However it is a well known topic that american pro nuclear propaganda declared 'spend fuel' as waste, ignoring that there is much more wast to think abot.
Simple example. A fuel rod consists of fuel and surrounding casing. Assuming a 50% / 50% relationship. The fuel is uranium that once was enriched to 5% fissionable material.
After a bit more than half of that fissionable material is burned, when concentration is down to 2%, the fuel rod is 'spent'.
During reprocessing you aim to get as much as possible of the remaining 2% back for new rods.
The casing, is thrown away, the fission products are, half of the non fissionable uranium is, and a huge deal if the chemicals used for the 'reprocessing' is.
The misconception comes from the misnomer of the term 'waste' in the USA.
With me, I think you're speaking to the wrong crowd. I personally know what nuclear waste ends up as here. Basically it's radioactive material in a canister embedded deep in the bedrock, and I think it's fine. I worry more about meteors hitting the apartment building I live (in my lifetime) in than the nuclear waste ever causing any harm to living organisms (ever), with the exception of bacteria, ect.
Seriously, worry more about crap like heavy metal poisoning than radiation poisoning (aka, if you eat uranium), unless Putin decides to start WW3.
Reprocessing does not reduce waste, it doubles to quadruples waste.
Reprocessing is a process to get unspent fuel out of spent fuel rods for reuse.
It does not magically let the waste, the fission products, or the chemical compounds you get during reprocessing 'vanish'.
I suggest to read some 'hard stuff' and not the pseudo science you read, otherwise you knew what reprocessing is, how it works and what the result is... sigh.
Can you actually specify your qualifications to discuss matters pertaining to nuclear waste management and nuclear power in general on the specific level you've gone through the effort to create messages on this thread? Even decent references would make it better, the statements you've made seem to be on a very superficial level, and could easily be from a book of anti-nuclear propaganda.
I'm a programmer also, it doesn't mean I know much about nuclear waste management.
Too bad that fruit company has among its practice of bundling bloatware along its software users want to install.
What do you consider is Apple's bloatware? All I see are Apple written, basic applications that are complete in and amongst themselves. No free trials, no upgrades, no advertising.
While the early iTunes weren't bad, it's now a horrible piece of crap. I haven't used OSX for a while, so I can't comment on new developments, but I imagine they're even more into the sell more media side, as opposed to a simple and functional media player.
Like with Microsoft Windows, you can consider all the useless features they add to the system that are basically for marketing purposes, as bloatware.
Given that this ideal world is completely imaginary, and the things that the free market is supposed to do in it never actually happen in the real world, why imagine a world where it's specifically free markets that have these magical powers? Why not an imaginary world where these things happen without free markets? Why not one where elves come in the middle of the night and solve everything?
Or, if this ideal world you've imagined doesn't map to the real one, why not try to imagine one that does?
I find it odd that there's the sort of idea that government regulation is somehow inherently anti-competitive in the US. If the government wants to be anti-competitive, they'll just say that business isn't allowed to do X and monopolize that function themselves.
If there were no limits to free market, the majority of the population would be morphine addicts, or possibly something even more addictive.
I'll admit I just read the summary article and not the paper itself, but I wouldn't say that this is overly surprising.
Right off the bat due to this preoccupation we Java types seem to have with accessor methods (which I think if we admit, do something besides just set or get a private member variable like 1% of the time, why the hell we still do this I don't know..), and the frequent necessity for hash, clone, and equals methods, most of which is auto-generated, you end up with a bunch of small methods that do very little but up the code count.
Beyond that, I think good design usually works out this way. You (or at least I like to) build up in layers, each layer using the previous layer at a higher level, until you get to the top where you have a few seemingly simple bits of code that pull it all together. When you get big complex functions doing a bunch of stuff vs the described small functions adding little bits of functionality along the way, I think you are doing things wrong.
That's not to say people (and this is common in Java) go way overboard and end up with huge chains of methods that just pass the buck and complex control structures where you need a debugger to figure out whats going on, but if done right it can make for easily maintained and readable code.
To me it seems meaningless. You write the 'fluff' to actually make the code maintainable/easily readable (or the opposite). If you want to be totally effective in terms of written commands, you should write machine code directly.
What I think is curious is what their fluff algorithms would think of c obfuscation contests.
