Not neccessarily. I remember being subscribed to a magazine that numbered it's pages throughout the year. This meant page 1 was the first page of the first magazine that year and page (big number) was the last page of the december one. So you could easily have a pagenumber 250 somewhere in the middle of the year. My guess is that this magazine used the same system.
And you actually BELIEVE *IAA won't put an additional, let's say, 900% extra on the price? They will play this game as they did with vinyl record vs CD: "NOW it will cost a bit more than the old medium, but LATER, when we have earned back our investments, it will be so much cheaper..".Yeah right! We all know how that went! I'm afraid the only ones profiting from this will be the *IAA. No possibility to copy (for the time being, that is:-) )and a cheaper production, what more do you want?
If you value free time and the opportunity to do your own things in your own way or to be with your family/friends more than having a bigger car/house this development is not good. If you like your work and just HAVE to have this huge SUV to impress your neighbours, don't mind to be stressed till you break down and think material wealth is everything, then nothing is wrong. But at least, give people a chance to choose what they want, more time for themselves or just more money. Personally, I would choose for time. (I live in the Netherlands (!= Holland),so i work 40 hours/week. Even that is too much sometimes, as working pressure can be very high here. This country is more productive per hour as most other countries, including the USA. The only reason our yearly productivity is lower than the USA's is the fact we work less hours, and if I believed in a god, I would thank it for that.)
The only reason IBM does not change their warranty because they have been giving just one year of warranty all the time on their harddisks. And that's ONLY on the 'original IBM' ones, that have a FRU-partnr on them and are mounted in original IBM systems. If you buy an 'IBM' harddisk in a shop, 99 out of 100 times you will get an 'oem'-harddisk that looks like IBM, has an IBM label on it, was made by IBM, performs like IBM, crashes in a few months like IBM but is NOT warranted by IBM because it is a so-called 'bulk' harddisk that IBM makes for third parties. Warranty for those drives are the responsibility of the guy you bought it from, and if they choose not to give warranty, you can't go to IBM. IBM only grants one year warranty to IBM drives with a FRU partnumber on them, and the IBM drives you buy at the computershop are simply missing this number and are not warranted by IBM.
I happen to work in an IBM service shop in Europe, and I have to turn down lots of warranty requests for these oem drives. Personally I think this stinks, but then, who am I??
Ooooohh....and of course it should have this very low pulsating humming sound synced ('s that how you spell this?) to the lights. Thàt would be really impressive!
Ever heard of the fact that it's impossible to put all the earth that comes out of a hole back into it? But maybe some of the stuff could be put back where it came from. You just have to be sure all air-shafts etc. from the mine are securely sealed.
(Better still would be not to use nuclear energy, if you want to know why, take a peek at www.alternet.org, if you want to read something more than the Big Boys from the nuclear industry want you to know.)
Sometime ago/. posted a link to a letter of some Cuban statesman (http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/25157.html ), in answer to a M$ FUD-letter. Why not have this letter printed on poster-format and hang it all over the place, say two posters per booth (except the M$-booth maybe:-) ). I think all M$ FUD will be more then compensated!
Apparently you did not look well at the picture. The "cavity" is, in fact, a lens, covering the whole thing. (OK, I'm just filling in a small hole here..)
Remember when the CD's were all new and really expensive? "Soon" they would be even cheaper than LP's (these big, black round things with a small hole in the middle your dad used to have), because CD's "were so easy and cheap to manufacture"? Well, they *would* have been really cheap now, if not the prices for American politicians had rocketed sky-high! If we would stop copying, the Music and Film Industry could allow themselves more politicians and maybe would even be able to cut prices a bit, so we would all be happy! (Well...some happier than others...)
and for a very few people / industries who are making money out of it now. If it suits them, they'll just leave it for what it is and start something else. The costs for cleaning up the mess will be payed by the people, so why should they care? YOU are the ones paying for it, not them. These folks in the industry are only interested in the short-term money, and when problems occur when they are out of this business (and/or out of this life), who cares? There's enough money to buy another congressman to tell you it's all nice and clean and to tax you for paying their bill. Have fun, and think of the money you save bij radiating yourself!
