I speak for my self, but like you I don't much about Microsoft spying my IP, but I care about being easy to modify and hiding a bug there for a malware.
Still not such a big deal.
You're going on and on in comment after comment about Microsoft allowing people to "hide a malware" in there. Care to elaborate as to why that's different from somebody hiding a malware in their own process?
- open task manager
- goto processes
- kill any programs that I don't need (like Compaq Assistant, Adobe Launcher, etc)
- kill any services I don't need
- make explorer High priority
It frees RAM and makes the computer run faster (less hard drive swapping). Hopefully this internet "IP recorder" service is one of those things I kill off. Although now that I know how to do it permanently, I'll do that instead.
Spoiling mod points to call you an idiot.
Start > Run > MSCONFIG
Turn off the programs and services you don't need so you don't HAVE to kill them every time you boot up, and making Explorer high priority isn't going to really do much for you.
This "IP recorder" thing is just your computer testing for an active internet connection by actually running a real DNS query and actually contacting a real server somewhere rather than assuming your internet works because the interface is up.
You don't get murdered for no reason. I guess you'd rather have a knife in your leg from a gunless mugging than have a quite-likely-unloaded gun pointed at you by a criminal who's too much of a pussy to actually hurt you.
Our prison population is primarily drug-related offenses, not real crime, and how often is the police called to a bar because two guys have a "bit of a fight"? A bar fight is a violent crime, and they are factored into violent crime statistics in the US... but most fights here don't require police intervention, maybe they do in the UK. I don't know.
Most murder in the United States is gang- or drug-related. That means people breaking the law anyway so what's to stop them from obtaining guns anyway?
Give me one good reason for denying people hand guns. "You can shoot somebody with it" is not valid, because I can also stab somebody with a knife, which would most likely not kill them, which means it would not be added to a region's murder statistics.
I did not say anything about more guns and less murder, I said more guns and less crime. That's a huge difference. Nobody would dare rob a man at gunpoint in Texas because you know damn well that you'll have three others pointed at you in an instant. Crime deterrent at its finest. Not even the best police department in the world has a response time that can match that.
Wow that's a lot of words. You make several good points, but you ruin them by your false points and blatant overexaggeration. First off, all I said was that "110% of your taxes and more goes straight to the banks and none of it gets spent on society" was the stupidest thing I've ever read, because it is.
The true cost of the bailouts is not over $12 Trillion. They added trillions in there that they should not have. First of all, the bailout program that everybody loves to hate -- TARP -- was actually loans and is now almost completely paid off. The final cost to taxpayers is only expected to be around $30B last I heard (a lot of money to you and me, but not to the government). Then they added in things like the stimulus packages ($915B that went to the taxpayers, not the banks), various tax breaks (big deal, EVERYBODY gets tax breaks), "Line of Credit for FDIC" ($500B for what looks like money to FDIC, not the banks), they included TARP in that big number but compared it to TARP which is irresponsible reporting, FDIC is paid for by its member banks so the $2T for that does not count at all.
Inflation is not a tax. Nobody's forced to by overpriced goods. Food, housing, and energy are all controlled by wildly-fluctuating markets. When more people are buying, the prices go up. What unjust, illegal wars have been fought lately to further the interests of the profiteers? Don't tell me you're one of those horribly-misinformed douchebags with a No Blood for Oil bumper sticker on the back of your volkswagen bus. Prison "industry"? Military "industry"? Yes, there is a military industry, but its run by private companies selling things to the government and weapons and equipment aren't where the majority of military costs lie... it's mostly wages and benefits.
Of course it's not a conspiracy, so why do you write like it's a conspiracy? You sound like one of those people who have convinced themselves that the World Trade Center was downed by internal explosives set by Bush's brainwashed minions. Of course rich people are trying to protect their assets. I would, wouldn't you? Don't blame them for a broken system, blame the system for being breakable. All it takes is a little deception. And not deception of the lawmakers, but deception of the People. Who lets all this happen? We do. "They" spread all kinds of misinformation and We gobble it up. Back in the depression era, it was about money. That's where most of these big corrupt entites started. Fannie Mae was a government-sponsored enterprise started during the depression to try and suck us out of the hole. In the '40s it was about the military. In the '60s it was about the environment. Today it's about terrorism on one hand and the environment on the other. The PATRIOT Act was passed because we were deceived into allowing it. Now all these environmental regulations are being passed because we're being deceived. I can't believe people can call the oil companies corrupt and turn around and look at Al Gore only to revere him as God Incarnate.