I would _never_ agree to work for a business which chooses the wrong tool for the job because said tool is "cool". Either they use an appropriate language, of I choose which language to use.
Virtually all Ruby shops fit into that first statement - wrong tool for the job, but do it because it's "cool".
Interesting, I don't personally care much about languages unless it's just plain bad idea in terms of performance, like say doing scientific HPC on pure interpreted python. If someone wants to pay me to reinvent the virtual wheel, I don't really mind. The language itself is just a tool, and having used C for almost 20 years now, I still tend to lookup standard function calls from the man. It's not like using a different language would be any different aside from missing man pages.
I do wonder if people hate languages because their favorite IDE Product X doesn't support Language Y. My favorite "IDE" is called vim, it's not too hard to add language support to it, but it will take decent chunk of time.
Let's say I had a tested, working LFTR design. Do you really think it would be very hard to convince the public that it is inherently safer than other fission designs. Safer than a coal plant. Safer than hydroelectric. It is pretty easy to understand that a plant that is inherently impossible to cause a melt-down might be a different kind of plant than a light-water reactor design.
True, there is radiation, but it is very modest. Few people seem to have NIMBY issues with LWR reactors based on the normal radiation. It is the fear of a Chernobyl event.
I don't think Chernobyl or Three Mile Island is really the problem these days (aside from the green activists that want to enter the stone age), but that the generation experience was lost due to these disaster as well as the passive uranium cycle designs in the company fallout. To be fair, the modern nuclear reactor designs are pretty decent, but the lost generations really hurt the industry.
X was great for its time. But its time was when graphics hardware was slow and software was relatively undemanding.
Ha-ha-ha... you clearly never used an X-Terminal back when we were all going to have dumb terminals on our desks talking to The Cloud... sorry... super-powerful 68020-based Unix servers The X overhead is miniscule today, unless you're trying to push X sessions over the Internet, or video over the LAN.
It's not like 10 years ago it was enjoyable either to use a dumb terminal, and quite frankly I doubt it's improved (I think they were SUN dumb terminals connected to something I can't remember). These days you're still going to compete over resources over a extremely high latency link (relative to computer performance). Not to mention the increased use of graphical elements in the UI.
We're using it to do a web page-based UI for a commercial product. The RasPi people are looking for commercial users, so we decided to try it out. It's far less expensive than other commercial SBCs, and being Linux based, it's a known quantity (no nasty proprietary OS or API to deal with), and the RasPi has a large user base, so hopefully, no unannounced obsolescence. Only drawback is that we need a HDMI converter board between the RasPi and the bare TFT panel. We still come in at around $200 for the entire display subsystem.
If RPI Foundation is actually interested in commercial users, why don't you ask information on how to use the MIPI DSI port (flat flex connector above the SD Card, it's a video output) on the thing and see if you can cut the costs.
Oh, but it was! In fact, Darwin 7.0 (OSX 10.3) brought Darwin's BSD layer back in sync with FreeBSD 5. There was, indeed, a lot of reimplementation at the kernel level, and most of the userland tools had many parts rewritten as well, but your own source confirms what I have said. It confirmed it before I posted it originally, as well. In case that's not enough, here's another, and another, and, for good measure, one more, though that last one only mentions the use of BSD's userland components.
None of those sources say that Darwin was forked off of FreeBSD kernel. You must realize that a fork implies a shared root source tree, copying subsystems does not qualify as a fork. They do qualify as forks of the specific subsystems, but not the kernel.
That said, I've never been bothered to look at either FreeBSD or Darwin kernel sources, so for all I know FreeBSD might be based on AmigaOS.
To me the plan sounds like you end up with every car you use giving you the reliability of a rental, with the "oops no cars are available now" factor of services like ZipCar...
But perhaps in a more isolated culture where people do not abuse things they do not own, the cars will be treated well and availability will work out well.
I do wonder if all these comments are from Americans living in sparse suburb style cities with a deserted downtown. For example Kutsuplus is a bus stop to bus stop ordered service provided by the city transport services (Sort of a random group taxi that goes through optimal stops). I haven't heard of a single company offering rental cars on the sort of plan you mention.
Helsinki already has a portal where you can create bus/walking/cycling routes. I imagine what they want to add to that is services like Taxi or the newer style private transportation services like Uber ect.
