Safety is important but there are broader safety considerations. For example, tighten up nuclear safety too much and we increase the death rate due to more use of fossil fuels and the associated health effects of the pollution.
It is notable that TMI wasn't getting lucky. Ultimately the safety measures worked and they got the reactor shut down without loss of containment. The other reactor on the site continued to operate for years after. It did show us some deficiencies which are addressed in newer designs and in operating procedures for existing plants.
Chernobyl was an extreme case. An old reactor design that never would have been allowed in the west, an under-qualified night shift running experiments that were 'complete or else' and supposed to be run by the more knowledgeable day shift Then they did practically every don't in the operations manual including withdrawing all of the control rods to try to burn off xenon poisoning when they should have accepted the mandatory 24-48 hour shutdown time.
Fukushima was a management failure (over and over). They had warning that the sea wall was inadequate, they failed to elevate the electrical equipment to help it tolerate a flood. They failed to have even basic equipment ready when needed to recover. They didn't even make sure the available off-site backup generators had the right connectors on them and apparently had no equipment for splicing.
That would all fall under reasonable measures still called for in the new proposal.
I would think it is reasonable enough to require that some negative thing happens to someone's health to call it a health impact. That's not moving the goalposts, that's going by the definitions of the words.
Except that it is much easier for a corporation to make profits disappear overseas on paper than it is for an individual. I cannot open a "Me Inc." in Ireland and pay Me 90% of my income as a licensing fee on me, the trademark and then deduct it from my taxes here.
They will do no such thing. The last thing they want is for the U.S. to reverse position on intellectual property and drive a worldwide shortening of copyright and broadening of fair use.
At least one of the customers that got called asshole did nothing more than insist on cancelling a premium option on their cable service. Her 'offense' was actually wanting the option cancelled.
As for the rest, for better or worse, these people are the only people reachable and so their job is to listen to the complaints. I do try to avoid screaming, but when I tell you there is no signal on the line at all anywhere on my street, I do not want to hear "reboot your computer" or I can't ping your modem, please be home between Monday and Thursday of next week so I can send someone who doesn't have any equipment to fix the actual problem (yes, paraphrased). Of course you can't ping my modem, your network is down. Apparently they haven't been provided any training at all and can't even look up other customers in my neighborhood so they can try pinging their modems.
Yes, it's the management's fault that they don't even have that very basic knowledge and necessary tools, but since they can't or won't put a manager on the phone (probably a matter of policy), all I can do is ask them to take dictation into a note on the account.
"Human Shield" has never been a pleasant job title, but it's the one that fits their role in the company more often than not.
Sure, some people who call for support are frustratingly inept or just act like assholes. I get that. Sure, a support person may feel a need to vent by the water cooler. Fine and dandy.
But, these support assholes are changing the customer name in the database such that the bills go out addressing customers as "asshole" or "whore". That is beyond unprofessional. Perhaps their paychecks should be made out to "dumbass", or "fuck head". Fair's fair.
It is possible to do it proportionally. For example, just replace some of the income tax with the gas tax. The thresholds for income tax could even be adjusted so that the EIC pays for the gas tax for the poor. You could tax based on octane rating as well. Few poor people drive cars that need premium gas.
Back then, potential employers understood that they would need to call early or late and probably leave a message. Or, they might, God forbid, decide to hire you on the spot. Now, you answer the phone when they call or they move on.
Keep in mind that the better insurance gets at assessing risk, the less value it has.At some point they get the risk pinned down with sufficient accuracy that you come out better by putting the premiums into a savings account until needed.
Of course the root problem is mistaking insurance for a solution to outrageously overpriced healthcare.
Actually, whenever they agree to not charge the customer, the bank charges it back. I know small merchants that have had it happen in spite of following all of the procedures as required.
The sabotage here was more intense and without consequence. Also, any ticket involving a competing DSL service went to the very bottom priority every time. It could literally take a month to get a plug inserted into an adjacent jack. It would, of course get 'accidentally' unplugged a week later and take another month to get plugged back in.
Actually, many businesses had a credit surcharge for a while. Then the credit cards added a no surcharge clause to the merchant contracts. So they hiked their prices and offered a cash discount. Then the credit cards added a no cash discount clause.
