It's not. Ingested Tritium poses a health hazard, but it almost certainly NOT lethal. It would take constant exposure to high levels of Tritium to cause your risk of cancer to jump up significantly.
it is also very difficult to contain
Your logic is illogical. If tritium is lethal, it's also difficult to contain? Why? Tritium is very easy to contain. Millions of watches, keychains, and scopes are doing it as we speak. No neighborhoods destroyed that I'm aware of. (For that matter, not even an unshielded reactor in your back yard is likely to kill the entire neighborhood!)
I'd like to see you use one in your iPod
I would not only love to, but I've been one of those people who has been trying to figure out how to make it happen for a year or two now.
Like most people on this forum you are inexplicably eager to lap up and vehemently defend the pseudo-scientific bilge that Cowboyneal can dish up.
No idea what you're talking about. But you obviously have been lapping up bullshit from Ralph Nadar and Greenpeace. Sorry dude, you lose.
Tritium "Duracells" are right up there with other slashdot favorites like the space elevator, and cold fusion.
Really? So you're telling me that the ones we sent up on the Apollo missions don't exist? Or the ones sent up on Cassini? Or the hundreds of them that Russia has laying around? Good God, you are acting stupid. Get educated, will you?
Ok, so the Tritium floats away harmlessly. I'm with you so far.
and killing the entire neighborhood.
Excuse me? Killing the entire neighborhood? The 10 year old and what army? If you think Tritium is enough to kill an entire neighborhood, then I've got a truckload of bananas that are going to destroy the ENTIRE WORLD! (MWHAHAHAHA!!!)
Dude. Seriously. You need to edumacated on the dangers (or lack thereof) of Beta Radiation.
Well yes, but most people don't realize that "meltdown" actually just means that the materials melt. Nothing to do with anything dangerous. (Some reactors normally run in a melted state.)
What most people are referring to when they speak of a "reactor melting down" is a prompt critical reaction whereby the nuclear materials are fissioning in a self-sustained fashion. (As opposed to the controlled use of delayed neutrons, as a nuclear scientist pointed out in another response.)
The problem with that situation is that the reactor could easily run out of control and fail to scram. Thankfully, most modern reactor designs are specifically made to make this situation near impossible. (A bit like bulkheads being magnetically held open instead of magnetically close, the reactors are designed to auto-scram if something goes horribly wrong.)
Meltdowns and prompt-criticality have nothing to do with each other.
Except for the fact that a prompt-critical reaction is usually the cause of a meltdown situation. (Unless your reactor normally runs in a melted state, that is.)
You really haven't said anything I don't know. All I was doing was translating what a regular guy thinks of as a "meltdown" into what it actually is. Using the term "meltdown" is just plain wrong because a radioactive battery *can* meltdown. All it needs to do is... well... melt. It's still not any more dangerous than it was before. (Unless it starts melting through things, that is. In which case its temperature make it dangerous.)
Honestly, I've talked with Nuclear Scientists a plenty. I'm just trying to help out people with no clue.
(And truthfully, I can't win one way or another. Every time I try to explain to a non-nuclear scientist the actual situation, a nuclear scientist has to come around and misinterpret things all over the place. I understand you guys get beat up a lot by the general public, but yeash! Lighten up!:-))
No. Excess energy would have to be expended in some form or another. Perhaps a small motor would be installed into the battery, and the power diverted there in case of a surplus.
If not, a laptop seems a poor use, but a tiny one might be great for cellphones.
Cellphones have always been the place that I have suggested the first batteries be made for. Besides lower power requirements, people have far more trouble keeping them sufficiently charged. But once that's tackled, there's no reason not to power laptops. Especially since many modern laptops (e.g. Macintoshes) rarely get turned off. (In the case of Macs, you just close the lid and the laptop goes to sleep. A pulsating LED on the front tells you it's state.)
Plutonium is chemically toxic in sufficient quantities. However, at those quantities, the material would be so hot (as in temperature wise) from the radiation, that it would burn a hole through just about anything. The bright side is that you could use it to boil water in seconds!;-)
Thanks for reminding me about cuts in the skin. That is probably the *most* dangerous vector for plutonium to enter the body, since you could potentially get it under your skin. As I said about digestion, they still warn about it but evidence suggests that it's mostly a non-issue. Here's a link for you.
Yeah, I noticed that after I posted. Most of what I said still applies to betavoltaics (it takes a LOT of beta radiation to cause what are effectively electrical burns on the skin) with the exception of the inhalation. It's far easier to inhale Tritium gas because it's light enough to float. Note that it's so light that it usually evacuates the area before you can inhale it, so it's less of a concern. Also, it's far less likely that such a light particle will get lodged in the lungs. You'd probably just exhale it and be none the worse for the wear.
Another bright side is that ingestion is *very* difficult with Tritium due to its gaseous nature. You'd have to swallow the entire container AND the container would have to be ingestable (which is doubtful). It's worth nothing that Tritium is already used in watches and scopes to provide always-on phosphorescent lighting, so there's little to no concern about introducing a new form of radioactive consumer products.
anyone else like me fear having anything nuclear in my lap?
You know, I used to worry about it just a little. Thanks to all the propaganda, there was always that nagging concern "What if I get cancer?" But now I'd be perfectly comfortable standing next to a nuclear power plant.