You're talking about electrical engineering. This is not that.
From what exposure I've had with HDL, it's a language for electrical engineering. It's different from normal electrical engineering but it's even more different from normal programming.
This law seems quite effective and enforceable really. How many search engines are you going to go through looking for a person before you decide there's nothing out there about them? The approach of stopping search indexes certainly shows a understanding of how people use the internet. Inaccessible data on the internet might just aswell not exist, there will be a special group of people who know the secret, but it won't affect public knowledge.
I'm certainly of two minds about the law, jaywalking and causing a serious traffic incident killing bus full of schoolchildren would probably mean you'd be practically unemployable for the rest of your life. The hard path of being allowed to grow up or being trapped in your past. (Or the abuse that it'll get)
Lots of good years of use, likely many more years of usefulness, too.
No-one in their right mind would use vi (I can navigate around it, but it's a PITA). I have to assume you mean vim. which is a very nice editor. And I've never used DDD and I never saw the purpose to it, gdb text mode seems easier to use, and it includes some fancy text mode ui features for register and code tracking, that some people might not be familiar with. I don't have anything against GUI debuggers, but DDD is pretty much an ancient throwback. Something like the QT Creator integrated debugger is actually reasonable.
Was rather hoping Nokia would come back with the Android smartphones, into the EU. Unfortunately that seems to not be the case and they inside on flogging that dead horse of their own operating system. They used to make nice hardware designs.
Nokia doesn't make cellphones anymore, the cellphone division was what was sold off to Microsoft and I don't see why Nokia would re-enter the cellphone market anymore, it's pretty saturated.
I hope they don't torture you with SVN at your current job anymore.
Git would actually be more effective for this since it requires the history and the hash that points to it be rewritten, so you can be sure that atleast internally no-one is messing around if you know the hash. Unless ofcourse the person messing with you is a cryptography savant, who's figured out how to rewrite the history without affecting the SHA hash and still make it seem like the history makes any sense.
Other countries also have much better public transportation. Which the US lacks unless you're in a major city.
I'm not really sure I buy into that, if you live in the less populated areas of Europe, the puiblic transport is going to suck, and you will need to own a car. On the Internet side of things, it's BS, but on public transport it isn't. Running empty busses every 5 minutes is just pointless, and in low population areas that might be empty busses even if you run them every hour, or longer.
Following the comparison of the atom. If you were an atom and saw a fellow atom floating around, could you imagine he was a part of a consistent whole called a rock?
Ofcourse I think theory of evolution is quite probable and extrapolating bacterial evolution (if this is the micro evolution you mention) is a good guess, but all creatures are made from millions of specialized cells. If there was no other evidence like apparent bones of earlier stages of evolution, I'm not sure I'd put that much weight on it.
The problem is however that without those who are controlled, is there really any control? Informed citizens who have heard about the strange ties to certain presidents on certain news channels. And I believe there was a court case where the people who sued lost because showing false information isn't infact illegal there.
And then there's the part of the commercial tv that has to make money from having people who watch them. Do people want to watch programme that makes them feel better or programme that is actually true?
The thing is that with state controlled media broadcasters, they Will Get Into Trouble if they start spewing false information. This obviously depends on how public the corruption of the goverment is, or how far they're going to go to show it. The commercial tv stations do however balance the state owned.
Re:People will soon not be needed!
on
Robots Go To War
·
· Score: 1
Because DirectX 8.1 (that supports ps 1.4) was developed with ATI. As for why someone might just buy an ATI board is (as far as it concerns me) because they have working DRI drivers, even though they aren't feature complete. My next card probably won't be an NVIDIA one.
You seem to have gotten stuck to the XFree86 3.x age. Slackware comes with XFree86 4.1 and from my experience there is only one server, and the specific drivers are libraries. The XFree86 default configuration in Slack8 is to use fbdev. To chege this edit/etc/X11/XF86Config and next time, RTFM.
Slashdot Mirror
No, I can't as I'm not an native english speaker.
However it is a well known topic that american pro nuclear propaganda declared 'spend fuel' as waste, ignoring that there is much more wast to think abot.
