See, nuke power is safe, and we always know how bad even these contained breakdowns are.
Yeah, this video was way cooler than a video that shows the effects of coal-fired plants in normal operation.
Interior shot, emphysema ward. Nobody is wearing hazmat suits, and the place doesn't exactly look like a Doom level, but people are still dying here. The patients look like Auschwitz refugees... three-dimensional shadows of human beings who lack the strength to fight for their last breaths, suffocating like fish on 100% O2.
But yeah, I see your point about how, um, scary and dangerous nuclear power is.
No shit. I'd hate to have to write a huge essay apologizing for all the stuff that Kubrick screwed up in '2001'. Oh, wait, I couldn't do that if I wanted to, because people demanded more from their filmmakers back in the day.
For a two engine plane I believe the rules put you at most 180 minutes from an airport. Thats a long glide even from 40,000 feet. Thats a worst case scenario of course.
Is that really true? I'm pretty sure that some flights from the US to Australia use the 777. No way you could stay within 180 minutes of a suitable landing strip on that route, unless you went by way of Siberia.
What was Jackson thinking there? "Hey, let's make an epic movie, based on an epic novel. And why not change the complete character of one of the key players?"
He was thinking, "Goddamn, this Tolkien guy needed to get laid. This whole thing is one giant sausage-fest, and ol' J.R.R.'s idea of comic relief appears to have been, well, Tom Bombadil. If I'm going to bring these stories to a wider audience, which I have to do in order to justify the production costs needed to do justice to the material, I'm obviously going to have to tweak a few things. I can have turn Gimli into a goofball and have Arwen save Frodo, or everything else about the production is going to suck. Gee. What do I do here?"
If you think about it, McDonalds is an IP company. Anyone can sell hamburgers, but when someone goes to McDonalds, they're paying for the product design and consumer experience.
Try opening a burger joint called "McDonall's" and you'll see what I mean in a hurry.
I'm OK with using regedit, and Firefox is a great browser otherwise. I'd use a teletype and Etch-A-Sketch before IE7.
But when Mozilla leaves a bug like this in place for years at a time, they can't whine too loudly when Microsoft keeps trampling their market share. It makes for a terrible user experience, regardless of who's at fault.
It's pretty safe to say they already know about it, I think. At any rate, I don't get paid to launch personal research efforts to figure out whose bug it is.
Thanks; yeah, that would explain why most users don't have the problem, and why Mozilla doesn't consider it their problem. As long as neither Google nor Mozilla step up and take responsibility for the bug, it's just going to stay broken, I guess.
Flashblock is damned nice. I just started using it in response to some unusually-gross ads on Fark. It doesn't require much motivation to install -- just google flashblock and click on the obvious link.
I just search for "FirefoxHTML" (whatever that is) to get into the right areas of the registry, then delete the ddeexec keys from it and the other common suffixes nearby (http, https, ftp). I think the relevant ones are in My Computer\HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Classes\FirefoxHTML and a few other places, although I don't know which one(s) actually trigger the bug.
The link to the Bugzilla page posted above will have better info than this, I'm sure. Needless to say, back up your registry before going around deleting keys on the advice of some random dude on Slashdot.
Every time I install a new Firefox release on any Win2K or XP system (two desktops and one laptop), I get "Windows cannot open (site name)" error dialogs every time I launch Firefox with no other browser windows open. This symptom has returned with every Firefox installation since the pre-1.5 releases. To fix it, I have to manually delete the ddeexec keys that the Firefox installer insists on creating for no good reason.
I genuinely don't understand why I'm the only person this ever seems to happen to, because (as you say) the bug was supposedly fixed a long time ago.
(Edit: if you scroll down to the bottom of the page at the link you posted, you'll see other people posting the same complaint.)
I think you misunderstood. I'm not asking whether people living under repressive regimes would like to live in a US-style democracy--of course they would. I'm asking whether people currently living under repressive regimes would vote to support current US policies if given a chance to voice their opinion; as a rule, they would not, among other things, because many people blame their political misfortunes on the US.
