All the inmates serving "Life-Sentences"....I know and understand this isnt an "immortality" prospect, in all reality, but just say it was, what WOULD we do wiht them at that point...Deny them an immortality prospect or not...I mean when the judgememnt of "life sentence" was issued the judge or jury prolly wasn't taking this into account...
In light of that news, I'd have to say that the penal system would have to be reworked due to the fact that we wouldn't want to pay to keep inmates indeffinately in jail...This would maybe either A) boost capital punishment or B)eliminate life terms...And i know this is far fetched and sci-fi esque....pretend that the treatment was a genetic one that was bred into the population through gene manipulation during gestation, and then became a passable trait for future offspring so it was inherently IN the population, there would be no way of reversing it....so what would we do for deathes and such as well? adn what would we do for life inmates?
I don't know if it is the same in the US but in Canada the natives are exempt from paying taxes on the gas they use and other controlled goods, and technically have a status different unto itself. I lived in the NWT in Frobisher Bay for four byears, and believe me; Everything is gas powered, My father was RCMP and since the temperature would drop below -50 during the winter the Vehicles that the towns people would use would run 24/7, otherwise they wouldnt get them started again...This means filling them with EMENSE amounts of gasoline, and this is onyl once facet of the lifestyle...
These aren't communities where Global Warming adn all the other hot platform topics are discussed in teh same manor and regular light they are here...this is, in comparison, a small rural community who (as has been done time and time again) is being exlpoited....
You can't tell me the motivation of this arguement is to either A)help the environment, or B)seek compensation for an action that has slighted their lifestyle in any particular direct way...
Howeevr, you CAN convince me very easliy that the arguement is about money and getting all you can...and was probobly proposed by the law firm representing the village...
The exploitation of an indivduals, or a social groups, ignorance is the bigger crime here...
-Adam
You facts about McVey is disengenous...If you , in fact do, believe in the Christian bible and concider yourself a Christian you have no further to look then the old testement for the warrants of genocide, ionfanticide, murder, rape, adulrty and purgery...And teh new testemetn is a perfect forground to embolden adn promote a fascist dictatorship mindset....
Its not a matter of "interpretation" its a matter of fact which is right there within those books in both black and white...
It says to stone and kill and murder, it depicts a God who condones these immoral and unethical judgements, based on their own UNQUESTIONABLE word....this si dictotorship..... "Worship me or die"....
And the same goes for, as ive indicated by the old testement, the Jewish God Yawhe and the God depcited in the Quron, Allah...
It IS a "THEY" kind of arguemnt. It is so because if you dont accept what the texts say and dont folow all that the religion says then YOU ARENT PART OF IT, you are part of your own addaptive belief....
the peope who believe in either of the three great montheistic faithes CAN all be grouped together...
Ask any Catholic, which i was until i reached the age of reason, if they REALLY belive in the virgin birth.....Of course they dont , nobody who wasnt delusional or retarded would, so tehn to what extent are they really a catholic? they arent...
Yeah except for the relationships, family history/woe, political empire/rebellion, pluralistic nature, HUGE focus on moral strife and solidarity as well as human nature (even thogh, yes i know they arent all technically human), and the huge climactic battle between fascist totalitarian dictatorship and freedom....
Oh yeah and lightsabers and the force...
I find, though I really like star trek, that it is unfathomable in the same sense as star wars due to the fact that near every species of focus or that contributes to the interpersonal story lines are humanoid and identifies with most of the core essential beliefs and opinions that would be held by a pluralistic society on earth....eg. most species hold similar values like family construct/political systems/technology advances and such....if they didnt then the stories portrayed in the show wouldnt be identifiable by the audience that watches them....And there woudlnt be the connection between them and the show that is so obviously there....it really does portray a HUMAN view and vision in the end, even if it is something that is not totally evident
Chernobyl had a reactor design that actually had a positive heat coefficient, which means the hotter it got the quickler ti reacted. Thius means that when the reaction was happening and the core was heating and got to the capacity of tnt, instead of maintiang its reactionslwoly and producing heat and energy, it simply blew up. Chernobyl was not a nuclear reaction but a chemical one which was equivilant to its core mass in TNT, the problem with Chernobyl was that it burned and released plutonium gas into the air whic flooded up the copuntry side, and though it was only alpha emitting plutoniuma dn plutonium is safe, it isnt when its inhaled....and this si what caused a lot of the damage.