It's all about deception. If people would cut the bullshit and look around for information from those besides whom they agree with, things would be so much better. But no, people only get their information from one source and that's the only source they believe. Our tax code would be so much smaller if that wasn't the case.
What could possibly go wrong?
You ever thought about banning hand guns and imprisoning anyone who carries one like the rest of the civilised world does? You know the rest of the civilised world where the number of people being shot is much much lower.
Strange how you manage to ignore your supposedly infallible constitutiuon when it talks about slavery but somehow a vague section about armed militias means you want teachers in schools to be armed. Think for yoursleves and make the laws you need instead of slavishly following the 'Founding Fathers' and glorifying a gun culture to the rest of the world through your media.
I like America but when it comes to guns there seems to be some sort of mental block stopping you from looking at it in a disinterested way that would lead you to the same conclusions every other bloody country has reached.
We're totally off topic here, but I just want to say that guns aren't the only tool for committing crime, and there are causal links between higher gun ownership and lower crime rates. Look at Britain's violent crime rate, by the way. Far greater than anywhere in the states because over there violent crimes are committed with large blunt objects in dark corridors where nobody can see or hear them. Violent crimes here usually aren't violent because it's pointing a gun at a shopkeeper telling him to empty his cash register.
I'm sorry, but he's trying to tell me that the Fukushima disaster was caused by the nuclear industry "falling asleep at the wheel again" which makes absolutely no sense because you can't prevent an earthquake.
Elements of this recent disaster have shown that portions of the industry were drifting off to sleep at the wheel again.
I very much agree with most of your comment, but do you care to tell me how the nuclear industry could have done more to prevent a 9.0-magnitude earthquake, resulting tsunami, and subsequent massive aftershocks? Something tells me that not even they have the technology to stop something like that.
I also think that it's pertinent to point out the fact that nuclear power plants only account for about 1% of the number of power plants in operation over 1MW capacity in the United States but they generate a whopping 20% of our electricity. Just thought that was a neat fact.
So you're saying that the people who run the nuclear power plants can be bribed to disregard safety precautions with some hookers and coke? The nuclear power industry is no more susceptible to corruption than any other, and in fact I would submit that it is far less susceptible due to the vast monitoring by both the government and civilian watchgroups. The fact is that nuclear engineers and their overlords know that what they're doing could potentially ruin the lives of thousands if things go awry, so they take their jobs quite seriously. They're not corporate fat-cats that sit in their office snorting coke off hooker tits while all their minions on floors 2 through 148 trade stocks for them and make them tons of money.
I am merely pointing out the fallacy of assuming that because a couple catastrophes occurred with relation to this thing that you're afraid of, said thing must be inherently dangerous and is doubtlessly going to wreak havoc on the world. We have to look at things from a logical point of view. Why should we pass up this incredibly cheap, incredibly efficient, incredibly powerful, incredibly clean, incredibly robust, and in the vast majority of cases incredibly safe method of power generation just because a few Russians killed thousands of people due to ridiculous levels of incompetence?
I guess because I have a different opinion than you, I must be trolling. And your analogy does not at all make sense... mug funky's is pretty much dead on. Every accident is learned from and the United States has the most stringent nuclear regulatory agency in the world.
Oh noes, it melted down. Further use of stigmatized words to convey images of something much worse than what actually happened. Yes, the core melted down. But the walls of the facility contained all nuclear fallout as well as the ensuing fires, and the reactor was brought back to stability with no injuries to the staff or the public. How is that anything other than safe?
"Logitech Mice Used In Sony Playstation Hack"
"64-Bit Processors Used In Sony Playstation Hack"
"Store-Brand Clothing Used In Sony Playstation Hack"
"Mountain Dew Used In Sony Playstation Hack"
I completely agree. It was during the infancy of nuclear power. A small prototype reactor that was poorly designed before they really knew what differentiated good reactor design from bad reactor design.
