They can be reused because they are more radioactive is the point.
If you refine the spent fuel rods, you can get this material out and make more fuel rods. The materials you speak of also have shorter half-lives, and so are practically dead by the time you're done.
Yes, certainly. I elaborated on these in a blog posting, but, well, this was really sufficient for what I had intended to say here. If you choose to have a bunch of kids, you're going to have a bigger impact on the gene pool. It almost goes without saying.
Since most people seem to have their 2.5 and pack it in as far as child rearing is concerned, these folks are in the minority, don't you think? Those having 3 having a bigger influence, the real studs with 100 kids having a huge influence, and the ones who have no kids, having no influence.
Darwin Awards aside, what made people think that evolution stopped with the modern era?
Applying natural selection as a template, lets look at what it really is. Natural selection is the phenomena of being removed from the gene pool prior to reproduction. Anything else that happens will allow your genes to carry on, which is how evolution works. People probably assumed that evolution stopped because they assume that most people manage to successfully reproduce prior to their death.
Ask developers at Microsoft if they developed Vista in 100% C# before taking that perspective young man, you might be surprised at the response that you get.
That debate only really seems at all applicable in Windows, however, I should point out that those languages are very different animals. C++ is not only syntactically different, and semantically different, but its capabilities are actually different. C++ has no garbage collector, C# does, for instance, unless you're talking about managed C++, and things of that nature.
See... it's not JUST language, though it doesn't play as major a role as people like to think.
Do you have some stats to back up your argument that people are choosing these options in greater volumes than some earlier period?
I used to drive 45 minutes to work, as did practically everyone in the area that I was from. Dinner I cook, but then, I don't think that most people ever made McDonalds their primary source of dinner-food. I see plenty of TV dinners at work, and most people do not pick their fruit from their own tree.
Actually, if you've done your job right, you end up with a substance less radioactive than it was when you pulled it out of the ground.
See, you run it through the reactor, then reprocess it, then run it through the reactor again. After that second run through th reactor, it's less radioactive than when you pulled it out of the ground.
Not that swimming pool storage is that bad either. You stick it in, an underwater (your water, in a swimming pool like structure) storage facility where it doesn't come out again, unlike most of the alternatives that dump stuff into the air or water.
The year was 2000, so good texts on SQL 99 were hard to come by. MySQL wouldn't honor referential integrity constraints, so it's output was just wrong, no matter how you sliced it. We were using Oracle.
Simply put, the Oracle syntax was 100% different for certain things. Tools and what not aside, if you put SQL 99 code into Oracle, I think that it would work (but don't remember so clearly on that point), but Oracle PL/SQL for triggers, stored procedures, and functions? It's nothing like SQL 99.
MS Visual Studio isn't THAT bad. I dislike how the directory structure that you browse in the code browser isn't reflective of the directory structure on disk, and other unpleasant surprises that one encounters while compiling.
On the Oracle front again, though, folks at my old company wanted to use Java stored procedures in a project that we were working on. We did it, it was fine. Of course, the version of Java that was supported at the time was outdata, and one has to wonder... Perl embedded in Oracle (Oracle came with an interpreter) was the hot thing 5 years ago, now it's Java... Will it be Java 5 years from now? I have a feeling that writing code like that is like inviting a future developer to criticise the primitive tools you clacked together to produce your system.
Honestly, though, you'd expect more people here to have a real issue with software patents... which just goes to show you that most posters are just regurgitating what astroturfers tell them anyway.
I, for one, only put my Slashbot point of view in my blog. No no no, the editors don't tell me what to put in it. Rather, I copy from astroturfers here.
I for one, think that Wal*Mart is evil, as is Microsoft, people who are paid for a living, commercial software development, and software patents. Google is evil for raising the average salary of software engineers, and for stealing all of the good ones. How will my dogfood website ever get off the ground now?
Anyway, you can read all about it in my blog, which is NOT Technology Trends by Roland Piqpaille, because he is also evil, as is capitalism, and every American citizen, who are also bad people.