Simple example. A fuel rod consists of fuel and surrounding casing. Assuming a 50% / 50% relationship. The fuel is uranium that once was enriched to 5% fissionable material.
After a bit more than half of that fissionable material is burned, when concentration is down to 2%, the fuel rod is 'spent'.
During reprocessing you aim to get as much as possible of the remaining 2% back for new rods.
The casing, is thrown away, the fission products are, half of the non fissionable uranium is, and a huge deal if the chemicals used for the 'reprocessing' is.
The misconception comes from the misnomer of the term 'waste' in the USA.
With me, I think you're speaking to the wrong crowd. I personally know what nuclear waste ends up as here. Basically it's radioactive material in a canister embedded deep in the bedrock, and I think it's fine. I worry more about meteors hitting the apartment building I live (in my lifetime) in than the nuclear waste ever causing any harm to living organisms (ever), with the exception of bacteria, ect.
Seriously, worry more about crap like heavy metal poisoning than radiation poisoning (aka, if you eat uranium), unless Putin decides to start WW3.
Reprocessing does not reduce waste, it doubles to quadruples waste.
Reprocessing is a process to get unspent fuel out of spent fuel rods for reuse.
It does not magically let the waste, the fission products, or the chemical compounds you get during reprocessing 'vanish'.
I suggest to read some 'hard stuff' and not the pseudo science you read, otherwise you knew what reprocessing is, how it works and what the result is ... sigh.
Can you actually specify your qualifications to discuss matters pertaining to nuclear waste management and nuclear power in general on the specific level you've gone through the effort to create messages on this thread? Even decent references would make it better, the statements you've made seem to be on a very superficial level, and could easily be from a book of anti-nuclear propaganda.
I'm a programmer also, it doesn't mean I know much about nuclear waste management.
Too bad that fruit company has among its practice of bundling bloatware along its software users want to install.
What do you consider is Apple's bloatware? All I see are Apple written, basic applications that are complete in and amongst themselves. No free trials, no upgrades, no advertising.
While the early iTunes weren't bad, it's now a horrible piece of crap. I haven't used OSX for a while, so I can't comment on new developments, but I imagine they're even more into the sell more media side, as opposed to a simple and functional media player.
Like with Microsoft Windows, you can consider all the useless features they add to the system that are basically for marketing purposes, as bloatware.
Given that this ideal world is completely imaginary, and the things that the free market is supposed to do in it never actually happen in the real world, why imagine a world where it's specifically free markets that have these magical powers? Why not an imaginary world where these things happen without free markets? Why not one where elves come in the middle of the night and solve everything?
Or, if this ideal world you've imagined doesn't map to the real one, why not try to imagine one that does?
I find it odd that there's the sort of idea that government regulation is somehow inherently anti-competitive in the US. If the government wants to be anti-competitive, they'll just say that business isn't allowed to do X and monopolize that function themselves.
If there were no limits to free market, the majority of the population would be morphine addicts, or possibly something even more addictive.
I'll admit I just read the summary article and not the paper itself, but I wouldn't say that this is overly surprising.
Right off the bat due to this preoccupation we Java types seem to have with accessor methods (which I think if we admit, do something besides just set or get a private member variable like 1% of the time, why the hell we still do this I don't know..), and the frequent necessity for hash, clone, and equals methods, most of which is auto-generated, you end up with a bunch of small methods that do very little but up the code count.
Beyond that, I think good design usually works out this way. You (or at least I like to) build up in layers, each layer using the previous layer at a higher level, until you get to the top where you have a few seemingly simple bits of code that pull it all together. When you get big complex functions doing a bunch of stuff vs the described small functions adding little bits of functionality along the way, I think you are doing things wrong.
That's not to say people (and this is common in Java) go way overboard and end up with huge chains of methods that just pass the buck and complex control structures where you need a debugger to figure out whats going on, but if done right it can make for easily maintained and readable code.
To me it seems meaningless. You write the 'fluff' to actually make the code maintainable/easily readable (or the opposite). If you want to be totally effective in terms of written commands, you should write machine code directly.
What I think is curious is what their fluff algorithms would think of c obfuscation contests.
I would _never_ agree to work for a business which chooses the wrong tool for the job because said tool is "cool". Either they use an appropriate language, of I choose which language to use.
Virtually all Ruby shops fit into that first statement - wrong tool for the job, but do it because it's "cool".