Why, you ask? Because I learned a lot more about radiation and eventually learned that it's not as dangerous as it's made out to be. You see, your body is fending off radiation from everything from bananas, to radon gas that you inhale, to Uranium scattered throughout your back yard, to cosmic rays that come screaming in from space with far more energy than anything naturally occuring here on earth.
Basically, it's a normal risk of living and we deal with it every day. Our bodies are quite well adapted to radiation. (In some cases, people exposed to higher levels of background radiation seem to live *longer*!) Most of the "instant death" or "cancer within months" scenarios involve being swamped with unnaturally high levels of radioactivity. Particularly rays higher in penetration power such as Gamma and X-Rays.
Trust me, a battery that uses Alpha or Beta rays is really nothing to worry about. The radiation can't even penetrate your skin!
They're probably pretty close to indestructable, so I wouldn't worry too much about idiots. Even if they do manage to penetrate the outer shell, the materials will probably be of a "safer" radioactive type such as an Alpha Emitter. Alpha rays are generally not dangerous as they easily bounce off the outer skin.
The primary safety hazard is actually the inhalation of an Alpha Emitter. Once inside the soft tissues of the lungs, the emitter increases the risk of broken DNA strands, thus leading to cancer. Note that this is a worst case scenario. Most Alpha Emitters are far too heavy to float in the air, and far too strong to be easily pulverized into pieces small enough to float.
Note that evidence suggests that the other concern, indigestion, is a non-issue. In all documented cases where Plutonium (a common alpha emitter) was accidently ingested, it was found to pass through the digestive tract without issue. Radiation was not an issue due to the general thickness of the digestive system.
Compare this to the safety hazards of Alkaline and other battery technologies. These technologies can easily poison water wells, are quite dangerous if ingested, have the potential to explode, and can cause serious burns when in contact with the skin.
I realize you're joking, but just for the record these *can't* go into a "meltdown" state (what is technically termed a prompt critical reaction). Unlike nucelar reactors which function via nuclear fission, these batteries function by capturing the rays from radioactive materials and converting them into energy. The side effect of this is that these batteries tend to be inherently safe because they can't explode and they produce almost no extra radiation (because they're using the radioactivity directly as a power source).
The biggest concern with batteries such as this is actually cost. Radioactive materials are controlled by the government (although anyone with a license can obtain some through various online webstores) and thus have experienced little competition overall. As a result, prices have stayed high.
As I've said before, one solution to this problem is to lease the battery instead of selling it outright. Given its ten year lifespan, the costs can be spread out over that time. When the battery is exhausted, the manufacturer can then reuse the remaining materials in a new battery, thus slowly driving down the prices.
"Contrary to common wisdom, an informal exchange of promises can still be binding and legally as valid as a written contract. A spoken contract is often called an "oral contract", not a "verbal contract." A verbal contract is simply a contract that uses words. All oral contracts and written contracts are verbal contracts. Contracts that are created without the use of words are called "non-verbal, non-oral contracts" or "a contract implied by the acts of the parties."
As a licensing representative for Sun, that person is acting with the company's knowledge and permission to assist customers in resolving licensing questions. Even if Sun later decides that a mistake was made, their only course of action is to politely ask you to cease your activities. (Judges often won't even hear contract cases until after the parties have attempted to come to a resolution on their own.)
Of course, this is only an explanation as passed to me from lawyers, I am not a licensed lawyer and this is not legal advice. Blah, blah, blah. (Sorry, by law I have to say that. Giving unlicensed legal advice can be grounds for a suit in of itself.)
Get em to put it in writing and I'd be happy to add it.
The license may well say that, however the last time I checked the open source Java implementations would not accept code contributions from developers who did not assert that they had never viewed Sun's code.
Time to reevaluate. The old license (SCSL) had some confusing wording in that respect. Sun actually *gasp* listened to people (including the whining OSS fanatics who think Sun should turn over everything to them) and made an explicit exclusion to the license to prevent the "tainting" issue.
Oh, for crying out loud! You're reading far too much into that license. Yes, Mozilla with Java is an acceptable "bundle." As for "supercede", Sun is referring to components replacing their own components. i.e. As long as GCJ and Classpath are separate programs on the system, there's no concern. If they overwrite any files in the JDK/JRE, THEN there's a concern.
Tell you what, I'll help you out here. On this webpage is a phone number you can call to resolve licensing issues with Sun. You'll want to record the data/time of the phone call, as well as the representative's name. Ask them about any licensing concerns. Note that since you're speaking with an authorized representative, anything they say is legally binding. (see: Verbal Contract)
*If* you are too chicken to take this step, I'll happily help you out. Give me the authority to contact Sun on the behalf of the White Box Linux Project, and I'll see if I can clarify the issue for you. How about it?
If it should be done via plugins, then why isn't sun doing it as a plugin?
It IS being done as a plugin. An OpenOffice plugin architecture. That's what those files are, and there's no one stopping other JVMs from doing their plugins.
If this interface is something that doesn't have a standard and needs one, then why not add it to the standard?