I for one will be boycotting every American business and product possible, from the comfort of my office in San Diego, with my Dell laptop and my Coca Cola, while posting on Slashdot, an American site....
You get the idea. These aren't my ideas, but, rather what the shills who post here sound like (you don't need corporate backing to be a shill or a sellout, but the benefits package is a lot better)
Thanks. I know. That was my point. Congratulations, you're an idiot who didn't manage to catch that, and you even pointed it out my posting in a forum about it.
As an undergraduate, I took a class taught on Oracle platform (it helps that the department got a hefty kickback from Oracle). I got sick for 2 weeks and studied out of a database text that was all about SQL '99. The prof smoked my grade for using SQL '99 syntax, despite, otherwise, getting the questions right.
What I mean is, why live for such comparisons? Does it have to be about beating Microsoft, or using them as a bar to jump over?
Even if it is, would you consider this an objective metric? Everybody knows that the kloc is, at best, an informal estimate of effort. Perhaps the Microsoft code does in 5 lines what the Open Source code does in 150. There are no bugs in those 5 lines, but 5 in the 150. The 150 line implementation implements an algorithm that runs in poly time, but the 5 lines run in exponential, what's the better code?
If you were really pro open source, rather than anti-Microsoft, you'd probably not care.
Seriously, the "at least it's not Microsoft" argument shouldn't impress anybody. The desire to put out a superior product, period, should be motivation enough to undertake something along these lines.
Slashdot Mirror
They can be reused because they are more radioactive is the point.
If you refine the spent fuel rods, you can get this material out and make more fuel rods. The materials you speak of also have shorter half-lives, and so are practically dead by the time you're done.
Sure, but even unattractive people manage to pair off and have kids, and nobody in the US is going to tell them "you have to stop at 2."
Yes, certainly. I elaborated on these in a blog posting, but, well, this was really sufficient for what I had intended to say here. If you choose to have a bunch of kids, you're going to have a bigger impact on the gene pool. It almost goes without saying.
Since most people seem to have their 2.5 and pack it in as far as child rearing is concerned, these folks are in the minority, don't you think? Those having 3 having a bigger influence, the real studs with 100 kids having a huge influence, and the ones who have no kids, having no influence.
Darwin Awards aside, what made people think that evolution stopped with the modern era?
Applying natural selection as a template, lets look at what it really is. Natural selection is the phenomena of being removed from the gene pool prior to reproduction. Anything else that happens will allow your genes to carry on, which is how evolution works. People probably assumed that evolution stopped because they assume that most people manage to successfully reproduce prior to their death.
Ask developers at Microsoft if they developed Vista in 100% C# before taking that perspective young man, you might be surprised at the response that you get.
That debate only really seems at all applicable in Windows, however, I should point out that those languages are very different animals. C++ is not only syntactically different, and semantically different, but its capabilities are actually different. C++ has no garbage collector, C# does, for instance, unless you're talking about managed C++, and things of that nature.
See... it's not JUST language, though it doesn't play as major a role as people like to think.
http://www.ledwatches.net/photo-pages/elektronika5 .htm
This one?
I'll be looking for them >=)
Do you have some stats to back up your argument that people are choosing these options in greater volumes than some earlier period?
I used to drive 45 minutes to work, as did practically everyone in the area that I was from. Dinner I cook, but then, I don't think that most people ever made McDonalds their primary source of dinner-food. I see plenty of TV dinners at work, and most people do not pick their fruit from their own tree.
http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/progress/nuclea r-faq.html
Actually, if you've done your job right, you end up with a substance less radioactive than it was when you pulled it out of the ground.
See, you run it through the reactor, then reprocess it, then run it through the reactor again. After that second run through th reactor, it's less radioactive than when you pulled it out of the ground.
Not that swimming pool storage is that bad either. You stick it in, an underwater (your water, in a swimming pool like structure) storage facility where it doesn't come out again, unlike most of the alternatives that dump stuff into the air or water.
You're absolutely right.