Ah, I see what you mean. You're right; sorry for the confusion on my part.
Do you seriously believe that if you ask the citizens of North Korea or Iran, they are going to be any happier with US government policies than their repressive governments?
Yeah, I'm kinda thinking so.
It doesn't do your cause any good to engage in that sort of ridiculous hyperbole, you know.
Yeah, likewise, if I'm hiring electrical engineers and someone in Human Resources throws away a resume because it's from some guy named bunnie or some chick named ladyada, they can either clean out their desk by 5 PM or I'll have security do it for them.
Nicknames by themselves aren't career-limiting moves, and either of those two people would do OK if they listed their nicks on their resume pages.
I'm subscribed to a reasonable active mailing list for the type of music I like (characterized by words like: female, singer-songwriter, alternative, ethereal, celtic, eclectic, folk, americana - although obviously not all at the same time...
Give Halou a try sometime; they add an electronica feel to that list of adjectives. (If you check them out, I'd recommend downloading some actual album rips to listen to, rather than using the awful-sounding streaming gadget on their website.)
I knew Halou was awesome when they recorded a song called The Ratio of Freckles to Stars that didn't suck. Not many artists could have pulled that off.
In case your version of news hasn't covered it, there isn't much of a "war" actually going on. In fact, large portions of Iraq are extremely peaceful.
Whatever it is, it's extremely expensive, and we have better things to do. When we leave, it will take about six months for Iraq to return to the same condition it was in when we found it (ruled by a dictator) or worse (all-out civil war).
Knowledge gained at Arecibo and similar facilities lasts forever.
Many many years ago a compiler named Merlin Pro (points if you have any idea what platform THAT was for) I pulled out my hair for a few hours on why something would not run properly.
Sounds like some 65816 code for a IIgs. Merlin was an assembler, technically, not a compiler per se.
The fact that he put it as, "I believe that paying for access tiers makes more sense than forcing the market to all stay at a certain level of service for everyone at a flat price," tells you that he unequivocally does not understand net neutrality.
If you're a carrier, you should have the ability to sell me a bigger chunk of your bandwidth. You should not have the right to control the content that is transmitted over the share you sell me.
Imagine a pizza-delivery company who pays the phone company to drop calls to its competitors at random... that's what dada21 is arguing for.
Hell, look up the history of the Strowger switch. This battle has been fought before.
Well, duh. If you drop one atomic bomb and they still don't surrender, what else are you supposed to do? You have to convince the Japanese (and, yes, the Soviets) that Hiroshima wasn't just a one-shot parlor trick. The idea of losing one major city wasn't enough to convince everyone in Japan not to fight. The idea of losing one major city every three days, though, was.
It's hard for people like you to realize that nobody considered it that big a deal back then. A-bombs didn't have the totemic power they have today. All they offered at the time was one-stop shopping convenience; you could carry out a Dresden- or Toyko-scale firebombing campaign with a single plane. The idea that atomic explosions represented something radically new, different, and immoral didn't gain widespread traction until they became a hundred times more powerful.
I am opposed to any and all legalized gambling in MA, including the state-run lottery monopolies
Why do you feel the need to control this? When you say you're opposed to legalizing private behavior of individuals, that's when the rest of us start going "blah blah Ron Paul blah blah" or some such.
Eventually, nanny-statists like yourself will start to lose elections based on your incurable need to control every aspect of your subjects' lives. Kind of a shame in your case since you sound like a bright, rational person otherwise.
So what was it? Bad parenting? Religious indoctrination? Nobody but organized crime figures (follow the money) should be in favor of total prohibition on gambling; it just doesn't make sense for anyone else. But I won't go there.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, this video was way cooler than a video that shows the effects of coal-fired plants in normal operation. But yeah, I see your point about how, um, scary and dangerous nuclear power is.
No shit. I'd hate to have to write a huge essay apologizing for all the stuff that Kubrick screwed up in '2001'. Oh, wait, I couldn't do that if I wanted to, because people demanded more from their filmmakers back in the day.