This is a trickier question. Sun/Netscape/Mozilla publish a specification for web browsers entitled "Open JVM Integration (OJI)". Sun also publishes the JAWT standard for Java/JNI/Native integration. What you see here is the issue that a new type of plugin exists: an OpenOffice plugin.
Now Sun provides the code to make the Java Plugin work in IE and Netscape, so they're also providing the code to make the JVM Plugin work in OpenOffice. And just as it's the responsbility of the Kaffe or GCJ project to produce a plugin for IE and Netscape, it's also their responsiblity to provide a plugin to OpenOffice. If anything should be done about the situation, it's to move those files out of OpenOffice and put them in the JVM. The only difference would be that having them in OpenOffice allows any version of the JVM to be plugged in as is.
To be specific, we're referring to files like WEmbeddedFrame which takes a hWindow from a Windows program and wraps it. You'll see the same code in other Sun and non-Sun projects such as JOGL and GL4Java.
Allow me to reiterate until it sinks in: There's no "secret" APIs being used here! This is just JVM plugin code that has nothing to do with OpenOffice! Kaffe and GCJ are free to provide their own plugin code! Are we clear yet?
Repeat after me, JAVA is not Free Software. JAVA is not Open Source. JAVA is not OOo licensed software. if OOo depends on JAVA it is useless except possibly as a way to haggle lower prices on Office site licenses.
Repeat after me, "This is called brainwashing." Especially when you're brainwashing people with lies, damn lies, and absolute untruths. (See my other response to you.)
Stuff like this is why I called the entire lot of you assholes. You're foaming at the mouth, spreading lies like rabies, looking for the next victim to bite. Stop it!
BUT, you can redistribute the existing Linux binaries.
They can't examine it
Can too.
they can't learn from it,
Can too.
they can't change it.
Can too.
The only Linux distros who include it are commercial ones because a free distro is forbidden from it even if they aren't opposed to including un-free binaries.
Bullshit. The Linux distros have been free to include the JRE and JDK for a very long time. They usually give some BS about it "not being Free as in Libre" or somesuch. Are you one of those distro maintainers who's spouting this bullshit?
Once OOo depends on Java it can no longer be freely distributed.
1. It already does, always has. 2. Can too.
You sir, are either amazingly clueless or brainwashed by the OSS fanatics. Allow me to present Sun's open Java development model which allows people to download and develop Java under the Java Research License. Also allow me to introduce you to Sun's position on redistributing the JRE and the rules for JDK redistribution. The long and short of it is, "Feel free to redistribute it with your software. Here is a list of files you can leave out. Here is a list of JDK files that can be bundled with the JRE instead."
OOo is clearly intended to be a Trojan Horse designed to force JAVA dependence.
The only trojan horse around here are the assholes of the Open Source community (apparently like yourself) who would rather spread diseased lies than try to work through the issues to find what's really true.
And in case you're wondering, YES. I'm hopping mad at you people!
What? Are you praticing to be thick or something?!
We're talking about the bridge between native windows (MFC/X11/Carbon) and Java AWT here. This bridge has no standard and has traditionally been handled by providing browser specific plugins. In this case, OpenOffice has abstracted away their own Java Plugin design using the EmbeddedWindow class in the JVM. However, other JVM are free to provide their own plugins. There are no fucking hidden APIs in use that are preventing an OSS JVM from being used. Are we clear now?
Viewed from this perspective of workers' rights, I think the idea that H-1Bs are "bad for the economy" is a bit of a distraction, though yes, you could probably phrase it in these terms.
It's hardly a "distraction". If it's bad for the economy, it means that *everyone* will suffer. Not just native or foreign workers. If it's *good* for the economy, then *everyone* will gain.
Please, encourage your kids to come to Berkeley. I for one try not to turn out "degreed idiots".
Berkley is one of the better schools. But I probably will be encouraging my kids to think about if they even want to go to college or not. If they don't really know what they want to do in life, then it's a waste of time and money to spend in college getting a useless degree. If they instead spend a little time doing other things in life, they can then decide if they want to go to college at a later point. And if they do, they'll be excellent students because they know they want to be there.:-)
To use two examples from your post: The fact that local, qualified workers exist is not a huge issue to me. The fact that the foreign workers aren't getting the same rights as the local workers (such as free movement from employer to employer) is an issue.
Ah, but the two issues are tied. The purpose of an H1-B is to allow a worker into the country who needs to be here. e.g. Let's say I need a nuclear scientist from CERN to spend time working at Fermi to assist with the improvement in anti-matter production. There's little to no concern about abuses of the employee because he's only here temporarily and he's free to go home if his employer abuses him. That would leave the employer in the lurch, not the employee.
Compare that to a company who illegally hires from an underpriviledged country. The employee is then trapped because he needs the money (even an entry level US salary is riches in India), the employer can threaten to replace him at any time (effectively holding it over his head as "You fail, and we send you back!"), and he can't switch jobs (H1-Bs are per employer). Thus the employee is abused on one hand, and an artifcial economic hole is created on the other. Both are very, very bad.