Yes, services cost money. That's no excuse for hiding how much it costs and forcing it to be paid for by people not using the service (for example, everyone that pays cash).
Many merchants prefer cash because cash can't be charged back after the fact. For example, if the card turns out to be stolen but not yet reported or the customer files a false claim.
WITH a warrant, a pentrace is still available. That is, who did this phone call and where was it at the time. But note they're not complaining about phones that encrypt voice communication. Neither Google nor Apple are proposing to do that. They're complaining that they can't read your address book or paw through your email and photos. They're complaining that your papers might be secured nearly as well as Capone's (but not quite as well unless you have a tommy gun).
The thing is, most crimes eventually come down to some sort of physical activity somewhere that can be observed or to money moving from one place to another which can be traced (yes, including bitcoin).
The part you're missing is selection. The harmful mutations either fail to reproduce altogether or they reproduce at a lower rate than the good ones. Actual experiments show that you can actually randomly mutate a program and if you have a good selection function, you can actually evolve new functionality.
The catch is that the evolution tends to 'find' really odd solutions.
I argue that they don't need it. They need it the way a 5 year old will claim that chocolate deficiency is an actual medical problem.
I could use a Ferrari but the price is too high. They could use the ability to snoop into people's phones and PCs but the price is too high.
Like your DUI analogy, we tried the ignition interlock, but they hot wired it and got another DUI. Now they will have to walk (get it? LEGWORK!). Back in the before time, they brought down notorious mobsters and bank robbers by pounding the pavement. Ness didn't hack Capone's PC. Capone kept his books locked in a safe in his office The office was guarded by men with Tommy guns. Many crooks kept the real books in code.
Slashdot Mirror
Not really. In the case of fuel for a fission engine, it won't be radioactive at launch and it won't be suitable as bomb material.
Safety is important but there are broader safety considerations. For example, tighten up nuclear safety too much and we increase the death rate due to more use of fossil fuels and the associated health effects of the pollution.
It is notable that TMI wasn't getting lucky. Ultimately the safety measures worked and they got the reactor shut down without loss of containment. The other reactor on the site continued to operate for years after. It did show us some deficiencies which are addressed in newer designs and in operating procedures for existing plants.
Chernobyl was an extreme case. An old reactor design that never would have been allowed in the west, an under-qualified night shift running experiments that were 'complete or else' and supposed to be run by the more knowledgeable day shift Then they did practically every don't in the operations manual including withdrawing all of the control rods to try to burn off xenon poisoning when they should have accepted the mandatory 24-48 hour shutdown time.
Fukushima was a management failure (over and over). They had warning that the sea wall was inadequate, they failed to elevate the electrical equipment to help it tolerate a flood. They failed to have even basic equipment ready when needed to recover. They didn't even make sure the available off-site backup generators had the right connectors on them and apparently had no equipment for splicing.
That would all fall under reasonable measures still called for in the new proposal.
Sorry, but that is not correct. The U.S. is still driving other countries to change their laws to benefit U.S. corporations.
We could force many countries to spend extra billions a year each just by pulling our military back to the U.S. border.
I would think it is reasonable enough to require that some negative thing happens to someone's health to call it a health impact. That's not moving the goalposts, that's going by the definitions of the words.
They are advantageous as long as most of the content producers are here. If not, they become a disadvantage.
That's the point where the U.S. throws it's weight around and gets others to agree to new terms.
So where's that health impact you claimed? Who got sick?
Except that it is much easier for a corporation to make profits disappear overseas on paper than it is for an individual. I cannot open a "Me Inc." in Ireland and pay Me 90% of my income as a licensing fee on me, the trademark and then deduct it from my taxes here.
They will do no such thing. The last thing they want is for the U.S. to reverse position on intellectual property and drive a worldwide shortening of copyright and broadening of fair use.
At least one of the customers that got called asshole did nothing more than insist on cancelling a premium option on their cable service. Her 'offense' was actually wanting the option cancelled.
As for the rest, for better or worse, these people are the only people reachable and so their job is to listen to the complaints. I do try to avoid screaming, but when I tell you there is no signal on the line at all anywhere on my street, I do not want to hear "reboot your computer" or I can't ping your modem, please be home between Monday and Thursday of next week so I can send someone who doesn't have any equipment to fix the actual problem (yes, paraphrased). Of course you can't ping my modem, your network is down. Apparently they haven't been provided any training at all and can't even look up other customers in my neighborhood so they can try pinging their modems.