For a two engine plane I believe the rules put you at most 180 minutes from an airport. Thats a long glide even from 40,000 feet. Thats a worst case scenario of course.
Is that really true? I'm pretty sure that some flights from the US to Australia use the 777. No way you could stay within 180 minutes of a suitable landing strip on that route, unless you went by way of Siberia.
What was Jackson thinking there? "Hey, let's make an epic movie, based on an epic novel. And why not change the complete character of one of the key players?"
He was thinking, "Goddamn, this Tolkien guy needed to get laid. This whole thing is one giant sausage-fest, and ol' J.R.R.'s idea of comic relief appears to have been, well, Tom Bombadil. If I'm going to bring these stories to a wider audience, which I have to do in order to justify the production costs needed to do justice to the material, I'm obviously going to have to tweak a few things. I can have turn Gimli into a goofball and have Arwen save Frodo, or everything else about the production is going to suck. Gee. What do I do here?"
McDonalds?
If you think about it, McDonalds is an IP company. Anyone can sell hamburgers, but when someone goes to McDonalds, they're paying for the product design and consumer experience.
Try opening a burger joint called "McDonall's" and you'll see what I mean in a hurry.
It is pretty obvious that Britney Spears and Usher are the priority in our society.
They are indeed. Think about it: what else does America produce anymore besides "intellectual property"?
You can expect more Draconian copyright and IP as time goes by, not less. Our country has literally nothing else to offer the rest of the world.
I'm OK with using regedit, and Firefox is a great browser otherwise. I'd use a teletype and Etch-A-Sketch before IE7.
But when Mozilla leaves a bug like this in place for years at a time, they can't whine too loudly when Microsoft keeps trampling their market share. It makes for a terrible user experience, regardless of who's at fault.
It's pretty safe to say they already know about it, I think. At any rate, I don't get paid to launch personal research efforts to figure out whose bug it is.
Thanks; yeah, that would explain why most users don't have the problem, and why Mozilla doesn't consider it their problem. As long as neither Google nor Mozilla step up and take responsibility for the bug, it's just going to stay broken, I guess.
Flashblock is damned nice. I just started using it in response to some unusually-gross ads on Fark. It doesn't require much motivation to install -- just google flashblock and click on the obvious link.
I just search for "FirefoxHTML" (whatever that is) to get into the right areas of the registry, then delete the ddeexec keys from it and the other common suffixes nearby (http, https, ftp). I think the relevant ones are in My Computer\HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Classes\FirefoxHTML and a few other places, although I don't know which one(s) actually trigger the bug.
The link to the Bugzilla page posted above will have better info than this, I'm sure. Needless to say, back up your registry before going around deleting keys on the advice of some random dude on Slashdot.
Every time I install a new Firefox release on any Win2K or XP system (two desktops and one laptop), I get "Windows cannot open (site name)" error dialogs every time I launch Firefox with no other browser windows open. This symptom has returned with every Firefox installation since the pre-1.5 releases. To fix it, I have to manually delete the ddeexec keys that the Firefox installer insists on creating for no good reason.
I genuinely don't understand why I'm the only person this ever seems to happen to, because (as you say) the bug was supposedly fixed a long time ago.
(Edit: if you scroll down to the bottom of the page at the link you posted, you'll see other people posting the same complaint.)
... a new Firefox point release. Time to run regedit and delete all the .htm/.html DDEExec keys by hand again.
Why don't they ever seem to fix that bug?
I'm the last to get panicked, I just think that radioactivity is not meant for 'mass distribution'.
Then you should be seriously pissed about coal-fired electric generation. Do some reading before jerking your knee.
You're breathing radioactive waste right now, and it didn't come from a nuke plant.
I think you misunderstood. I'm not asking whether people living under repressive regimes would like to live in a US-style democracy--of course they would. I'm asking whether people currently living under repressive regimes would vote to support current US policies if given a chance to voice their opinion; as a rule, they would not, among other things, because many people blame their political misfortunes on the US.