What the employee should be doing is obtaining resident status in the US, which would allow him to work for *anyone*, and give him many of the same freedoms as a US citizen. That includes demanding the same treatment as a citizen on the threat of walking. Since he has many of the same freedoms, he can then compete for a different job. And the bright side for both employee and employer is that the employee can offer to undercut US help without damaging the economy. Rather, if his undercut is valuable it means that the job in question may be overpaid and need adjustment. Other employees might not be happy about it (e.g. your Irish Union examples), but they have to live with it.
Good question: how can we build a dialogue with these workers, to create global standards and rights? Bad question: how can we stop low-skilled hacks stealing our jobs?
Better question, how can we establish a dialog with employers who are running their businesses into the ground by using the "magical cost cutting sword?" The current problem is not an "us (American Employees) vs. them (foreign help)" situation. It's a matter of companies destroying themselves and hurting everyone else in the process. And that's despite the fact that there's mounting evidence that this will happen.
I propose that Java n'est pas libre. Please explain how your argument that Java est gratuit contradicts that.
1. I have the liberty to download Java at no cost. 2. I have the liberty to redistribute Java with any program I make. 3. I have the liberty to download and view the source code. 4. I have the liberty to retain the ideas I learn from the source code. 5. I have the liberty to reimplement the Java Virtual Machine as I see fit. 6. I have the liberty to share anything I learn from the Java Virtual Machine with others. 7. I have the liberty to use the Java Virtual Machine for any purpose I see fit. 8. I have the liberty to compile my own, custom, JVM based on Sun's source code. 9. I have the liberty to redistribute my custom JVM to research associates. 10. I have the liberty to redistribute the custom JVM inside my company.
So on and so forth. What I DON'T have the liberty of doing is:
1. I don't have the liberty of forking Sun's codebase. 2. I don't have the liberty of redistributing custom binaries to the world. 3. I don't have the liberty of giving the source code to someone who has not entered in a license agreement with Sun. 4. I don't have the liberty of calling my Virtual Machine "Java" without Sun's permission.
You say that further economic crashes are likely due to "these systems", which is fair enough, but you're fixated on this one aspect of the system that concerns your nationality and the sanctity of your borders.
That's where you're confused. I love immigrants. I even married one. Not to mention the Pakistani fellow I championed in my company after I interviewed him. Or a young Indian lady at a previous job who I told my boss was one of our best assets. Or a Chinese fellow I recommended for hire after realizing that he had amazing potential. (I also recommended a French fellow there, but due to his personal issues he didn't work out.) Go ahead, tell me I'm racist and that I hate immigrants. You could, but it would be a lie. What you're doing is a classic example of "projecting" what you want to see on someone.
The real problem is that the H1-Bs and outsourcing are symptoms of a bigger problem that's detrimental for both immigrants and non-immigrants alike. That's why I pointed out in my original post that the author did not blame the H1-B or outsourced workers. They're people just trying to make it in this world, not villians.
The symptoms themselves are obvious. In the case of H1-Bs, workers are often placed in situations for which local workers *do* exist. Companies get around the illegalness of this practice by crafting resumes to meet only the skills of the H1-B they want to hire. Then they pay the H1-B less than he's worth by claiming a lower skillset, and work him longer hours because he can't switch jobs. This is cruel to the H1-B worker, and is an abuse of a system designed for international cooperation. Not to mention the fact that companies are losing customers with disposable income by failing to support the economy! (See: Prisoner's Dillema)
Of course, they can't quite abuse that enough. The workers are cheaper, but not cheap enough for true empire building. The trick then is to "outsource" or "offshore" the work. Since in empire building only body count matters, they replace a more expensive worker who can do the job with five workers who are inexperienced and half a world away. Do well trained, intelligent offshore workers exist? Certainly! But you can't tell me that in a city with more tech workers than Silicon Valley *ever* had (Bangalore) ALL of them are highly trained and experienced workers? In the tech boom, we saw 70-80% of tech workers being new people who entered the field for money. Tell me that's not happening here and is not hurting the economy?
And then there's the education system. It's been corrupted for a long time. The original purpose of higher education was to provide resources to those who wanted to learn. No one forced you to get through it. But now schools are doing nothing but churning out degreed idiots which companies swear up and down they "need". Then they sell it to the students as a good thing because "they'll have a job as soon as they leave college." What they're not being told is that their education hasn't been future proofed, and the "current" stuff they learned will be outdated within a few years. Since they didn't truely get their basics in, they'll be completely non-competitive in future markets.
If we trace back the roots, we can find that all of this started around the tech boom. As techies became a bit more scarce, managers noted that they could replace older, more experienced, but expensive employees with two or more juniors. Using faulty logic, they were then able to convince people that more juniors == more work == better deal. But that's just crazy talk when you realize that differences in programming time between a junior and senior can be as high as a jump from two weeks for a task to two months! Even worse, an experienced employee is going to try to ease his future workload by utilizing good practices, while juniors will waste time maintaining their old crap because they didn't have the expertise to know better!
Now do you want to tell me that this picture is all rosy? Or are you willing to open your eyes and note that there may be issues here?
Slashdot Mirror
And if you RTFReplies, you would have noticed that this was already pointed out and corrected. So, are we even then? :-P
If ingested Tritium is lethal,
It's not. Ingested Tritium poses a health hazard, but it almost certainly NOT lethal. It would take constant exposure to high levels of Tritium to cause your risk of cancer to jump up significantly.
it is also very difficult to contain
Your logic is illogical. If tritium is lethal, it's also difficult to contain? Why? Tritium is very easy to contain. Millions of watches, keychains, and scopes are doing it as we speak. No neighborhoods destroyed that I'm aware of. (For that matter, not even an unshielded reactor in your back yard is likely to kill the entire neighborhood!)