Yes, it's the management's fault that they don't even have that very basic knowledge and necessary tools, but since they can't or won't put a manager on the phone (probably a matter of policy), all I can do is ask them to take dictation into a note on the account.
"Human Shield" has never been a pleasant job title, but it's the one that fits their role in the company more often than not.
Sure, some people who call for support are frustratingly inept or just act like assholes. I get that. Sure, a support person may feel a need to vent by the water cooler. Fine and dandy.
But, these support assholes are changing the customer name in the database such that the bills go out addressing customers as "asshole" or "whore". That is beyond unprofessional. Perhaps their paychecks should be made out to "dumbass", or "fuck head". Fair's fair.
It is possible to do it proportionally. For example, just replace some of the income tax with the gas tax. The thresholds for income tax could even be adjusted so that the EIC pays for the gas tax for the poor. You could tax based on octane rating as well. Few poor people drive cars that need premium gas.
Back then, potential employers understood that they would need to call early or late and probably leave a message. Or, they might, God forbid, decide to hire you on the spot. Now, you answer the phone when they call or they move on.
How about replace income tax with a gasoline tax that costs about as much on average?
If a vehicle is on the road in poor repair, there's a decent chance it's because the owner can't afford to fix it and needs to get to work.
Keep in mind that the better insurance gets at assessing risk, the less value it has.At some point they get the risk pinned down with sufficient accuracy that you come out better by putting the premiums into a savings account until needed.
Of course the root problem is mistaking insurance for a solution to outrageously overpriced healthcare.
Actually, whenever they agree to not charge the customer, the bank charges it back. I know small merchants that have had it happen in spite of following all of the procedures as required.
Then, one day you get distracted and don't see or hear the car backing out and CRUNCH! You become the one with the handicap.
The sabotage here was more intense and without consequence. Also, any ticket involving a competing DSL service went to the very bottom priority every time. It could literally take a month to get a plug inserted into an adjacent jack. It would, of course get 'accidentally' unplugged a week later and take another month to get plugged back in.
Then, as you said, they got rid of it.
Actually, many businesses had a credit surcharge for a while. Then the credit cards added a no surcharge clause to the merchant contracts. So they hiked their prices and offered a cash discount. Then the credit cards added a no cash discount clause.
Yes, services cost money. That's no excuse for hiding how much it costs and forcing it to be paid for by people not using the service (for example, everyone that pays cash).
Many merchants prefer cash because cash can't be charged back after the fact. For example, if the card turns out to be stolen but not yet reported or the customer files a false claim.
Please don't trot that old nag out again. Major metro areas with much greater population density also have crappy service.
WITH a warrant, a pentrace is still available. That is, who did this phone call and where was it at the time. But note they're not complaining about phones that encrypt voice communication. Neither Google nor Apple are proposing to do that. They're complaining that they can't read your address book or paw through your email and photos. They're complaining that your papers might be secured nearly as well as Capone's (but not quite as well unless you have a tommy gun).
The thing is, most crimes eventually come down to some sort of physical activity somewhere that can be observed or to money moving from one place to another which can be traced (yes, including bitcoin).
Someone didn't read TFA
Modern pacemakers are exactly that. They can detect when they need to pace and how much and can also act as internal defibrillators.
The part you're missing is selection. The harmful mutations either fail to reproduce altogether or they reproduce at a lower rate than the good ones. Actual experiments show that you can actually randomly mutate a program and if you have a good selection function, you can actually evolve new functionality.
The catch is that the evolution tends to 'find' really odd solutions.
I argue that they don't need it. They need it the way a 5 year old will claim that chocolate deficiency is an actual medical problem.
I could use a Ferrari but the price is too high. They could use the ability to snoop into people's phones and PCs but the price is too high.
Like your DUI analogy, we tried the ignition interlock, but they hot wired it and got another DUI. Now they will have to walk (get it? LEGWORK!). Back in the before time, they brought down notorious mobsters and bank robbers by pounding the pavement. Ness didn't hack Capone's PC. Capone kept his books locked in a safe in his office The office was guarded by men with Tommy guns. Many crooks kept the real books in code.