's original fuel in dust form.. The roof of the 'sargophagus' is imminent to collapse. Does the term 'fall out' ring a bell to anyone? If it would collapse, the disaster would be much much bigger than in 1986.. Providing it won't ignite the nuclear fuel in #3, causing a real global disaster, which is a real fear.
And don't forget the 1991 fire..

Russia and Lithuania still also are using 14 RBMK light water graphite reactors such as at Chornobyl. The RMBK 1000 model VVER 440-230 in Novovoronezh NPP (Russia), the same as used in Chornobyl, has already failed 17 times, during it's life...
Some article on Sovjet reactors.
Some other articles: Russia today , more info this and this

"The odds of a meltdown are one in 10,000 years. The plants have safe and reliable controls that are protected from any breakdown with three safety systems." Vitaly Sklyarov, Minister of Power for the Ukrainian SSR., February 1986