I'd like to see you use one in your iPod
I would not only love to, but I've been one of those people who has been trying to figure out how to make it happen for a year or two now.
Like most people on this forum you are inexplicably eager to lap up and vehemently defend the pseudo-scientific bilge that Cowboyneal can dish up.
No idea what you're talking about. But you obviously have been lapping up bullshit from Ralph Nadar and Greenpeace. Sorry dude, you lose.
Tritium "Duracells" are right up there with other slashdot favorites like the space elevator, and cold fusion.
Really? So you're telling me that the ones we sent up on the Apollo missions don't exist? Or the ones sent up on Cassini? Or the hundreds of them that Russia has laying around? Good God, you are acting stupid. Get educated, will you?
Just how many wannabe X-Men are out there?
:-)
About 40. Let's just say that in WWII Plutonium was a rather new thing.
Linky.
So what your saying is that I shouldn't make a bong out of it?
Ummm... yes?
Imagine a 10 year old breaking open a battery
Ok, so the Tritium floats away harmlessly. I'm with you so far.
and killing the entire neighborhood.
Excuse me? Killing the entire neighborhood? The 10 year old and what army? If you think Tritium is enough to kill an entire neighborhood, then I've got a truckload of bananas that are going to destroy the ENTIRE WORLD! (MWHAHAHAHA!!!)
Dude. Seriously. You need to edumacated on the dangers (or lack thereof) of Beta Radiation.
Well yes, but most people don't realize that "meltdown" actually just means that the materials melt. Nothing to do with anything dangerous. (Some reactors normally run in a melted state.)
What most people are referring to when they speak of a "reactor melting down" is a prompt critical reaction whereby the nuclear materials are fissioning in a self-sustained fashion. (As opposed to the controlled use of delayed neutrons, as a nuclear scientist pointed out in another response.)
The problem with that situation is that the reactor could easily run out of control and fail to scram. Thankfully, most modern reactor designs are specifically made to make this situation near impossible. (A bit like bulkheads being magnetically held open instead of magnetically close, the reactors are designed to auto-scram if something goes horribly wrong.)
Meltdowns and prompt-criticality have nothing to do with each other.
:-))
Except for the fact that a prompt-critical reaction is usually the cause of a meltdown situation. (Unless your reactor normally runs in a melted state, that is.)
You really haven't said anything I don't know. All I was doing was translating what a regular guy thinks of as a "meltdown" into what it actually is. Using the term "meltdown" is just plain wrong because a radioactive battery *can* meltdown. All it needs to do is... well... melt. It's still not any more dangerous than it was before. (Unless it starts melting through things, that is. In which case its temperature make it dangerous.)
Honestly, I've talked with Nuclear Scientists a plenty. I'm just trying to help out people with no clue.
(And truthfully, I can't win one way or another. Every time I try to explain to a non-nuclear scientist the actual situation, a nuclear scientist has to come around and misinterpret things all over the place. I understand you guys get beat up a lot by the general public, but yeash! Lighten up!
Could a battery such as this be turned off?
No. Excess energy would have to be expended in some form or another. Perhaps a small motor would be installed into the battery, and the power diverted there in case of a surplus.
If not, a laptop seems a poor use, but a tiny one might be great for cellphones.
Cellphones have always been the place that I have suggested the first batteries be made for. Besides lower power requirements, people have far more trouble keeping them sufficiently charged. But once that's tackled, there's no reason not to power laptops. Especially since many modern laptops (e.g. Macintoshes) rarely get turned off. (In the case of Macs, you just close the lid and the laptop goes to sleep. A pulsating LED on the front tells you it's state.)
Plutonium is in fact quite chemically poisonous.
;-)
Plutonium is chemically toxic in sufficient quantities. However, at those quantities, the material would be so hot (as in temperature wise) from the radiation, that it would burn a hole through just about anything. The bright side is that you could use it to boil water in seconds!
Thanks for reminding me about cuts in the skin. That is probably the *most* dangerous vector for plutonium to enter the body, since you could potentially get it under your skin. As I said about digestion, they still warn about it but evidence suggests that it's mostly a non-issue. Here's a link for you.
Yeah, I noticed that after I posted. Most of what I said still applies to betavoltaics (it takes a LOT of beta radiation to cause what are effectively electrical burns on the skin) with the exception of the inhalation. It's far easier to inhale Tritium gas because it's light enough to float. Note that it's so light that it usually evacuates the area before you can inhale it, so it's less of a concern. Also, it's far less likely that such a light particle will get lodged in the lungs. You'd probably just exhale it and be none the worse for the wear.
Another bright side is that ingestion is *very* difficult with Tritium due to its gaseous nature. You'd have to swallow the entire container AND the container would have to be ingestable (which is doubtful). It's worth nothing that Tritium is already used in watches and scopes to provide always-on phosphorescent lighting, so there's little to no concern about introducing a new form of radioactive consumer products.
anyone else like me fear having anything nuclear in my lap?