It IS a fact a teaspoon of plutonium can kill us all. Furthermore, plutonium is NOT a natural element. It is MADE, by exposing uranium to radiation (a lot more than occurs in nature), so the uranium turns into plutonium. There is NO plutonium in nature! (at least, there wasn't until we made it). And it's not just the radiation that makes plutonium poisonous, it's just poisonous by itself, just as cyanide is.
There's just a few small thingies wrong with nuclear power. One of them is that the winning,transportation and preparation of the necessary uranium costs so much energy (it's present in only very small percentages in it's ores)that the CO2-production in that stage already equals that of the amount produced by winning the same amount of energy the uranium produces + what's needed to produce the uranium, with fossil energy. So the net-amount of CO2 saved with nuke-power is zero.
Furthermore, you are left with huge amounts of useless radio-active waste, evenly dangerous as the uranium won out of it. You can't put it back in the ground, as it's volume has grown (you never get it out of the ground as compact as it was). This is a problem the nuke-power industry does not like you to know about. Just as the fact you can poison the world-population with less than one gram of pure plutonium, the most poisonous material on this world.
As long as a few people can make big money out of nuke power, they will tell you it's safe and clean (oh, maybe for the 0,00000001% of it's lifetime the stuff spends in powerplants it is more or less safe, assuming no terrorists, idiots who don't know how to handle the stuff or bad design gets a chance), but what happens before (uranium mining is one of the most polluting industries) or after (oh, we're just left with piles of dangerous stuff for the next 100000 years or so, let's just dump it somewhere and hope there will be no earthquakes or anything, and while we make money, we don't care) the nuke-industry won't tell you. As long as people believe the nuke-energy guys, renewable energy will not make it. Just imagine: they would not be able to squeeze money out of renewable energy, that would be an economic disaster! (for them, not for us common people).
Oh, another thing a almost forgot: A nuclear powerplant has an economical lifespan of 30 years. When used full time, it takes 29 years to produce the amount of energy used by building the plant, and winning and processing the fuel to run it. So the net time you actually produce energy is one year. Of course the Big Men are making money all this time, so for them it's well worth the trouble. But is it for you???
...And, you are going to tell use that teaching them Linux and KDE will make them BETTER suited for the job market?...
I think it would, yes! There is a need for people who know how a computer works (not so much the hardware but the software-side of it). And Unix-admins are really wanted (at least here in Europe they are).
Just as you understand the workings of a computer better when you 'grew up' with DOS, I think people who have learned to think about software-configuration (as needed in Linux), and can learn some shell-scripting (as possible in Linux) will learn a lot more than the kids who only learn the 'point-and-click-and-drag-and-drop for dummies' that Winblows is, hiding everything that happens behind a nice graphic interface. Furthermore kids are much more eager and able to learn these things than grown-ups are.
Another thing is that they can learn that there's more than Micro$oft on this world and will have a real choice if they grow up, if they want they can either use M$-shit, or a real OS. [btw, I use M$:-( ].
If M$ gets it's way, they will only know M$ and will not easily change to anything else. I agree fully with the people who say that M$ is only perpetuating their monopoly this way.
What would be really good would be if M$ was forced to give the schools new hardware and OSS to run on it. If the kids want to change to M$ later when they leave school, well, I won't stop them. But at least they'll know there's more. And the talented kids will have had a chance to get into a real OS, and, to return to the beginning of this reply, have a lot more chances on the job market!
(Just mij 0.02).
Interesting articles (though i didn't read the one about the Caspian Sea entirely). It confirms my personal belief that this "war against terrorism" also has strong economical reasons. The American arms-industries were in great need for more business.....and what is more ideal then a far-away war, and as a result of that delivers another Northern Ireland, but many times bigger and many more parties who all want to exterminate each other? Yummie!!
And if America gets control over some gas and oil in the process, well, it wouldn't hurt, would it?
In fact, alcoholism is a physical disease. Alcohol influences the way your nervous system works. When you are drunk, certain neuro-transmitter-levels go down (or up, don't ask the details, it's been some time since I read an article about it), causing the numbness when you are drunk. When sobering up, the nerve-cells initially overcompensate the effect by producing a peak (or just the other way round, see last remark)production, causing for example the over-sensitivity for sound when you have a hangover. If you stay drunk for a longer period, or give the nervous system not enough time to re-stabilize, the system keeps trying to compensate. In the end, the nervous cells are 'programmed' to overproduce the substance, and they keep doing so, even when you are sober. The only way to compensate for this is drinking alcohol! So, alcoholism is a life-long illness (once you've 'got' it). You can stay sober, but the craving stays and once you start drinking it's very hard to stop again.