Chernobyl doesn't count. That was a horribly-designed reactor staffed by a bunch of incompetents and commissioned by a nation in shambles. It was a horrible example of what can go wrong when human stupidity gets in the way of human innovation and a delightful example of Russia and their retardery. Yes, it was an awful disaster that ruined the lives of thousands of people, but it is NOT, by any means, a reliable example of the state of nuclear power.
So the hackers chose to bounce their packets off a server rented from Amazon. They could have chosen a server rented from a thousand others. Hell, they could have done it with a server rented from me. Thankfully, they did not. But really who the hell cares?
"Nobody died"
This is the tired old logic of the nuclear appologist.
Only count the deaths. Ignore the fact that some of the health effects like cancer and birth defects take years to become evident. And ignore the fact that the huge swaiths of land has become uninhabital and that the groundwater has become poisened.
Oh yes, then the idiotic chest x-ray comparison.
Chest x-ray is external radiation, but people living near Fukusima are in danger because of internal radiation (ingesting radioactive isotopes from air, dust, food, etc.)
How many years are we supposed to wait? Three Mile Island happened over 30 years ago and there has been no evidence of increased cancer rates as a result of that accident. And the only other accident that caused any injury in the history of nuclear power in the United States was in 1967 when somebody fucked up and improperly removed a control rod from the reactor, causing an explosion and the death of its three operators. That's it. Stop being blindfolded by the sensationalization and the stigmas related to the word "nuclear" and look at the facts.
To your logic: the fact that in a majour catastrophe nobody died, does not make the technology causing that catastrophe safe. The opposite is true: if the technology would be save the catastrophe would not have happend.
It wasn't a catastrophe. It was an accident. Nuclear power is not safe in the same definition that almost EVERYTHING we do is not safe. Are cars safe? Nearly 40,000 people die every year in car accidents, let alone the tens of thousands more that are severely injured. Are planes safe? Planes are the safest method of efficient long-range travel in existance, but 1,000 people still die every year. And there are thousands of aviation accidents that don't actually cause any harm... I think earlier you called those "catastrophes". There are thousands of aviation catastrophes every year, resulting in about 1,000 deaths per year.
Let's try some risk-benefit analysis. There are about 140,000,000 automobiles in the United States. Let's just estimate that means 140,000,000 people drive frequently given that most people who own a car drive every day and some households have only one car for several people while some households may have several cars for one person. 40,000 automobile-related deaths per year means that approximately 0.0003% of those served by the automobile industry die because of it each year. Nuclear power accounts for about 20% of all power generation in the United States. Given a population of 307,000,000, I think we can safely approximate that around 61,400,000 people are served by nuclear power in the United States. 3 deaths in the history of nuclear power in the United States (3 people died in an accident at the Nuclear Reactor Testing Station in Idaho Falls on January 3, 1961) means that less than 0.00000005% of people served by the nuclear power industry have ever died because of it. We see 45 deaths per year directly attributed to coal power which produces energy for 150,000,000 people giving us a death rate of 0.0000003% per year, let alone all the wild speculation by the environazis trying to attribute every lung-related death in coal power areas to the coal emissions and we see numbers claimed to be sometimes approaching 10,000 deaths per year. That's all bullshit, of course, but that's what people claim. The fact is that nobody can claim any more deaths in the United States due to nuclear power than those three that died during the technology's infancy, because there is no environmental impact with which to attribute random numbers to.
The media oversensationalizes every little thing that ever happens, and you have been sucked in. Everything we do is dangerous. I suggest you stay inside wrapped in a warm blanket for the rest of your life because that's the only way you'll ever protect yourself from injury. Be careful not to stub your toe on your bedroom door on the way to the kitchen.
"According to the American Nuclear Society, using the official radiation emission figures, "The average radiation dose to people living within ten miles of the plant was eight millirem, and no more than 100 millirem to any single individual. Eight millirem is about equal to a chest X-ray, and 100 millirem is about a third of the average background level of radiation received by US residents in a year.""