You know, I used to worry about it just a little. Thanks to all the propaganda, there was always that nagging concern "What if I get cancer?" But now I'd be perfectly comfortable standing next to a nuclear power plant.
Why, you ask? Because I learned a lot more about radiation and eventually learned that it's not as dangerous as it's made out to be. You see, your body is fending off radiation from everything from bananas, to radon gas that you inhale, to Uranium scattered throughout your back yard, to cosmic rays that come screaming in from space with far more energy than anything naturally occuring here on earth.
Basically, it's a normal risk of living and we deal with it every day. Our bodies are quite well adapted to radiation. (In some cases, people exposed to higher levels of background radiation seem to live *longer*!) Most of the "instant death" or "cancer within months" scenarios involve being swamped with unnaturally high levels of radioactivity. Particularly rays higher in penetration power such as Gamma and X-Rays.
Trust me, a battery that uses Alpha or Beta rays is really nothing to worry about. The radiation can't even penetrate your skin!
They're probably pretty close to indestructable, so I wouldn't worry too much about idiots. Even if they do manage to penetrate the outer shell, the materials will probably be of a "safer" radioactive type such as an Alpha Emitter. Alpha rays are generally not dangerous as they easily bounce off the outer skin.
The primary safety hazard is actually the inhalation of an Alpha Emitter. Once inside the soft tissues of the lungs, the emitter increases the risk of broken DNA strands, thus leading to cancer. Note that this is a worst case scenario. Most Alpha Emitters are far too heavy to float in the air, and far too strong to be easily pulverized into pieces small enough to float.
Note that evidence suggests that the other concern, indigestion, is a non-issue. In all documented cases where Plutonium (a common alpha emitter) was accidently ingested, it was found to pass through the digestive tract without issue. Radiation was not an issue due to the general thickness of the digestive system.
Compare this to the safety hazards of Alkaline and other battery technologies. These technologies can easily poison water wells, are quite dangerous if ingested, have the potential to explode, and can cause serious burns when in contact with the skin.
I realize you're joking, but just for the record these *can't* go into a "meltdown" state (what is technically termed a prompt critical reaction). Unlike nucelar reactors which function via nuclear fission, these batteries function by capturing the rays from radioactive materials and converting them into energy. The side effect of this is that these batteries tend to be inherently safe because they can't explode and they produce almost no extra radiation (because they're using the radioactivity directly as a power source).
The biggest concern with batteries such as this is actually cost. Radioactive materials are controlled by the government (although anyone with a license can obtain some through various online webstores) and thus have experienced little competition overall. As a result, prices have stayed high.
As I've said before, one solution to this problem is to lease the battery instead of selling it outright. Given its ten year lifespan, the costs can be spread out over that time. When the battery is exhausted, the manufacturer can then reuse the remaining materials in a new battery, thus slowly driving down the prices.
Basic contract law:
As a licensing representative for Sun, that person is acting with the company's knowledge and permission to assist customers in resolving licensing questions. Even if Sun later decides that a mistake was made, their only course of action is to politely ask you to cease your activities. (Judges often won't even hear contract cases until after the parties have attempted to come to a resolution on their own.)
Of course, this is only an explanation as passed to me from lawyers, I am not a licensed lawyer and this is not legal advice. Blah, blah, blah. (Sorry, by law I have to say that. Giving unlicensed legal advice can be grounds for a suit in of itself.)
Get em to put it in writing and I'd be happy to add it.
Don't mind if I do. Be back in a jif!
The license may well say that, however the last time I checked the open source Java implementations would not accept code contributions from developers who did not assert that they had never viewed Sun's code.
Time to reevaluate. The old license (SCSL) had some confusing wording in that respect. Sun actually *gasp* listened to people (including the whining OSS fanatics who think Sun should turn over everything to them) and made an explicit exclusion to the license to prevent the "tainting" issue.
Welcome to the modern world. Enjoy your stay.
Oh, for crying out loud! You're reading far too much into that license. Yes, Mozilla with Java is an acceptable "bundle." As for "supercede", Sun is referring to components replacing their own components. i.e. As long as GCJ and Classpath are separate programs on the system, there's no concern. If they overwrite any files in the JDK/JRE, THEN there's a concern.
Tell you what, I'll help you out here. On this webpage is a phone number you can call to resolve licensing issues with Sun. You'll want to record the data/time of the phone call, as well as the representative's name. Ask them about any licensing concerns. Note that since you're speaking with an authorized representative, anything they say is legally binding. (see: Verbal Contract)
*If* you are too chicken to take this step, I'll happily help you out. Give me the authority to contact Sun on the behalf of the White Box Linux Project, and I'll see if I can clarify the issue for you. How about it?
But given that Jedi can parry gunfire with their lightsabres (neat trick, that - how do you practice?
;-)
Little floating balls that zap you with light blaster charges. Often practiced blindfolded. (Feel the force Luke!) Yeash, even I knew that.
If it should be done via plugins, then why isn't sun doing it as a plugin?
It IS being done as a plugin. An OpenOffice plugin architecture. That's what those files are, and there's no one stopping other JVMs from doing their plugins.