Wow, are YOU misinformed. A nuclear reactor first off can't create a nuclear explosion, any one that would be produced for use in North America in itself utilizes a design, by law, which makes use of a negative heat core coefficient. Secondly they device obviously would not be uranium as it is too expensive to refine and collect for a comercial venture, instead it would be plutonium. Plutonium is one of those things that most educated people feel they understad but is actually very imsunderstood at its basis when it comes to nuclear reactors and bombs. A uranium bomb is simple to construct and amke for just about any country given that they have the resources to refine it, which most dont, the isotope of urnaium used is about 0.07% of what is normally found in raw uranium....and raw uranium is found as one part per million in most granite mines. Plutonium OTOH is very common, much more so then one would think and it is actually quite harmless, again another misconception, due to it only being an alpha emitter. The onyl ain differnce between the two bomb designs is this
A uranium bomb is simple in design it has a small plutonium core and an adequate amount (AKA critical mass) or uranium encompassing it in a spherical design, this sphere is split in two,a nd a peice or berylium and carbon is placed between them, this construct sits inside a shell, when a high impact explosive is triggered inside the tube the two semi-spherical halfs slam together sandwhciching the beryliuma nd carbon whcih in effect releases a neutron, this neutron hits the pluoniuma nd realeses another two neutrons which hit the uranium (assuming theres enough there and the neutron doesnt jsut pass throuhg, hence CRITICAL MASS) and makes the uranium split and throw off five neutrons these five hit more uranium and you get a chain reaction.
A plutonium bomb works on aan implosion design which uses explosive lenses to create a simultaneous explosion around the core at 360 degress......this is very ahrd and almost impossible unless you have the engineering resources of a large developed country behind you.....it has to be an exact perfect explosion....This kind of technology isnt available to msot terrorist groups and is too ahrd to attain....therefore i dont get what the fuss is about "terrorists making a nuke" it simply is so improboble to do that its shoudlnt be a concern....Sadam couldnt even create a plutonium bomb cause of the difficulty so instead he tried to make a uranium bomb, the only problem was is that he didnt have the means to enrich urnaium excpet for the use of Calutrons which suck up an extremem amount or power to operate adn produce very little refined uranium....
I HATE FEAR MONGERING and people who dont understand these topics do a great job of it when they atart talking about things they dont wholly understand.
Yeah, I undertsmad what your saying but I dont really agree, you haveplaces like niagra falls and such and other such natural resources, along with convential power plants, that can only scale a certain percent of their production down, Niagra falls can't store the power being produced, all it can do is run itwards into the community, it doesnt have the means to store all that it produces, this means that if it doesnt get used by the population it goes to waste. Now take night time, if you leave your office and leave stuff on there, such as computers and a/c and then come home and go to bed and turn off your tv and lights and whatever that 99% of the regular population turns off at night, the entire population's amount of use, including the offices are still lower then the power being generated, this means that it is a moot point about arguing it being a waste of power when you leave computers on at night....
Also, if offices do leave A/c on at night, i dont knwo where your from but i can guarantee here ti uses much less energy then throughout the day, first off all it does it regualte to a specific temp, so sense the temp drops at night it has to do less work to reach the desired level, second there is nobody in the office and such and most appliances arent being actively used, this cuts down on office heat drastically..... yet the power plant that powers everyhting thorugh the day is still making and distributing near the same amount of electricity...
It may be true that computers and networks left active at night time may use electricity but that is different from wasting electricity.
A power plant doesnt scale its production dynamically to the fullest degree fo the term, they dont produce power on the fly for the needs of the infrastructure, they have a set amount of electricity they pump out, at night time general usage goes down by the average person, so there technically is a large amount of electricity just wasted at ngiht time that is being run through the power lines but is never utilized. I dont think its fair to call it wasting when it's being produced and unused anyways, if it werent used, now that would be the waste. Its as wrong as saying "well if you have an electric car you need to charge it and that energy comes form a coal powerplant, so your really not helping the environment" cause at night time power is technically wasted, so charging your car at night really isnt hurting the envirnoment as much as those critics think. Correct me if im wrong....