First, let me state that I don't like drugdealers and their like at all. Softdrugs (cannabis) is merely OK with me, harddrugs are just bad. But that's off-topic. But the Mafia was born in the time that alcohol was illegal in the USA, and gangs started making big money with it. It turned out that prohibiting alcohol gave more trouble than allowing and controlling it. The same goes, for a great part, for drugs. One can easily become 100 years using heroine of a good, pure quality, and noone has to bother about people using this. Now, it's big money and it's mixed with all kinds of shit that causes users to become sick etc, and it's expensive, so people have to steal to use it. IMHO it'd be better to legalize it and control it. BUT America wants to have an excuse (yes, I'm finally coming to my point here:-) ) to have a finger into everything, everywhere. So what works better than to create a devil (drugs) and have a force with almost unlimited power to 'fight' it? The DEA is such a force, it's everywhere and when America thinks it's needed to do something about a thing they don't like, they use it. And. of course, everything and everyone has to be monitored everywhere. I think the DEA is just an excuse to get influence. Am I lucky I live in the Netherlands! (Yes, I have used cannabis for years, absolutely problemless, I stopped, without any problem, and I'm not using any other drugs (apart from caffeine), never have used other drugs, and never wanted to. But that's off-topic again:-) )
Maybe I am mis-informed here (I hope for America I am!), but isn't this what you can expect from a country with (one of)the worst educational systems in the world, where the average (mind you, I say AVERAGE) education of people is lower than a 14-year old's in our country (The Netherlands). If you don't educate people, they get wrong ideas (and are easy to manipulate bij govt. etc). If media and govt. tell them the Net is bad, it MUST be bad. And if they are so stupid not to take the responsibility for their coffee-spills (or are not able to figure out you can't dry a dog in a microwave), how can you expect them to know someone who calls a classmate a motherf*cker isn't going to shoot a whole school next? You should start with a better educational system, that is, in short, my point. Again, I hope i'm mis-informed here!
At least with a Nuke, we can collect all the radioactive waste, instead of just dumping it into the atmosphere with everything else.)
Uhhhh....just one small prob here: EVERY nuclear reactor (a friend of mine has studied this and has worked in some reactors as well), has an outlet in the reactor room, more or less directly to the outside, to let out gasious by-products of the reactor. There are some filters, but those are not capable to take all radio-active stuff out, before it hits the atmosphere. In France, some formerly really expensive wines (Cote du Rhone's) are for sale for crap now, because France has a lot of nuclear powerplants on the Rhone-sides. (Maybe these wines now make a nice night-lite:-) ). Above that, when, in the process of changing the fuel-elements, one of those should fall out of the crane that carries it to the cooling-basin, it would break (they are very brittle) on the bottom of the basin, releasing a bubble of radio-active gasses that will take about 5 seconds to rise (the time the personnel has to run for the automatically closing air-lock) and then will instantly kill all personnel left there. After that, it will just be let out into the atmosphere, since no-one knows how to control such a thing.
Well, OK, let it be two atoms for a cancer. But Plutonium just stays the most toxic material known, you only need a fraction of a milligram to kill someone (just toxic effect, not by radiation). Look up any information source about Plutonium, and you'll see this confirmed.
I'm not such a 'rabit environmentalist', although i DO find the environment an important item, after all, we all have to live in it and your children (I don't have/want any), after us. Nevertheless, if you start reading other stuff as what the nukes feed you, maybe you'll change your mind like i did. Years ago, i started as a pro-nuke and believed all the bullshit the industry is spreading. Then i started reading some more, and the more i read, the more my doubt grew. Now i'm sure it's a lot better not to use nuclear power, because we just can't know what the long-term effects will be, and we can see (read) that what is happening now is not so innocent as the big companies want us to believe.