If this interface is something that doesn't have a standard and needs one, then why not add it to the standard?
This is a trickier question. Sun/Netscape/Mozilla publish a specification for web browsers entitled "Open JVM Integration (OJI)". Sun also publishes the JAWT standard for Java/JNI/Native integration. What you see here is the issue that a new type of plugin exists: an OpenOffice plugin.
Now Sun provides the code to make the Java Plugin work in IE and Netscape, so they're also providing the code to make the JVM Plugin work in OpenOffice. And just as it's the responsbility of the Kaffe or GCJ project to produce a plugin for IE and Netscape, it's also their responsiblity to provide a plugin to OpenOffice. If anything should be done about the situation, it's to move those files out of OpenOffice and put them in the JVM. The only difference would be that having them in OpenOffice allows any version of the JVM to be plugged in as is.
To be specific, we're referring to files like WEmbeddedFrame which takes a hWindow from a Windows program and wraps it. You'll see the same code in other Sun and non-Sun projects such as JOGL and GL4Java.
Allow me to reiterate until it sinks in: There's no "secret" APIs being used here! This is just JVM plugin code that has nothing to do with OpenOffice! Kaffe and GCJ are free to provide their own plugin code! Are we clear yet?
Repeat after me, JAVA is not Free Software. JAVA is not Open Source. JAVA is not OOo licensed software. if OOo depends on JAVA it is useless except possibly as a way to haggle lower prices on Office site licenses.
Repeat after me, "This is called brainwashing." Especially when you're brainwashing people with lies, damn lies, and absolute untruths. (See my other response to you.)
Stuff like this is why I called the entire lot of you assholes. You're foaming at the mouth, spreading lies like rabies, looking for the next victim to bite. Stop it!
But what none of them can do is redistribute it.
BUT, you can redistribute the existing Linux binaries.
They can't examine it
Can too.
they can't learn from it,
Can too.
they can't change it.
Can too.
The only Linux distros who include it are commercial ones because a free distro is forbidden from it even if they aren't opposed to including un-free binaries.
Bullshit. The Linux distros have been free to include the JRE and JDK for a very long time. They usually give some BS about it "not being Free as in Libre" or somesuch. Are you one of those distro maintainers who's spouting this bullshit?
Once OOo depends on Java it can no longer be freely distributed.
1. It already does, always has.
2. Can too.
You sir, are either amazingly clueless or brainwashed by the OSS fanatics. Allow me to present Sun's open Java development model which allows people to download and develop Java under the Java Research License. Also allow me to introduce you to Sun's position on redistributing the JRE and the rules for JDK redistribution. The long and short of it is, "Feel free to redistribute it with your software. Here is a list of files you can leave out. Here is a list of JDK files that can be bundled with the JRE instead."
OOo is clearly intended to be a Trojan Horse designed to force JAVA dependence.
The only trojan horse around here are the assholes of the Open Source community (apparently like yourself) who would rather spread diseased lies than try to work through the issues to find what's really true.
And in case you're wondering, YES. I'm hopping mad at you people!
What? Are you praticing to be thick or something?!
We're talking about the bridge between native windows (MFC/X11/Carbon) and Java AWT here. This bridge has no standard and has traditionally been handled by providing browser specific plugins. In this case, OpenOffice has abstracted away their own Java Plugin design using the EmbeddedWindow class in the JVM. However, other JVM are free to provide their own plugins. There are no fucking hidden APIs in use that are preventing an OSS JVM from being used. Are we clear now?
Viewed from this perspective of workers' rights, I think the idea that H-1Bs are "bad for the economy" is a bit of a distraction, though yes, you could probably phrase it in these terms.
:-)
It's hardly a "distraction". If it's bad for the economy, it means that *everyone* will suffer. Not just native or foreign workers. If it's *good* for the economy, then *everyone* will gain.
Please, encourage your kids to come to Berkeley. I for one try not to turn out "degreed idiots".
Berkley is one of the better schools. But I probably will be encouraging my kids to think about if they even want to go to college or not. If they don't really know what they want to do in life, then it's a waste of time and money to spend in college getting a useless degree. If they instead spend a little time doing other things in life, they can then decide if they want to go to college at a later point. And if they do, they'll be excellent students because they know they want to be there.
To use two examples from your post: The fact that local, qualified workers exist is not a huge issue to me. The fact that the foreign workers aren't getting the same rights as the local workers (such as free movement from employer to employer) is an issue.
Ah, but the two issues are tied. The purpose of an H1-B is to allow a worker into the country who needs to be here. e.g. Let's say I need a nuclear scientist from CERN to spend time working at Fermi to assist with the improvement in anti-matter production. There's little to no concern about abuses of the employee because he's only here temporarily and he's free to go home if his employer abuses him. That would leave the employer in the lurch, not the employee.
Compare that to a company who illegally hires from an underpriviledged country. The employee is then trapped because he needs the money (even an entry level US salary is riches in India), the employer can threaten to replace him at any time (effectively holding it over his head as "You fail, and we send you back!"), and he can't switch jobs (H1-Bs are per employer). Thus the employee is abused on one hand, and an artifcial economic hole is created on the other. Both are very, very bad.
