Right, because anybody who disputes the Holy Atom is a just a stupid hippie. Aren't stereotypes great? Combined them with ad hominem arguments, and you never have to use your brain at all.
Dude, please argue with what I'm actually saying. I'm not arguing the nuclear power is worse than all the alternatives. I'm simply trying to debunk the attitude that it's utterly harmless and that anybody who opposes it is a illiterate luddite hippie.
I agree, which is why I objected to some fairly intelligent articles being dismissed as "insanely sensationalistic FUD piece". If you want to overcome the kneejerk anti-nuke crowd, try not being the kneejerk pro-nuke crowd.
Well, cool. But did you notice where this design has a whole bunch of other safety issues?
Look, I'm not trying to tell anybody that nuclear power is evil. I'm just tired of all the crap from people who refuse to admit that safety is even an issue, and basically respond to every argument with "you're a stupid hippie."
My accusation is that they no longer matter. Every counterargument I've seen talks about all their wonderful software. So the fact that they don't do software anymore is kind of relevant.
Look, I'm not trying to say that reactors are disasters waiting to happen. I'm simply trying to shoot down the nuclear zealots who throw out safety features as if they absolutely guaranteed that nothing can ever go wrong. I get very tired of being insulted just because I don't drink the koolaid.
The Wikipedia article doesn't actually say that CANDU reactors can rely solely on passive cooling while shut down, though I gather from other sources that this is true. Anyway, none of the reactors mentioned in the article is a CANDU.
Really, this thread is not so much about the safety issue itself as the claim that people who worry about reactor safety are "scaremongering". That's always been a favorite strawman for people who have the Nucleasr Religion, but it's always been absurd. And after the the Fukishima disaster, it's just plain ostrich imitation. If you want to argue that Nuclear power makes sense, by all means do so, but be fucking honest about it, and stop whining. about "scaremongering".
Let's see. GCC has belonged to an external group for some time now, with the "blessing" of FSF. There are many versions of EMACs. The leading ones are all third-party, though many do use FSF-approved licenses.
(I used to know the main guy at XEMACS. He was actually a Sun employee, because Sun needed XEMACS to continue so they could provide an editor as part of their development tool bundle. Most FOSS projects are highly dependent on sponsorship by the companies that use their software.)
I give FSF credit for the core stuff — but not a lot of credit. In fact, most of the work these days on these tools is done by outsiders. I was at Borland in 2000 when we were porting our object-oriented programming language to Linux. We soon found a major memory leak in GLIBC. It must have been there all along (20 years!) but didn't become obvious until a language that did a lot of dynamic memory management started baning on it. Not impressive.
I find your idea of "wings" in the FSF a little silly. What I'm seeing is a lot of outsiders who could give a shit about the whole "free software" thing, but contribute to the maintenance of FSF products because their businesses depend on them. I guess they're your "working wing", the Mark Twain.
The "advocacy wing" (which still owns the copyright on all the code, BTW; your Samuel Clemens) is a bunch of guys who go around telling us all thatOpen Source is evil and everybody should Just Say No to any kind of IP protection. That's why we have them handing out a Linux distro that won't even run on most people's hardware. They just don't matter, because nothing the do or advocate now has any impact on the industry. I'll give them thanks for inventing a key development model (but grudgingly, since I consider them a bunch of prolix, overbearing assholes) but I refuse to give them any credit for things that others have managed to build on their rather shaky foundation.
The meltdowns ins Japan happened because the diesel generators that were supposed to supply power to keep the cores cool in an emergency got flooded. Has somebody invented a floodproof diesel generator in the last 50 years?
Seriously? Because there's a lot of radioactive real estate in Japan that says there is a problem. And yet you continue to blather about "fear mongering".
In Portland, we havve Free Geek, which will take your unwanted hardware and turn it into systems and sell them cheap or give them away. (The build program which allows anybody to put in some time building computers and walk away with their own system as a reward, particularly tickles me.) You can certainly ship your DIMMs to them, though there might well be a similar effort closer to you.
Yeah, and if the external backup power goes out (like it did in Japan) you're looking at a potential meltdown situation. And guess what: that would generate enough heat to melt all that steel and concrete.
Oh please. I've read both stories, and neither of them is the least bit sensationalistic. They present issues and facts, and neither of them is clearly anti-nuke. But of course anybody who suggests that there are safety issues with nuclear power must be "scaremongering".
What's weird to me is that people get all religious about nuclear power. At best, fission plants will never provide more than a fraction of the power we need. You may think that the benefit-versus-risk equation argues that we shoud build them (not that I agree) but is that really sufficient reason to treat nuclear power like the Second Coming?
LOL. Right, because "common sense" is the same fotr everybody.
BTW, people often get arrested for taking pictures in pubic places where there are no such signs as the ones you describe. And there have been repeated court rulings that shopping malls do not have unrestricted control over the activities of their patrons.
If you're ever arrested, do yourself a favor and talk to an actual lawyer. Do not try to tell the judge: "That's can't illegal, it's against common sense."
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is that I'm not trying to tell you that nuclear plants are evil.
Right, because anybody who disputes the Holy Atom is a just a stupid hippie. Aren't stereotypes great? Combined them with ad hominem arguments, and you never have to use your brain at all.
Sigh. Could I get you to read my post all the way through? It's not that long.
Dude, please argue with what I'm actually saying. I'm not arguing the nuclear power is worse than all the alternatives. I'm simply trying to debunk the attitude that it's utterly harmless and that anybody who opposes it is a illiterate luddite hippie.
clueless denouncements are not helpful either.