I've read these figures in several ('alternative') magazines and books, and these were the numbers that I remember, because they impressed me the most. It's some time ago, i have to admit that, and i can't exactly remember where i read it. Also, i have to admit, this seems to make this info less reliable, but i'm sure it's true. I started out as a pro-nuke myself, declaring everyone who thought it could be dangerous to be mad......until i started reading about it. The more i read, the more i get convinced nuke-power is NOT safe, clean or good for anything else but the profit of a small number of companies. (Or is that compagnies, English is not my native language). B.T.W., the sources for my numbers are all Dutch, I don't think a title as 'Allicht' will tell you anything.
So far for my (poor, alas) references.
Stands the fact i would not like to be responsible for the problems nuke-waste is causing 1000 years after now, or the availability of uranium or plutonium to terrorists etc. Or the dangers of unmotivated/drunk/addicted/not good enough educated/corrupt personnel in plants, the ignorance of safety rules and -measures etc. etc.
I'd rather have some good windmills, that's a bit noisier, but a lot cleaner and a whole lot safer.
(sorry it took me some time to reply, but i tend to sleep at night and had things to do this morning)
I'm sorry to have to disagree with you, but no-one has succeeded so far to clean nuke waste in such a way it can be re-used. During the lifespan of the fuel-elements in a reactor, all kinds of isotopes and polluting elements are formed, most of which are very hard to get rid of and making the stuff unusable. Countries have large stocks of 're-worked' fuel that simply is unusable.
Oh, by the way, breeding technology is developed, but has been proven useless for the reasons mentioned above.
About your remark about shooting the waste into the ocean-floor: Do you know what this ocean floor will do in the next 10,000 years? Or how currents will behave? I for myself would not care for a few hundred years, but with this you are talking about thousands of years. A bet i would not like to take!
The Earth is flat, pigs can fly and nuclear energy is safe.
Slashdot Mirror
Zinc is not attracted by magnets. The only ferromagnetic materials are iron, nickel and cobald.
Magnets will have no effect whatsoever.
Just how about: "No CPU- or powersupply fans." :-)
A little dash can make a difference
Not neccessarily. I remember being subscribed to a magazine that numbered it's pages throughout the year. This meant page 1 was the first page of the first magazine that year and page (big number) was the last page of the december one. So you could easily have a pagenumber 250 somewhere in the middle of the year. My guess is that this magazine used the same system.
And you actually BELIEVE *IAA won't put an additional, let's say, 900% extra on the price? They will play this game as they did with vinyl record vs CD: "NOW it will cost a bit more than the old medium, but LATER, when we have earned back our investments, it will be so much cheaper..".Yeah right! We all know how that went! :-) )and a cheaper production, what more do you want?
I'm afraid the only ones profiting from this will be the *IAA. No possibility to copy (for the time being, that is
If you value free time and the opportunity to do your own things in your own way or to be with your family/friends more than having a bigger car/house this development is not good. If you like your work and just HAVE to have this huge SUV to impress your neighbours, don't mind to be stressed till you break down and think material wealth is everything, then nothing is wrong. But at least, give people a chance to choose what they want, more time for themselves or just more money.
Personally, I would choose for time.
(I live in the Netherlands (!= Holland),so i work 40 hours/week. Even that is too much sometimes, as working pressure can be very high here. This country is more productive per hour as most other countries, including the USA. The only reason our yearly productivity is lower than the USA's is the fact we work less hours, and if I believed in a god, I would thank it for that.)
The only reason IBM does not change their warranty because they have been giving just one year of warranty all the time on their harddisks. And that's ONLY on the 'original IBM' ones, that have a FRU-partnr on them and are mounted in original IBM systems. If you buy an 'IBM' harddisk in a shop, 99 out of 100 times you will get an 'oem'-harddisk that looks like IBM, has an IBM label on it, was made by IBM, performs like IBM, crashes in a few months like IBM but is NOT warranted by IBM because it is a so-called 'bulk' harddisk that IBM makes for third parties. Warranty for those drives are the responsibility of the guy you bought it from, and if they choose not to give warranty, you can't go to IBM. IBM only grants one year warranty to IBM drives with a FRU partnumber on them, and the IBM drives you buy at the computershop are simply missing this number and are not warranted by IBM.
I happen to work in an IBM service shop in Europe, and I have to turn down lots of warranty requests for these oem drives.