Slashdot Mirror
Lol it depends wether your gonan take into account a few hundred years of inflation or not....
Do I get to use my flashlight?
All the inmates serving "Life-Sentences"....I know and understand this isnt an "immortality" prospect, in all reality, but just say it was, what WOULD we do wiht them at that point...Deny them an immortality prospect or not...I mean when the judgememnt of "life sentence" was issued the judge or jury prolly wasn't taking this into account... In light of that news, I'd have to say that the penal system would have to be reworked due to the fact that we wouldn't want to pay to keep inmates indeffinately in jail...This would maybe either A) boost capital punishment or B)eliminate life terms...And i know this is far fetched and sci-fi esque....pretend that the treatment was a genetic one that was bred into the population through gene manipulation during gestation, and then became a passable trait for future offspring so it was inherently IN the population, there would be no way of reversing it....so what would we do for deathes and such as well? adn what would we do for life inmates?
I don't know if it is the same in the US but in Canada the natives are exempt from paying taxes on the gas they use and other controlled goods, and technically have a status different unto itself. I lived in the NWT in Frobisher Bay for four byears, and believe me; Everything is gas powered, My father was RCMP and since the temperature would drop below -50 during the winter the Vehicles that the towns people would use would run 24/7, otherwise they wouldnt get them started again...This means filling them with EMENSE amounts of gasoline, and this is onyl once facet of the lifestyle... These aren't communities where Global Warming adn all the other hot platform topics are discussed in teh same manor and regular light they are here...this is, in comparison, a small rural community who (as has been done time and time again) is being exlpoited.... You can't tell me the motivation of this arguement is to either A)help the environment, or B)seek compensation for an action that has slighted their lifestyle in any particular direct way... Howeevr, you CAN convince me very easliy that the arguement is about money and getting all you can...and was probobly proposed by the law firm representing the village... The exploitation of an indivduals, or a social groups, ignorance is the bigger crime here... -Adam
You facts about McVey is disengenous...If you , in fact do, believe in the Christian bible and concider yourself a Christian you have no further to look then the old testement for the warrants of genocide, ionfanticide, murder, rape, adulrty and purgery...And teh new testemetn is a perfect forground to embolden adn promote a fascist dictatorship mindset.... Its not a matter of "interpretation" its a matter of fact which is right there within those books in both black and white... It says to stone and kill and murder, it depicts a God who condones these immoral and unethical judgements, based on their own UNQUESTIONABLE word....this si dictotorship..... "Worship me or die".... And the same goes for, as ive indicated by the old testement, the Jewish God Yawhe and the God depcited in the Quron, Allah... It IS a "THEY" kind of arguemnt. It is so because if you dont accept what the texts say and dont folow all that the religion says then YOU ARENT PART OF IT, you are part of your own addaptive belief.... the peope who believe in either of the three great montheistic faithes CAN all be grouped together... Ask any Catholic, which i was until i reached the age of reason, if they REALLY belive in the virgin birth.....Of course they dont , nobody who wasnt delusional or retarded would, so tehn to what extent are they really a catholic? they arent...
Yeah except for the relationships, family history/woe, political empire/rebellion, pluralistic nature, HUGE focus on moral strife and solidarity as well as human nature (even thogh, yes i know they arent all technically human), and the huge climactic battle between fascist totalitarian dictatorship and freedom.... Oh yeah and lightsabers and the force... I find, though I really like star trek, that it is unfathomable in the same sense as star wars due to the fact that near every species of focus or that contributes to the interpersonal story lines are humanoid and identifies with most of the core essential beliefs and opinions that would be held by a pluralistic society on earth....eg. most species hold similar values like family construct/political systems/technology advances and such....if they didnt then the stories portrayed in the show wouldnt be identifiable by the audience that watches them....And there woudlnt be the connection between them and the show that is so obviously there....it really does portray a HUMAN view and vision in the end, even if it is something that is not totally evident
Chernobyl had a reactor design that actually had a positive heat coefficient, which means the hotter it got the quickler ti reacted. Thius means that when the reaction was happening and the core was heating and got to the capacity of tnt, instead of maintiang its reactionslwoly and producing heat and energy, it simply blew up. Chernobyl was not a nuclear reaction but a chemical one which was equivilant to its core mass in TNT, the problem with Chernobyl was that it burned and released plutonium gas into the air whic flooded up the copuntry side, and though it was only alpha emitting plutoniuma dn plutonium is safe, it isnt when its inhaled....and this si what caused a lot of the damage.