I agree, which is why I objected to some fairly intelligent articles being dismissed as "insanely sensationalistic FUD piece". If you want to overcome the kneejerk anti-nuke crowd, try not being the kneejerk pro-nuke crowd.
Huh? What do that have to do with this discussion?
Well, cool. But did you notice where this design has a whole bunch of other safety issues?
Look, I'm not trying to tell anybody that nuclear power is evil. I'm just tired of all the crap from people who refuse to admit that safety is even an issue, and basically respond to every argument with "you're a stupid hippie."
I never said common sense wasn't useful. I only said it didn't make you a legal expert.
My accusation is that they no longer matter. Every counterargument I've seen talks about all their wonderful software. So the fact that they don't do software anymore is kind of relevant.
Look, I'm not trying to say that reactors are disasters waiting to happen. I'm simply trying to shoot down the nuclear zealots who throw out safety features as if they absolutely guaranteed that nothing can ever go wrong. I get very tired of being insulted just because I don't drink the koolaid.
The Wikipedia article doesn't actually say that CANDU reactors can rely solely on passive cooling while shut down, though I gather from other sources that this is true. Anyway, none of the reactors mentioned in the article is a CANDU.
Really, this thread is not so much about the safety issue itself as the claim that people who worry about reactor safety are "scaremongering". That's always been a favorite strawman for people who have the Nucleasr Religion, but it's always been absurd. And after the the Fukishima disaster, it's just plain ostrich imitation. If you want to argue that Nuclear power makes sense, by all means do so, but be fucking honest about it, and stop whining. about "scaremongering".
I'm sorry, where are these magic plants that don't need backup power? I did some googling and couldn't find any.
Nuke zealots actually think that their Magic Power Source has never killed anybody.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-07-17/fukushima-radiation-may-cause-1-300-cancer-deaths-study-finds
There's also the people who weren't hurt, but can never return to their homes or land:
http://www.japantoday.com/smartphone/view/opinions/pure-land-lost-for-fukushima-evacuees
And then there's the contamination issue:
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/asia-pacific/2012/10/2012102510561941251.html
Let's see. GCC has belonged to an external group for some time now, with the "blessing" of FSF. There are many versions of EMACs. The leading ones are all third-party, though many do use FSF-approved licenses.
(I used to know the main guy at XEMACS. He was actually a Sun employee, because Sun needed XEMACS to continue so they could provide an editor as part of their development tool bundle. Most FOSS projects are highly dependent on sponsorship by the companies that use their software.)
I give FSF credit for the core stuff — but not a lot of credit. In fact, most of the work these days on these tools is done by outsiders. I was at Borland in 2000 when we were porting our object-oriented programming language to Linux. We soon found a major memory leak in GLIBC. It must have been there all along (20 years!) but didn't become obvious until a language that did a lot of dynamic memory management started baning on it. Not impressive.
I find your idea of "wings" in the FSF a little silly. What I'm seeing is a lot of outsiders who could give a shit about the whole "free software" thing, but contribute to the maintenance of FSF products because their businesses depend on them. I guess they're your "working wing", the Mark Twain.
The "advocacy wing" (which still owns the copyright on all the code, BTW; your Samuel Clemens) is a bunch of guys who go around telling us all thatOpen Source is evil and everybody should Just Say No to any kind of IP protection. That's why we have them handing out a Linux distro that won't even run on most people's hardware. They just don't matter, because nothing the do or advocate now has any impact on the industry. I'll give them thanks for inventing a key development model (but grudgingly, since I consider them a bunch of prolix, overbearing assholes) but I refuse to give them any credit for things that others have managed to build on their rather shaky foundation.
The meltdowns ins Japan happened because the diesel generators that were supposed to supply power to keep the cores cool in an emergency got flooded. Has somebody invented a floodproof diesel generator in the last 50 years?
Seriously? Because there's a lot of radioactive real estate in Japan that says there is a problem. And yet you continue to blather about "fear mongering".
In Portland, we havve Free Geek, which will take your unwanted hardware and turn it into systems and sell them cheap or give them away. (The build program which allows anybody to put in some time building computers and walk away with their own system as a reward, particularly tickles me.) You can certainly ship your DIMMs to them, though there might well be a similar effort closer to you.
You're obviously not Japanese. If you were, you'd know that Godzilla is a myth and meltdowns are not.
And if there's a meltdown, will all the obsessive nukes-will-save-us zealots admit that there's a problem?
Yeah, and if the external backup power goes out (like it did in Japan) you're looking at a potential meltdown situation. And guess what: that would generate enough heat to melt all that steel and concrete.
Oh please. I've read both stories, and neither of them is the least bit sensationalistic. They present issues and facts, and neither of them is clearly anti-nuke. But of course anybody who suggests that there are safety issues with nuclear power must be "scaremongering".
What's weird to me is that people get all religious about nuclear power. At best, fission plants will never provide more than a fraction of the power we need. You may think that the benefit-versus-risk equation argues that we shoud build them (not that I agree) but is that really sufficient reason to treat nuclear power like the Second Coming?
Sound advice. Your "common sense" approach to social issues makes you a person to avoid.
Yes, but it's conducted by private individuals. Sort of a private-public parnership.
http://www.photographyisntacrime.com/
Oh, and: my house, my fucking rules.
Word of advice: don't use that argument in court.
Common Law=Common Sense
LOL. Right, because "common sense" is the same fotr everybody.
BTW, people often get arrested for taking pictures in pubic places where there are no such signs as the ones you describe. And there have been repeated court rulings that shopping malls do not have unrestricted control over the activities of their patrons.
If you're ever arrested, do yourself a favor and talk to an actual lawyer. Do not try to tell the judge: "That's can't illegal, it's against common sense."