Personally I think this stinks, but then, who am I??
Ooooohh....and of course it should have this very low pulsating humming sound synced ('s that how you spell this?) to the lights. Thàt would be really impressive!
Ever heard of the fact that it's impossible to put all the earth that comes out of a hole back into it? But maybe some of the stuff could be put back where it came from. You just have to be sure all air-shafts etc. from the mine are securely sealed.
(Better still would be not to use nuclear energy, if you want to know why, take a peek at www.alternet.org, if you want to read something more than the Big Boys from the nuclear industry want you to know.)
Sometime ago /. posted a link to a letter of some Cuban statesman (http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/25157.html ), in answer to a M$ FUD-letter. Why not have this letter printed on poster-format and hang it all over the place, say two posters per booth (except the M$-booth maybe :-) ). I think all M$ FUD will be more then compensated!
Apparently you did not look well at the picture. The "cavity" is, in fact, a lens, covering the whole thing.
(OK, I'm just filling in a small hole here..)
Remember when the CD's were all new and really expensive? "Soon" they would be even cheaper than LP's (these big, black round things with a small hole in the middle your dad used to have), because CD's "were so easy and cheap to manufacture"? Well, they *would* have been really cheap now, if not the prices for American politicians had rocketed sky-high! If we would stop copying, the Music and Film Industry could allow themselves more politicians and maybe would even be able to cut prices a bit, so we would all be happy! (Well...some happier than others...)
Well, ok, I was wrong on this one! As far is I knew there was no Pu before we made it. Thanks for the info!
and for a very few people / industries who are making money out of it now. If it suits them, they'll just leave it for what it is and start something else. The costs for cleaning up the mess will be payed by the people, so why should they care? YOU are the ones paying for it, not them. These folks in the industry are only interested in the short-term money, and when problems occur when they are out of this business (and/or out of this life), who cares? There's enough money to buy another congressman to tell you it's all nice and clean and to tax you for paying their bill.
Have fun, and think of the money you save bij radiating yourself!
It IS a fact a teaspoon of plutonium can kill us all. Furthermore, plutonium is NOT a natural element. It is MADE, by exposing uranium to radiation (a lot more than occurs in nature), so the uranium turns into plutonium. There is NO plutonium in nature! (at least, there wasn't until we made it). And it's not just the radiation that makes plutonium poisonous, it's just poisonous by itself, just as cyanide is.
There's just a few small thingies wrong with nuclear power. One of them is that the winning,transportation and preparation of the necessary uranium costs so much energy (it's present in only very small percentages in it's ores)that the CO2-production in that stage already equals that of the amount produced by winning the same amount of energy the uranium produces + what's needed to produce the uranium, with fossil energy. So the net-amount of CO2 saved with nuke-power is zero.
Furthermore, you are left with huge amounts of useless radio-active waste, evenly dangerous as the uranium won out of it. You can't put it back in the ground, as it's volume has grown (you never get it out of the ground as compact as it was). This is a problem the nuke-power industry does not like you to know about. Just as the fact you can poison the world-population with less than one gram of pure plutonium, the most poisonous material on this world.
As long as a few people can make big money out of nuke power, they will tell you it's safe and clean (oh, maybe for the 0,00000001% of it's lifetime the stuff spends in powerplants it is more or less safe, assuming no terrorists, idiots who don't know how to handle the stuff or bad design gets a chance), but what happens before (uranium mining is one of the most polluting industries) or after (oh, we're just left with piles of dangerous stuff for the next 100000 years or so, let's just dump it somewhere and hope there will be no earthquakes or anything, and while we make money, we don't care) the nuke-industry won't tell you.
As long as people believe the nuke-energy guys, renewable energy will not make it. Just imagine: they would not be able to squeeze money out of renewable energy, that would be an economic disaster! (for them, not for us common people).
Oh, another thing a almost forgot: A nuclear powerplant has an economical lifespan of 30 years. When used full time, it takes 29 years to produce the amount of energy used by building the plant, and winning and processing the fuel to run it. So the net time you actually produce energy is one year. Of course the Big Men are making money all this time, so for them it's well worth the trouble. But is it for you???
...And, you are going to tell use that teaching them Linux and KDE will make them BETTER suited for the job market?...
:-( ].