Interesting, I don't personally care much about languages unless it's just plain bad idea in terms of performance, like say doing scientific HPC on pure interpreted python. If someone wants to pay me to reinvent the virtual wheel, I don't really mind. The language itself is just a tool, and having used C for almost 20 years now, I still tend to lookup standard function calls from the man. It's not like using a different language would be any different aside from missing man pages.
I do wonder if people hate languages because their favorite IDE Product X doesn't support Language Y. My favorite "IDE" is called vim, it's not too hard to add language support to it, but it will take decent chunk of time.
Let's say I had a tested, working LFTR design. Do you really think it would be very hard to convince the public that it is inherently safer than other fission designs. Safer than a coal plant. Safer than hydroelectric. It is pretty easy to understand that a plant that is inherently impossible to cause a melt-down might be a different kind of plant than a light-water reactor design.
True, there is radiation, but it is very modest. Few people seem to have NIMBY issues with LWR reactors based on the normal radiation. It is the fear of a Chernobyl event.
I don't think Chernobyl or Three Mile Island is really the problem these days (aside from the green activists that want to enter the stone age), but that the generation experience was lost due to these disaster as well as the passive uranium cycle designs in the company fallout. To be fair, the modern nuclear reactor designs are pretty decent, but the lost generations really hurt the industry.
X was great for its time. But its time was when graphics hardware was slow and software was relatively undemanding.
Ha-ha-ha... you clearly never used an X-Terminal back when we were all going to have dumb terminals on our desks talking to The Cloud... sorry... super-powerful 68020-based Unix servers The X overhead is miniscule today, unless you're trying to push X sessions over the Internet, or video over the LAN.
It's not like 10 years ago it was enjoyable either to use a dumb terminal, and quite frankly I doubt it's improved (I think they were SUN dumb terminals connected to something I can't remember). These days you're still going to compete over resources over a extremely high latency link (relative to computer performance). Not to mention the increased use of graphical elements in the UI.
We're using it to do a web page-based UI for a commercial product. The RasPi people are looking for commercial users, so we decided to try it out. It's far less expensive than other commercial SBCs, and being Linux based, it's a known quantity (no nasty proprietary OS or API to deal with), and the RasPi has a large user base, so hopefully, no unannounced obsolescence. Only drawback is that we need a HDMI converter board between the RasPi and the bare TFT panel. We still come in at around $200 for the entire display subsystem.
If RPI Foundation is actually interested in commercial users, why don't you ask information on how to use the MIPI DSI port (flat flex connector above the SD Card, it's a video output) on the thing and see if you can cut the costs.
Oh, but it was! In fact, Darwin 7.0 (OSX 10.3) brought Darwin's BSD layer back in sync with FreeBSD 5. There was, indeed, a lot of reimplementation at the kernel level, and most of the userland tools had many parts rewritten as well, but your own source confirms what I have said. It confirmed it before I posted it originally, as well. In case that's not enough, here's another, and another, and, for good measure, one more, though that last one only mentions the use of BSD's userland components.
None of those sources say that Darwin was forked off of FreeBSD kernel. You must realize that a fork implies a shared root source tree, copying subsystems does not qualify as a fork. They do qualify as forks of the specific subsystems, but not the kernel.
That said, I've never been bothered to look at either FreeBSD or Darwin kernel sources, so for all I know FreeBSD might be based on AmigaOS.
To me the plan sounds like you end up with every car you use giving you the reliability of a rental, with the "oops no cars are available now" factor of services like ZipCar...
But perhaps in a more isolated culture where people do not abuse things they do not own, the cars will be treated well and availability will work out well.
I do wonder if all these comments are from Americans living in sparse suburb style cities with a deserted downtown. For example Kutsuplus is a bus stop to bus stop ordered service provided by the city transport services (Sort of a random group taxi that goes through optimal stops). I haven't heard of a single company offering rental cars on the sort of plan you mention.
Helsinki already has a portal where you can create bus/walking/cycling routes. I imagine what they want to add to that is services like Taxi or the newer style private transportation services like Uber ect.
You're talking about electrical engineering. This is not that.
From what exposure I've had with HDL, it's a language for electrical engineering. It's different from normal electrical engineering but it's even more different from normal programming.