What the employee should be doing is obtaining resident status in the US, which would allow him to work for *anyone*, and give him many of the same freedoms as a US citizen. That includes demanding the same treatment as a citizen on the threat of walking. Since he has many of the same freedoms, he can then compete for a different job. And the bright side for both employee and employer is that the employee can offer to undercut US help without damaging the economy. Rather, if his undercut is valuable it means that the job in question may be overpaid and need adjustment. Other employees might not be happy about it (e.g. your Irish Union examples), but they have to live with it.
Good question: how can we build a dialogue with these workers, to create global standards and rights? Bad question: how can we stop low-skilled hacks stealing our jobs?
Better question, how can we establish a dialog with employers who are running their businesses into the ground by using the "magical cost cutting sword?" The current problem is not an "us (American Employees) vs. them (foreign help)" situation. It's a matter of companies destroying themselves and hurting everyone else in the process. And that's despite the fact that there's mounting evidence that this will happen.
Gotta go, More later...
as AKAImBatman seems to have suggested
Speak of the Devil...
I propose that Java n'est pas libre. Please explain how your argument that Java est gratuit contradicts that.
1. I have the liberty to download Java at no cost.
2. I have the liberty to redistribute Java with any program I make.
3. I have the liberty to download and view the source code.
4. I have the liberty to retain the ideas I learn from the source code.
5. I have the liberty to reimplement the Java Virtual Machine as I see fit.
6. I have the liberty to share anything I learn from the Java Virtual Machine with others.
7. I have the liberty to use the Java Virtual Machine for any purpose I see fit.
8. I have the liberty to compile my own, custom, JVM based on Sun's source code.
9. I have the liberty to redistribute my custom JVM to research associates.
10. I have the liberty to redistribute the custom JVM inside my company.
So on and so forth. What I DON'T have the liberty of doing is:
1. I don't have the liberty of forking Sun's codebase.
2. I don't have the liberty of redistributing custom binaries to the world.
3. I don't have the liberty of giving the source code to someone who has not entered in a license agreement with Sun.
4. I don't have the liberty of calling my Virtual Machine "Java" without Sun's permission.
Doesn't sound so bad to me. Go get some freedom, man.
You say that further economic crashes are likely due to "these systems", which is fair enough, but you're fixated on this one aspect of the system that concerns your nationality and the sanctity of your borders.
That's where you're confused. I love immigrants. I even married one. Not to mention the Pakistani fellow I championed in my company after I interviewed him. Or a young Indian lady at a previous job who I told my boss was one of our best assets. Or a Chinese fellow I recommended for hire after realizing that he had amazing potential. (I also recommended a French fellow there, but due to his personal issues he didn't work out.) Go ahead, tell me I'm racist and that I hate immigrants. You could, but it would be a lie. What you're doing is a classic example of "projecting" what you want to see on someone.
The real problem is that the H1-Bs and outsourcing are symptoms of a bigger problem that's detrimental for both immigrants and non-immigrants alike. That's why I pointed out in my original post that the author did not blame the H1-B or outsourced workers. They're people just trying to make it in this world, not villians.
The symptoms themselves are obvious. In the case of H1-Bs, workers are often placed in situations for which local workers *do* exist. Companies get around the illegalness of this practice by crafting resumes to meet only the skills of the H1-B they want to hire. Then they pay the H1-B less than he's worth by claiming a lower skillset, and work him longer hours because he can't switch jobs. This is cruel to the H1-B worker, and is an abuse of a system designed for international cooperation. Not to mention the fact that companies are losing customers with disposable income by failing to support the economy! (See: Prisoner's Dillema)
Of course, they can't quite abuse that enough. The workers are cheaper, but not cheap enough for true empire building. The trick then is to "outsource" or "offshore" the work. Since in empire building only body count matters, they replace a more expensive worker who can do the job with five workers who are inexperienced and half a world away. Do well trained, intelligent offshore workers exist? Certainly! But you can't tell me that in a city with more tech workers than Silicon Valley *ever* had (Bangalore) ALL of them are highly trained and experienced workers? In the tech boom, we saw 70-80% of tech workers being new people who entered the field for money. Tell me that's not happening here and is not hurting the economy?
And then there's the education system. It's been corrupted for a long time. The original purpose of higher education was to provide resources to those who wanted to learn. No one forced you to get through it. But now schools are doing nothing but churning out degreed idiots which companies swear up and down they "need". Then they sell it to the students as a good thing because "they'll have a job as soon as they leave college." What they're not being told is that their education hasn't been future proofed, and the "current" stuff they learned will be outdated within a few years. Since they didn't truely get their basics in, they'll be completely non-competitive in future markets.
If we trace back the roots, we can find that all of this started around the tech boom. As techies became a bit more scarce, managers noted that they could replace older, more experienced, but expensive employees with two or more juniors. Using faulty logic, they were then able to convince people that more juniors == more work == better deal. But that's just crazy talk when you realize that differences in programming time between a junior and senior can be as high as a jump from two weeks for a task to two months! Even worse, an experienced employee is going to try to ease his future workload by utilizing good practices, while juniors will waste time maintaining their old crap because they didn't have the expertise to know better!
Now do you want to tell me that this picture is all rosy? Or are you willing to open your eyes and note that there may be issues here?