I think it would, yes! There is a need for people who know how a computer works (not so much the hardware but the software-side of it). And Unix-admins are really wanted (at least here in Europe they are).
Just as you understand the workings of a computer better when you 'grew up' with DOS, I think people who have learned to think about software-configuration (as needed in Linux), and can learn some shell-scripting (as possible in Linux) will learn a lot more than the kids who only learn the 'point-and-click-and-drag-and-drop for dummies' that Winblows is, hiding everything that happens behind a nice graphic interface. Furthermore kids are much more eager and able to learn these things than grown-ups are.
Another thing is that they can learn that there's more than Micro$oft on this world and will have a real choice if they grow up, if they want they can either use M$-shit, or a real OS. [btw, I use M$
If M$ gets it's way, they will only know M$ and will not easily change to anything else. I agree fully with the people who say that M$ is only perpetuating their monopoly this way.
What would be really good would be if M$ was forced to give the schools new hardware and OSS to run on it. If the kids want to change to M$ later when they leave school, well, I won't stop them. But at least they'll know there's more. And the talented kids will have had a chance to get into a real OS, and, to return to the beginning of this reply, have a lot more chances on the job market!
(Just mij 0.02).
Interesting articles (though i didn't read the one about the Caspian Sea entirely). It confirms my personal belief that this "war against terrorism" also has strong economical reasons. The American arms-industries were in great need for more business.....and what is more ideal then a far-away war, and as a result of that delivers another Northern Ireland, but many times bigger and many more parties who all want to exterminate each other? Yummie!!
And if America gets control over some gas and oil in the process, well, it wouldn't hurt, would it?
Well, that's just my (insert Euro-sign here)0.02.
Uhhh....I copied this from the FAQ (link at original /. article):
.....and in the 2001-2002 academic year (Class of 2005), a computer and the VitalBook will be required as part of coming to dental school....
Sounds pretty much like forcing to me!
I just hope i see it wrong!
In fact, alcoholism is a physical disease. Alcohol influences the way your nervous system works. When you are drunk, certain neuro-transmitter-levels go down (or up, don't ask the details, it's been some time since I read an article about it), causing the numbness when you are drunk. When sobering up, the nerve-cells initially overcompensate the effect by producing a peak (or just the other way round, see last remark)production, causing for example the over-sensitivity for sound when you have a hangover.
If you stay drunk for a longer period, or give the nervous system not enough time to re-stabilize, the system keeps trying to compensate. In the end, the nervous cells are 'programmed' to overproduce the substance, and they keep doing so, even when you are sober. The only way to compensate for this is drinking alcohol! So, alcoholism is a life-long illness (once you've 'got' it). You can stay sober, but the craving stays and once you start drinking it's very hard to stop again.
First, let me state that I don't like drugdealers and their like at all. Softdrugs (cannabis) is merely OK with me, harddrugs are just bad. But that's off-topic. But the Mafia was born in the time that alcohol was illegal in the USA, and gangs started making big money with it. It turned out that prohibiting alcohol gave more trouble than allowing and controlling it. The same goes, for a great part, for drugs. One can easily become 100 years using heroine of a good, pure quality, and noone has to bother about people using this. Now, it's big money and it's mixed with all kinds of shit that causes users to become sick etc, and it's expensive, so people have to steal to use it. IMHO it'd be better to legalize it and control it. :-) ) to have a finger into everything, everywhere. So what works better than to create a devil (drugs) and have a force with almost unlimited power to 'fight' it? :-) )
BUT America wants to have an excuse (yes, I'm finally coming to my point here
The DEA is such a force, it's everywhere and when America thinks it's needed to do something about a thing they don't like, they use it. And. of course, everything and everyone has to be monitored everywhere. I think the DEA is just an excuse to get influence.
Am I lucky I live in the Netherlands! (Yes, I have used cannabis for years, absolutely problemless, I stopped, without any problem, and I'm not using any other drugs (apart from caffeine), never have used other drugs, and never wanted to. But that's off-topic again
Maybe I am mis-informed here (I hope for America I am!), but isn't this what you can expect from a country with (one of)the worst educational systems in the world, where the average (mind you, I say AVERAGE) education of people is lower than a 14-year old's in our country (The Netherlands). If you don't educate people, they get wrong ideas (and are easy to manipulate bij govt. etc). If media and govt. tell them the Net is bad, it MUST be bad. And if they are so stupid not to take the responsibility for their coffee-spills (or are not able to figure out you can't dry a dog in a microwave), how can you expect them to know someone who calls a classmate a motherf*cker isn't going to shoot a whole school next?