Accidents happen. Nobody died. Can we stop bringing up TMI as one of the poster children for why nuclear power is dangerous and deadly, because TMI is a horrible example for that purpose given how it pretty much proves the opposite.
"If you want nostalgia and nerd talk, go to/...."...and wait 45 seconds even on 8 core machines before your one line answer finally gets posted, just like in the olden days.
Because you're waiting for nmap to portscan you for open proxy ports. Only when that's done will it let you post. That's also why it only takes forever once per day, because it only scans a given IP address once every 24 hours.
Why don't HDMI cables have UL-like standards such that they can be treated like commodity items?
And, perhaps I'm over-generalizing, why does our government/society encourage the consumption of imaginary assets (in this case, "better" quality HDMI cables)? It seems like "those in charge" think that the solution to our recession is to spend our way out of it, regardless of the efficacy of what we actually purchase (e.g., bottled water). It seems like "they" would rather have us work harder to maintain a neutral personal cash flow rather than to work the same amount, get ahead, and pay down our debt.
Instead of manufacturing real goods, we manufacture imaginary goods.
What exactly are you bitching about? Are you bitching about the government? Are you bitching about capitalism? Are you bitching about the stupidity of the market? I honestly can't tell. The fact is that people are stupid, and stupid people who have lots of money are willing to spend it on things they think they need but don't. That drives these prices up and drives the manufacturers to develop these gold-plated connectors that don't do anything just so they can pretend to justify a $50 price increase. And then the stupid people with money buy those.
Luckily, there ARE companies that make quality cables without trying to gouge you. Monoprice, for example, has good cables and they are ridiculously inexpensive. Best Buy isn't your ONLY choice, just so you know.
Slashdot Mirror
I speak for my self, but like you I don't much about Microsoft spying my IP, but I care about being easy to modify and hiding a bug there for a malware. Still not such a big deal.
You're going on and on in comment after comment about Microsoft allowing people to "hide a malware" in there. Care to elaborate as to why that's different from somebody hiding a malware in their own process?
- open task manager - goto processes - kill any programs that I don't need (like Compaq Assistant, Adobe Launcher, etc) - kill any services I don't need - make explorer High priority
It frees RAM and makes the computer run faster (less hard drive swapping). Hopefully this internet "IP recorder" service is one of those things I kill off. Although now that I know how to do it permanently, I'll do that instead.
Spoiling mod points to call you an idiot.
Start > Run > MSCONFIG
Turn off the programs and services you don't need so you don't HAVE to kill them every time you boot up, and making Explorer high priority isn't going to really do much for you.
This "IP recorder" thing is just your computer testing for an active internet connection by actually running a real DNS query and actually contacting a real server somewhere rather than assuming your internet works because the interface is up.
Are you trolling? Kernel work isn't development?
A kernel without an interface isn't much of a kernel IS IT?
wait...
You don't get murdered for no reason. I guess you'd rather have a knife in your leg from a gunless mugging than have a quite-likely-unloaded gun pointed at you by a criminal who's too much of a pussy to actually hurt you.
Our prison population is primarily drug-related offenses, not real crime, and how often is the police called to a bar because two guys have a "bit of a fight"? A bar fight is a violent crime, and they are factored into violent crime statistics in the US... but most fights here don't require police intervention, maybe they do in the UK. I don't know.
Most murder in the United States is gang- or drug-related. That means people breaking the law anyway so what's to stop them from obtaining guns anyway?
Give me one good reason for denying people hand guns. "You can shoot somebody with it" is not valid, because I can also stab somebody with a knife, which would most likely not kill them, which means it would not be added to a region's murder statistics.
I did not say anything about more guns and less murder, I said more guns and less crime. That's a huge difference. Nobody would dare rob a man at gunpoint in Texas because you know damn well that you'll have three others pointed at you in an instant. Crime deterrent at its finest. Not even the best police department in the world has a response time that can match that.
Wow that's a lot of words. You make several good points, but you ruin them by your false points and blatant overexaggeration. First off, all I said was that "110% of your taxes and more goes straight to the banks and none of it gets spent on society" was the stupidest thing I've ever read, because it is.
