So once again Mr. Assange decided that he speaks for Americans. He will decide what to leak, when to leak it and what to redact. He is the one who gets to make decisions that could put lives in danger or derail sensitive negotiations, etc.
Funny, because I don't recall anyone electing him, or appointing him to anything. What if something he releases gets someone killed? Who is he accountable to?
All for the greater good you say? Maybe if you or someone you know is the one who is killed, you'd change your mind.
1. Use that great brand new repository that was shut down for political reasons. 2. Recycle it, that's never been done for political reasons 3. Just burn all the lying SOB politicians for fuel.
Funny, because except for 1 accidents (in the U.S, in which no one died) caused by humans screwing up, all that crappy Nuclear Technology is perfectly safe and is in fact, the technology that is currently in use now.
The reason anyone feels the need to declare their environmentalist bonfides is because there is a new bigotry developing, which I will ball the EnviroBigot. This is a person who feels others who do not show the appropriate amount of deference to the "Environment" is any one or all of Stupid, Selfish, Evil.
It allows EnviroBigots to discount policy arguments with a simple dismissals such as "oh, he drives an SUV", or "ignore what he says, he works for Big (Insert most currently reviled industry here)". It saves the EnviroBigot the need to think critically and re-enforces the echo chamber that they call debate.
So everyone get ready. Soon you won't be able to say squat about the environment without first declaring that you are a "friend" to the environment.
Here are some handy dandy phrases you can use...
"I recycle, but I don't think I should have to pay a fine if I miss a can in the trash."
"I really support Alternative Energy, In fact, I have a solar array on my roof. But I think that at this time Nuclear Power is the best bet to reduce carbon emissions"
"I drive a car that gets 1000 miles per gallon and I never use the A/C, but we really do need to keep drilling for oil because it is used for so many other things than just fuel."
Slashdot Mirror
Wikileaks, whose founder, Julian Assange, obtained the material in circumstances he will not discuss, said it would redact harmful material
How can this asshat know what is harmful and what is not? Who elected him everyone's "conscience"?
So once again Mr. Assange decided that he speaks for Americans. He will decide what to leak, when to leak it and what to redact. He is the one who gets to make decisions that could put lives in danger or derail sensitive negotiations, etc.
Funny, because I don't recall anyone electing him, or appointing him to anything. What if something he releases gets someone killed? Who is he accountable to?
All for the greater good you say? Maybe if you or someone you know is the one who is killed, you'd change your mind.
Obviously, Mr. Larson is in the pockets of Big Hybrids.
But I'm sure he used his vast experience in Spanish to come up with a completely reputable study that will survive any vigorous peer review.
BTW, I did look it up.
I'm sure there are many small world here on Slashdot that you too wouldn't want to be a part off.
I shudder to think.
Crowther adds that R136a1 is about as big as stars can get.
Right.
That's what Eddintgon said
Hmmm.
That's one circle of geeks I'm glad not to participate in I guess.
Nice
See my previous response.
ooookayyyy.
You got that italics tag down pretty good. Now you just have to work on writing something intelligible.
OK...not even half way through the comments and this is all starting to feel like some 9/11 Truther convention.
Well, we can't have the public believing that there are 8 screens monitoring the spill when there are actually only 6 (or WTF ever the number was).
It's not Bush's fault?
I'm sure captainpanaic wears makeup and to the double horror of many guys, has woken up next to them where they see reality.
Fifteen years ago, some idiot said all these same things and they didn't proceed.
Do we want to be listening to more idiots saying this same thing fifteen years from now?
the stupid way we've done it
Thank the envirowackos for that.
I suggest that we take all the people who whine and bitch and moan about nuclear power and chain them to stationary bikes hooked to generators.
The EnviroWackos would never allow that. Think of the Turtles!
I'll volunteer my back yard.
"Funny, because except for 1 accidents (in the U.S, in which no one died)"
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1723706&cid=32950064
Stick to the conversation
What are you smoking?
Nobody said ignore what we've learned. To the contrary, that seems to be what you are saying.
We need to use what we have learned, improve on it and move forward.
The OP stated that 80's technology was crappy. I just said that it is what we have today AND hasn't killed anyone.
Or we could...
1. Use that great brand new repository that was shut down for political reasons.
2. Recycle it, that's never been done for political reasons
3. Just burn all the lying SOB politicians for fuel.
Funny, because except for 1 accidents (in the U.S, in which no one died) caused by humans screwing up, all that crappy Nuclear Technology is perfectly safe and is in fact, the technology that is currently in use now.
"ball the EnviroBigot"
Hey, even EnviroBigots need love I guess.
In fact, I'll take the analogy even further.
The reason anyone feels the need to declare their environmentalist bonfides is because there is a new bigotry developing, which I will ball the EnviroBigot. This is a person who feels others who do not show the appropriate amount of deference to the "Environment" is any one or all of Stupid, Selfish, Evil.
It allows EnviroBigots to discount policy arguments with a simple dismissals such as "oh, he drives an SUV", or "ignore what he says, he works for Big (Insert most currently reviled industry here)". It saves the EnviroBigot the need to think critically and re-enforces the echo chamber that they call debate.
So everyone get ready. Soon you won't be able to say squat about the environment without first declaring that you are a "friend" to the environment.
Here are some handy dandy phrases you can use...
"I recycle, but I don't think I should have to pay a fine if I miss a can in the trash."
"I really support Alternative Energy, In fact, I have a solar array on my roof. But I think that at this time Nuclear Power is the best bet to reduce carbon emissions"
"I drive a car that gets 1000 miles per gallon and I never use the A/C, but we really do need to keep drilling for oil because it is used for so many other things than just fuel."