Ah, I see what you mean. You're right; sorry for the confusion on my part.
Do you seriously believe that if you ask the citizens of North Korea or Iran, they are going to be any happier with US government policies than their repressive governments?
Yeah, I'm kinda thinking so.
It doesn't do your cause any good to engage in that sort of ridiculous hyperbole, you know.
Yeah, likewise, if I'm hiring electrical engineers and someone in Human Resources throws away a resume because it's from some guy named bunnie or some chick named ladyada, they can either clean out their desk by 5 PM or I'll have security do it for them.
Nicknames by themselves aren't career-limiting moves, and either of those two people would do OK if they listed their nicks on their resume pages.
I'm subscribed to a reasonable active mailing list for the type of music I like (characterized by words like: female, singer-songwriter, alternative, ethereal, celtic, eclectic, folk, americana - although obviously not all at the same time...
Give Halou a try sometime; they add an electronica feel to that list of adjectives. (If you check them out, I'd recommend downloading some actual album rips to listen to, rather than using the awful-sounding streaming gadget on their website.)
I knew Halou was awesome when they recorded a song called The Ratio of Freckles to Stars that didn't suck. Not many artists could have pulled that off.
'Get the hell out of Fort Wayne' is sounding like a good plan.
In case your version of news hasn't covered it, there isn't much of a "war" actually going on. In fact, large portions of Iraq are extremely peaceful.
Whatever it is, it's extremely expensive, and we have better things to do. When we leave, it will take about six months for Iraq to return to the same condition it was in when we found it (ruled by a dictator) or worse (all-out civil war).
Knowledge gained at Arecibo and similar facilities lasts forever.
So what's a better investment?
Many many years ago a compiler named Merlin Pro (points if you have any idea what platform THAT was for) I pulled out my hair for a few hours on why something would not run properly.
Sounds like some 65816 code for a IIgs. Merlin was an assembler, technically, not a compiler per se.
The fact that he put it as, "I believe that paying for access tiers makes more sense than forcing the market to all stay at a certain level of service for everyone at a flat price," tells you that he unequivocally does not understand net neutrality.
If you're a carrier, you should have the ability to sell me a bigger chunk of your bandwidth. You should not have the right to control the content that is transmitted over the share you sell me.
Imagine a pizza-delivery company who pays the phone company to drop calls to its competitors at random... that's what dada21 is arguing for.
Hell, look up the history of the Strowger switch. This battle has been fought before.
there was no reason to drop the second bomb.
Well, duh. If you drop one atomic bomb and they still don't surrender, what else are you supposed to do? You have to convince the Japanese (and, yes, the Soviets) that Hiroshima wasn't just a one-shot parlor trick. The idea of losing one major city wasn't enough to convince everyone in Japan not to fight. The idea of losing one major city every three days, though, was.
It's hard for people like you to realize that nobody considered it that big a deal back then. A-bombs didn't have the totemic power they have today. All they offered at the time was one-stop shopping convenience; you could carry out a Dresden- or Toyko-scale firebombing campaign with a single plane. The idea that atomic explosions represented something radically new, different, and immoral didn't gain widespread traction until they became a hundred times more powerful.
I am opposed to any and all legalized gambling in MA, including the state-run lottery monopolies
Why do you feel the need to control this? When you say you're opposed to legalizing private behavior of individuals, that's when the rest of us start going "blah blah Ron Paul blah blah" or some such.
Eventually, nanny-statists like yourself will start to lose elections based on your incurable need to control every aspect of your subjects' lives. Kind of a shame in your case since you sound like a bright, rational person otherwise.
So what was it? Bad parenting? Religious indoctrination? Nobody but organized crime figures (follow the money) should be in favor of total prohibition on gambling; it just doesn't make sense for anyone else. But I won't go there.
Same basic idea in Seattle, with the EMP building. Looks like the remains of a large-scale industrial accident at the Boeing plant.
At some point, you'd think people would point at Gehry and ask why he's walking around naked.