The true cost of the bailouts is not over $12 Trillion. They added trillions in there that they should not have. First of all, the bailout program that everybody loves to hate -- TARP -- was actually loans and is now almost completely paid off. The final cost to taxpayers is only expected to be around $30B last I heard (a lot of money to you and me, but not to the government). Then they added in things like the stimulus packages ($915B that went to the taxpayers, not the banks), various tax breaks (big deal, EVERYBODY gets tax breaks), "Line of Credit for FDIC" ($500B for what looks like money to FDIC, not the banks), they included TARP in that big number but compared it to TARP which is irresponsible reporting, FDIC is paid for by its member banks so the $2T for that does not count at all.
Inflation is not a tax. Nobody's forced to by overpriced goods. Food, housing, and energy are all controlled by wildly-fluctuating markets. When more people are buying, the prices go up. What unjust, illegal wars have been fought lately to further the interests of the profiteers? Don't tell me you're one of those horribly-misinformed douchebags with a No Blood for Oil bumper sticker on the back of your volkswagen bus. Prison "industry"? Military "industry"? Yes, there is a military industry, but its run by private companies selling things to the government and weapons and equipment aren't where the majority of military costs lie... it's mostly wages and benefits.
Of course it's not a conspiracy, so why do you write like it's a conspiracy? You sound like one of those people who have convinced themselves that the World Trade Center was downed by internal explosives set by Bush's brainwashed minions. Of course rich people are trying to protect their assets. I would, wouldn't you? Don't blame them for a broken system, blame the system for being breakable. All it takes is a little deception. And not deception of the lawmakers, but deception of the People. Who lets all this happen? We do. "They" spread all kinds of misinformation and We gobble it up. Back in the depression era, it was about money. That's where most of these big corrupt entites started. Fannie Mae was a government-sponsored enterprise started during the depression to try and suck us out of the hole. In the '40s it was about the military. In the '60s it was about the environment. Today it's about terrorism on one hand and the environment on the other. The PATRIOT Act was passed because we were deceived into allowing it. Now all these environmental regulations are being passed because we're being deceived. I can't believe people can call the oil companies corrupt and turn around and look at Al Gore only to revere him as God Incarnate.
It's all about deception. If people would cut the bullshit and look around for information from those besides whom they agree with, things would be so much better. But no, people only get their information from one source and that's the only source they believe. Our tax code would be so much smaller if that wasn't the case.
What could possibly go wrong? You ever thought about banning hand guns and imprisoning anyone who carries one like the rest of the civilised world does? You know the rest of the civilised world where the number of people being shot is much much lower. Strange how you manage to ignore your supposedly infallible constitutiuon when it talks about slavery but somehow a vague section about armed militias means you want teachers in schools to be armed. Think for yoursleves and make the laws you need instead of slavishly following the 'Founding Fathers' and glorifying a gun culture to the rest of the world through your media. I like America but when it comes to guns there seems to be some sort of mental block stopping you from looking at it in a disinterested way that would lead you to the same conclusions every other bloody country has reached.
We're totally off topic here, but I just want to say that guns aren't the only tool for committing crime, and there are causal links between higher gun ownership and lower crime rates. Look at Britain's violent crime rate, by the way. Far greater than anywhere in the states because over there violent crimes are committed with large blunt objects in dark corridors where nobody can see or hear them. Violent crimes here usually aren't violent because it's pointing a gun at a shopkeeper telling him to empty his cash register.
The income tax was introduced in 1913 at levels of like about 2% , for only the super rich.
90% of people didnt have to pay so didnt complain.
Govts got greedy, kept increasing the taxes, and lowering the thresholds.
Welcome to 2011, 110% of you taxes and more goes directly to banks, and none of it gets spent on 'society'
I'm not a fan of our current tax system, but that's the stupidest thing I've ever read.
I'm sorry, but he's trying to tell me that the Fukushima disaster was caused by the nuclear industry "falling asleep at the wheel again" which makes absolutely no sense because you can't prevent an earthquake.
Elements of this recent disaster have shown that portions of the industry were drifting off to sleep at the wheel again.
I very much agree with most of your comment, but do you care to tell me how the nuclear industry could have done more to prevent a 9.0-magnitude earthquake, resulting tsunami, and subsequent massive aftershocks? Something tells me that not even they have the technology to stop something like that.