Wow, are YOU misinformed. A nuclear reactor first off can't create a nuclear explosion, any one that would be produced for use in North America in itself utilizes a design, by law, which makes use of a negative heat core coefficient. Secondly they device obviously would not be uranium as it is too expensive to refine and collect for a comercial venture, instead it would be plutonium. Plutonium is one of those things that most educated people feel they understad but is actually very imsunderstood at its basis when it comes to nuclear reactors and bombs. A uranium bomb is simple to construct and amke for just about any country given that they have the resources to refine it, which most dont, the isotope of urnaium used is about 0.07% of what is normally found in raw uranium....and raw uranium is found as one part per million in most granite mines. Plutonium OTOH is very common, much more so then one would think and it is actually quite harmless, again another misconception, due to it only being an alpha emitter. The onyl ain differnce between the two bomb designs is this A uranium bomb is simple in design it has a small plutonium core and an adequate amount (AKA critical mass) or uranium encompassing it in a spherical design, this sphere is split in two,a nd a peice or berylium and carbon is placed between them, this construct sits inside a shell, when a high impact explosive is triggered inside the tube the two semi-spherical halfs slam together sandwhciching the beryliuma nd carbon whcih in effect releases a neutron, this neutron hits the pluoniuma nd realeses another two neutrons which hit the uranium (assuming theres enough there and the neutron doesnt jsut pass throuhg, hence CRITICAL MASS) and makes the uranium split and throw off five neutrons these five hit more uranium and you get a chain reaction. A plutonium bomb works on aan implosion design which uses explosive lenses to create a simultaneous explosion around the core at 360 degress......this is very ahrd and almost impossible unless you have the engineering resources of a large developed country behind you.....it has to be an exact perfect explosion....This kind of technology isnt available to msot terrorist groups and is too ahrd to attain....therefore i dont get what the fuss is about "terrorists making a nuke" it simply is so improboble to do that its shoudlnt be a concern....Sadam couldnt even create a plutonium bomb cause of the difficulty so instead he tried to make a uranium bomb, the only problem was is that he didnt have the means to enrich urnaium excpet for the use of Calutrons which suck up an extremem amount or power to operate adn produce very little refined uranium.... I HATE FEAR MONGERING and people who dont understand these topics do a great job of it when they atart talking about things they dont wholly understand.
Yeah, I undertsmad what your saying but I dont really agree, you haveplaces like niagra falls and such and other such natural resources, along with convential power plants, that can only scale a certain percent of their production down, Niagra falls can't store the power being produced, all it can do is run itwards into the community, it doesnt have the means to store all that it produces, this means that if it doesnt get used by the population it goes to waste. Now take night time, if you leave your office and leave stuff on there, such as computers and a/c and then come home and go to bed and turn off your tv and lights and whatever that 99% of the regular population turns off at night, the entire population's amount of use, including the offices are still lower then the power being generated, this means that it is a moot point about arguing it being a waste of power when you leave computers on at night.... Also, if offices do leave A/c on at night, i dont knwo where your from but i can guarantee here ti uses much less energy then throughout the day, first off all it does it regualte to a specific temp, so sense the temp drops at night it has to do less work to reach the desired level, second there is nobody in the office and such and most appliances arent being actively used, this cuts down on office heat drastically..... yet the power plant that powers everyhting thorugh the day is still making and distributing near the same amount of electricity...
It may be true that computers and networks left active at night time may use electricity but that is different from wasting electricity. A power plant doesnt scale its production dynamically to the fullest degree fo the term, they dont produce power on the fly for the needs of the infrastructure, they have a set amount of electricity they pump out, at night time general usage goes down by the average person, so there technically is a large amount of electricity just wasted at ngiht time that is being run through the power lines but is never utilized. I dont think its fair to call it wasting when it's being produced and unused anyways, if it werent used, now that would be the waste. Its as wrong as saying "well if you have an electric car you need to charge it and that energy comes form a coal powerplant, so your really not helping the environment" cause at night time power is technically wasted, so charging your car at night really isnt hurting the envirnoment as much as those critics think. Correct me if im wrong....