People love those sorts of lifestyle changes that represent a reduction in lifestyle.
The article doesn't say what doubling is.
If Great Britain only has 1 plant, then I severely doubt that it would make a dent.
Ahh, see, here's the catch.
The year was 2000, so good texts on SQL 99 were hard to come by. MySQL wouldn't honor referential integrity constraints, so it's output was just wrong, no matter how you sliced it. We were using Oracle.
Simply put, the Oracle syntax was 100% different for certain things. Tools and what not aside, if you put SQL 99 code into Oracle, I think that it would work (but don't remember so clearly on that point), but Oracle PL/SQL for triggers, stored procedures, and functions? It's nothing like SQL 99.
MS Visual Studio isn't THAT bad. I dislike how the directory structure that you browse in the code browser isn't reflective of the directory structure on disk, and other unpleasant surprises that one encounters while compiling.
On the Oracle front again, though, folks at my old company wanted to use Java stored procedures in a project that we were working on. We did it, it was fine. Of course, the version of Java that was supported at the time was outdata, and one has to wonder... Perl embedded in Oracle (Oracle came with an interpreter) was the hot thing 5 years ago, now it's Java... Will it be Java 5 years from now? I have a feeling that writing code like that is like inviting a future developer to criticise the primitive tools you clacked together to produce your system.
VB gives me a headache just to look at. I can't imagine anybody's learning anything valuable.
Just 74 people watched Thom's first concert on February 24th. The concert on March 2nd drew 62,138 viewers.
I guess that, at that rate, I won't be saying "who?" in a week or 2.
Honestly, though, you'd expect more people here to have a real issue with software patents... which just goes to show you that most posters are just regurgitating what astroturfers tell them anyway.
I, for one, only put my Slashbot point of view in my blog. No no no, the editors don't tell me what to put in it. Rather, I copy from astroturfers here.
...
I for one, think that Wal*Mart is evil, as is Microsoft, people who are paid for a living, commercial software development, and software patents. Google is evil for raising the average salary of software engineers, and for stealing all of the good ones. How will my dogfood website ever get off the ground now?
Anyway, you can read all about it in my blog, which is NOT Technology Trends by Roland Piqpaille, because he is also evil, as is capitalism, and every American citizen, who are also bad people.
I for one will be boycotting every American business and product possible, from the comfort of my office in San Diego, with my Dell laptop and my Coca Cola, while posting on Slashdot, an American site.
You get the idea. These aren't my ideas, but, rather what the shills who post here sound like (you don't need corporate backing to be a shill or a sellout, but the benefits package is a lot better)
The point was that errors per KLOC is a rather naive measure of success to begin with, just as KLOCs are a poor measure of output to begin with.
Next time you decide to call me an idiot, say something smart.
Thanks. I know. That was my point. Congratulations, you're an idiot who didn't manage to catch that, and you even pointed it out my posting in a forum about it.
OK. I'll go enjoy their services, and you can go uhmm, not enjoy them.
Exactly. I didn't sign up to go to a trade school. I signed up to learn CS.
That's nothing.
As an undergraduate, I took a class taught on Oracle platform (it helps that the department got a hefty kickback from Oracle). I got sick for 2 weeks and studied out of a database text that was all about SQL '99. The prof smoked my grade for using SQL '99 syntax, despite, otherwise, getting the questions right.
What I mean is, why live for such comparisons? Does it have to be about beating Microsoft, or using them as a bar to jump over?
Even if it is, would you consider this an objective metric? Everybody knows that the kloc is, at best, an informal estimate of effort. Perhaps the Microsoft code does in 5 lines what the Open Source code does in 150. There are no bugs in those 5 lines, but 5 in the 150. The 150 line implementation implements an algorithm that runs in poly time, but the 5 lines run in exponential, what's the better code?
If you were really pro open source, rather than anti-Microsoft, you'd probably not care.
Seriously, the "at least it's not Microsoft" argument shouldn't impress anybody. The desire to put out a superior product, period, should be motivation enough to undertake something along these lines.