I also think that it's pertinent to point out the fact that nuclear power plants only account for about 1% of the number of power plants in operation over 1MW capacity in the United States but they generate a whopping 20% of our electricity. Just thought that was a neat fact.
So you're saying that the people who run the nuclear power plants can be bribed to disregard safety precautions with some hookers and coke? The nuclear power industry is no more susceptible to corruption than any other, and in fact I would submit that it is far less susceptible due to the vast monitoring by both the government and civilian watchgroups. The fact is that nuclear engineers and their overlords know that what they're doing could potentially ruin the lives of thousands if things go awry, so they take their jobs quite seriously. They're not corporate fat-cats that sit in their office snorting coke off hooker tits while all their minions on floors 2 through 148 trade stocks for them and make them tons of money.
I am merely pointing out the fallacy of assuming that because a couple catastrophes occurred with relation to this thing that you're afraid of, said thing must be inherently dangerous and is doubtlessly going to wreak havoc on the world. We have to look at things from a logical point of view. Why should we pass up this incredibly cheap, incredibly efficient, incredibly powerful, incredibly clean, incredibly robust, and in the vast majority of cases incredibly safe method of power generation just because a few Russians killed thousands of people due to ridiculous levels of incompetence?
I guess because I have a different opinion than you, I must be trolling. And your analogy does not at all make sense... mug funky's is pretty much dead on. Every accident is learned from and the United States has the most stringent nuclear regulatory agency in the world.
Oh noes, it melted down. Further use of stigmatized words to convey images of something much worse than what actually happened. Yes, the core melted down. But the walls of the facility contained all nuclear fallout as well as the ensuing fires, and the reactor was brought back to stability with no injuries to the staff or the public. How is that anything other than safe?
Just wait for this upcoming week's headlines...
"Logitech Mice Used In Sony Playstation Hack" "64-Bit Processors Used In Sony Playstation Hack" "Store-Brand Clothing Used In Sony Playstation Hack" "Mountain Dew Used In Sony Playstation Hack"
"Sony VAIO Used In Sony Playstation Hack"
I completely agree. It was during the infancy of nuclear power. A small prototype reactor that was poorly designed before they really knew what differentiated good reactor design from bad reactor design.
Chernobyl doesn't count. That was a horribly-designed reactor staffed by a bunch of incompetents and commissioned by a nation in shambles. It was a horrible example of what can go wrong when human stupidity gets in the way of human innovation and a delightful example of Russia and their retardery. Yes, it was an awful disaster that ruined the lives of thousands of people, but it is NOT, by any means, a reliable example of the state of nuclear power.
So the hackers chose to bounce their packets off a server rented from Amazon. They could have chosen a server rented from a thousand others. Hell, they could have done it with a server rented from me. Thankfully, they did not. But really who the hell cares?
"Nobody died" This is the tired old logic of the nuclear appologist. Only count the deaths. Ignore the fact that some of the health effects like cancer and birth defects take years to become evident. And ignore the fact that the huge swaiths of land has become uninhabital and that the groundwater has become poisened. Oh yes, then the idiotic chest x-ray comparison. Chest x-ray is external radiation, but people living near Fukusima are in danger because of internal radiation (ingesting radioactive isotopes from air, dust, food, etc.)
How many years are we supposed to wait? Three Mile Island happened over 30 years ago and there has been no evidence of increased cancer rates as a result of that accident. And the only other accident that caused any injury in the history of nuclear power in the United States was in 1967 when somebody fucked up and improperly removed a control rod from the reactor, causing an explosion and the death of its three operators. That's it. Stop being blindfolded by the sensationalization and the stigmas related to the word "nuclear" and look at the facts.
To your logic: the fact that in a majour catastrophe nobody died, does not make the technology causing that catastrophe safe. The opposite is true: if the technology would be save the catastrophe would not have happend.