This law seems quite effective and enforceable really. How many search engines are you going to go through looking for a person before you decide there's nothing out there about them? The approach of stopping search indexes certainly shows a understanding of how people use the internet. Inaccessible data on the internet might just aswell not exist, there will be a special group of people who know the secret, but it won't affect public knowledge.
I'm certainly of two minds about the law, jaywalking and causing a serious traffic incident killing bus full of schoolchildren would probably mean you'd be practically unemployable for the rest of your life. The hard path of being allowed to grow up or being trapped in your past. (Or the abuse that it'll get)
c/c++, vi/emacs, make, ddd.
Lots of good years of use, likely many more years of usefulness, too.
No-one in their right mind would use vi (I can navigate around it, but it's a PITA). I have to assume you mean vim. which is a very nice editor. And I've never used DDD and I never saw the purpose to it, gdb text mode seems easier to use, and it includes some fancy text mode ui features for register and code tracking, that some people might not be familiar with. I don't have anything against GUI debuggers, but DDD is pretty much an ancient throwback. Something like the QT Creator integrated debugger is actually reasonable.
Was rather hoping Nokia would come back with the Android smartphones, into the EU. Unfortunately that seems to not be the case and they inside on flogging that dead horse of their own operating system. They used to make nice hardware designs.
Nokia doesn't make cellphones anymore, the cellphone division was what was sold off to Microsoft and I don't see why Nokia would re-enter the cellphone market anymore, it's pretty saturated.
I hope they don't torture you with SVN at your current job anymore.
Git would actually be more effective for this since it requires the history and the hash that points to it be rewritten, so you can be sure that atleast internally no-one is messing around if you know the hash. Unless ofcourse the person messing with you is a cryptography savant, who's figured out how to rewrite the history without affecting the SHA hash and still make it seem like the history makes any sense.
Other countries also have much better public transportation. Which the US lacks unless you're in a major city.
I'm not really sure I buy into that, if you live in the less populated areas of Europe, the puiblic transport is going to suck, and you will need to own a car. On the Internet side of things, it's BS, but on public transport it isn't. Running empty busses every 5 minutes is just pointless, and in low population areas that might be empty busses even if you run them every hour, or longer.
That being said, solar powered distillation processes would probably work best on small scales.
Why would solar desalination be bad on large scale? Solar Towers and Solar Furnaces are essentially mirrors targeted at a mass.
I guess the initial costs might be quite a big higher than just getting a pump and a semi-permeable membrane.
Following the comparison of the atom. If you were an atom and saw a fellow atom floating around, could you imagine he was a part of a consistent whole called a rock?
Ofcourse I think theory of evolution is quite probable and extrapolating bacterial evolution (if this is the micro evolution you mention) is a good guess, but all creatures are made from millions of specialized cells. If there was no other evidence like apparent bones of earlier stages of evolution, I'm not sure I'd put that much weight on it.
Outside:
Temperature: Unknown
Pressure: 0
Humidity: Divide by Zero Error!
It'd probably freak out and order shuttles full of vodka.
The problem is however that without those who are controlled, is there really any control? Informed citizens who have heard about the strange ties to certain presidents on certain news channels. And I believe there was a court case where the people who sued lost because showing false information isn't infact illegal there.
And then there's the part of the commercial tv that has to make money from having people who watch them. Do people want to watch programme that makes them feel better or programme that is actually true?
The thing is that with state controlled media broadcasters, they Will Get Into Trouble if they start spewing false information. This obviously depends on how public the corruption of the goverment is, or how far they're going to go to show it. The commercial tv stations do however balance the state owned.
I hope they robots never figure that one out.
Because DirectX 8.1 (that supports ps 1.4) was developed with ATI. As for why someone might just buy an ATI board is (as far as it concerns me) because they have working DRI drivers, even though they aren't feature complete. My next card probably won't be an NVIDIA one.
It was forked off SSH 1.2.12 and apparently was under GPL then.
You seem to have gotten stuck to the XFree86 3.x age. Slackware comes with XFree86 4.1 and from my experience there is only one server, and the specific drivers are libraries. The XFree86 default configuration in Slack8 is to use fbdev. To chege this edit /etc/X11/XF86Config and next time, RTFM.