You should start with a better educational system, that is, in short, my point. Again, I hope i'm mis-informed here!
At least with a Nuke, we can collect all the radioactive waste, instead of just dumping it into the atmosphere with everything else.)
:-) ). Above that, when, in the process of changing the fuel-elements, one of those should fall out of the crane that carries it to the cooling-basin, it would break (they are very brittle) on the bottom of the basin, releasing a bubble of radio-active gasses that will take about 5 seconds to rise (the time the personnel has to run for the automatically closing air-lock) and then will instantly kill all personnel left there. After that, it will just be let out into the atmosphere, since no-one knows how to control such a thing.
Uhhhh....just one small prob here: EVERY nuclear reactor (a friend of mine has studied this and has worked in some reactors as well), has an outlet in the reactor room, more or less directly to the outside, to let out gasious by-products of the reactor. There are some filters, but those are not capable to take all radio-active stuff out, before it hits the atmosphere. In France, some formerly really expensive wines (Cote du Rhone's) are for sale for crap now, because France has a lot of nuclear powerplants on the Rhone-sides. (Maybe these wines now make a nice night-lite
So far for 'not polluting the atmosphere'!
Well, OK, let it be two atoms for a cancer. But Plutonium just stays the most toxic material known, you only need a fraction of a milligram to kill someone (just toxic effect, not by radiation). Look up any information source about Plutonium, and you'll see this confirmed.
I'm not such a 'rabit environmentalist', although i DO find the environment an important item, after all, we all have to live in it and your children (I don't have/want any), after us. Nevertheless, if you start reading other stuff as what the nukes feed you, maybe you'll change your mind like i did. Years ago, i started as a pro-nuke and believed all the bullshit the industry is spreading. Then i started reading some more, and the more i read, the more my doubt grew. Now i'm sure it's a lot better not to use nuclear power, because we just can't know what the long-term effects will be, and we can see (read) that what is happening now is not so innocent as the big companies want us to believe.
Nuke power: no thanks, not for me.
I've read these figures in several ('alternative') magazines and books, and these were the numbers that I remember, because they impressed me the most. It's some time ago, i have to admit that, and i can't exactly remember where i read it. Also, i have to admit, this seems to make this info less reliable, but i'm sure it's true. I started out as a pro-nuke myself, declaring everyone who thought it could be dangerous to be mad......until i started reading about it. The more i read, the more i get convinced nuke-power is NOT safe, clean or good for anything else but the profit of a small number of companies. (Or is that compagnies, English is not my native language). B.T.W., the sources for my numbers are all Dutch, I don't think a title as 'Allicht' will tell you anything.
So far for my (poor, alas) references.
Stands the fact i would not like to be responsible for the problems nuke-waste is causing 1000 years after now, or the availability of uranium or plutonium to terrorists etc. Or the dangers of unmotivated/drunk/addicted/not good enough educated/corrupt personnel in plants, the ignorance of safety rules and -measures etc. etc.
I'd rather have some good windmills, that's a bit noisier, but a lot cleaner and a whole lot safer.
(sorry it took me some time to reply, but i tend to sleep at night and had things to do this morning)
I'm sorry to have to disagree with you, but no-one has succeeded so far to clean nuke waste in such a way it can be re-used. During the lifespan of the fuel-elements in a reactor, all kinds of isotopes and polluting elements are formed, most of which are very hard to get rid of and making the stuff unusable. Countries have large stocks of 're-worked' fuel that simply is unusable.
Oh, by the way, breeding technology is developed, but has been proven useless for the reasons mentioned above.
About your remark about shooting the waste into the ocean-floor: Do you know what this ocean floor will do in the next 10,000 years? Or how currents will behave? I for myself would not care for a few hundred years, but with this you are talking about thousands of years. A bet i would not like to take!
The Earth is flat, pigs can fly and nuclear energy is safe.
Another 0.02.