It wasn't a catastrophe. It was an accident. Nuclear power is not safe in the same definition that almost EVERYTHING we do is not safe. Are cars safe? Nearly 40,000 people die every year in car accidents, let alone the tens of thousands more that are severely injured. Are planes safe? Planes are the safest method of efficient long-range travel in existance, but 1,000 people still die every year. And there are thousands of aviation accidents that don't actually cause any harm... I think earlier you called those "catastrophes". There are thousands of aviation catastrophes every year, resulting in about 1,000 deaths per year.
Let's try some risk-benefit analysis. There are about 140,000,000 automobiles in the United States. Let's just estimate that means 140,000,000 people drive frequently given that most people who own a car drive every day and some households have only one car for several people while some households may have several cars for one person. 40,000 automobile-related deaths per year means that approximately 0.0003% of those served by the automobile industry die because of it each year. Nuclear power accounts for about 20% of all power generation in the United States. Given a population of 307,000,000, I think we can safely approximate that around 61,400,000 people are served by nuclear power in the United States. 3 deaths in the history of nuclear power in the United States (3 people died in an accident at the Nuclear Reactor Testing Station in Idaho Falls on January 3, 1961) means that less than 0.00000005% of people served by the nuclear power industry have ever died because of it. We see 45 deaths per year directly attributed to coal power which produces energy for 150,000,000 people giving us a death rate of 0.0000003% per year, let alone all the wild speculation by the environazis trying to attribute every lung-related death in coal power areas to the coal emissions and we see numbers claimed to be sometimes approaching 10,000 deaths per year. That's all bullshit, of course, but that's what people claim. The fact is that nobody can claim any more deaths in the United States due to nuclear power than those three that died during the technology's infancy, because there is no environmental impact with which to attribute random numbers to.
The media oversensationalizes every little thing that ever happens, and you have been sucked in. Everything we do is dangerous. I suggest you stay inside wrapped in a warm blanket for the rest of your life because that's the only way you'll ever protect yourself from injury. Be careful not to stub your toe on your bedroom door on the way to the kitchen.
I agree, not talking about it is better than educating the public, because its fast, lazy, and wont lead to any misconceptions at all.
I didn't say don't talk about it. I said don't say that Three Mile Island is proof that nuclear power is unsafe, because it's not.
or three mile island ?
"According to the American Nuclear Society, using the official radiation emission figures, "The average radiation dose to people living within ten miles of the plant was eight millirem, and no more than 100 millirem to any single individual. Eight millirem is about equal to a chest X-ray, and 100 millirem is about a third of the average background level of radiation received by US residents in a year.""
Accidents happen. Nobody died. Can we stop bringing up TMI as one of the poster children for why nuclear power is dangerous and deadly, because TMI is a horrible example for that purpose given how it pretty much proves the opposite.
"If you want nostalgia and nerd talk, go to /. ..." ...and wait 45 seconds even on 8 core machines before your one line answer finally gets posted, just like in the olden days.
Because you're waiting for nmap to portscan you for open proxy ports. Only when that's done will it let you post. That's also why it only takes forever once per day, because it only scans a given IP address once every 24 hours.
Right, and tomorrow it's gonna rain donuts.
I don't believe you.
Why don't HDMI cables have UL-like standards such that they can be treated like commodity items? And, perhaps I'm over-generalizing, why does our government/society encourage the consumption of imaginary assets (in this case, "better" quality HDMI cables)? It seems like "those in charge" think that the solution to our recession is to spend our way out of it, regardless of the efficacy of what we actually purchase (e.g., bottled water). It seems like "they" would rather have us work harder to maintain a neutral personal cash flow rather than to work the same amount, get ahead, and pay down our debt. Instead of manufacturing real goods, we manufacture imaginary goods.
What exactly are you bitching about? Are you bitching about the government? Are you bitching about capitalism? Are you bitching about the stupidity of the market? I honestly can't tell. The fact is that people are stupid, and stupid people who have lots of money are willing to spend it on things they think they need but don't. That drives these prices up and drives the manufacturers to develop these gold-plated connectors that don't do anything just so they can pretend to justify a $50 price increase. And then the stupid people with money buy those.
Luckily, there ARE companies that make quality cables without trying to gouge you. Monoprice, for example, has good cables and they are ridiculously inexpensive. Best Buy isn't your ONLY choice, just so you know.