Safe, sustainable and cost effective nuclear power is not only possible but should be our priority!
I'm not suggesting we not use Nuclear power more, we should, but I think there are limits to what Nuclear can do for us at this point. Electricity is not easily stored, in fact, it must be generated the instant it is used. Our electrical consumption varies a lot by the time of day, the season, and location. But Nuclear reactors are not easily throttled up and down on such short cycles. Usually it takes days to plan for and bring a nuclear plant from a low power output up to full power and days to efficiently throttle back down. During some phases of the fuel cycle (towards the end mostly) this is the most trouble and more than one reactor has been unexpectedly out of service for refueling due to throttling down to fast (as in a SCRAM event).
I bring this up to simply point out that you will still need fossil fueled plants to handle the peak loads, because nuclear plants have their limits.
By my reading of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methane_clathrate one can extract the gas by heating the stuff to a specific point at which point the ice melts. You can also lower the pressure enough and the methane will exit on its own. I'm guessing they will do a little bit of both, some fracking followed by pumping out the fluid. Then nature will take its course and gas will rise to the top. The trick will be trying to control the pressure in the well because I understand the liberation of the gas can happen quickly and be hard to stop at times.
Obviously even multimillion dollar vaults get penetrated from time to time.
I don't think your comparison is valid. What is inside (say money or gold) is desirable enough somebody will risk life and limb break in. Breaking into a Nuclear reactor containment structure, while possible, is not going to contain much in the way of desirable things to take and the risks to life will be pretty high. How many folks would want to break into one, hit their lifetime radiation exposure limits in seconds, and attempt to steal what's inside? And what will they get? Miles of radio active copper wire? Radiation sources which are extremely easy to track along with the people carrying them? My point is that nobody really wants to break into a containment structure, while a bank vault has stuff they want.
So the real question is how often will the containment structure be compromised though accidental means? So far, out of thousands of years worth of reactor operating experience, we've only seen two contaminant structure failures. One killed a handful of people (between 100 and 200) and released quite a bit of radiation in Russia and eastern Europe and was caused by a seriously stupid operational error compounded by a reactor design that was nearly as stupid. The two stupids added up to one big stupid mess. The second containment breach event was caused by an extraordinary natural disaster which was outside of the design limits coupled with some seriously poor contingency plans, but hasn't killed anybody. All in all this doesn't seem too bad of a record to me.
It's safer per operating hour than riding in an automobile, or going on a commercial fight.
Unless you have a large number of identical machines capable of PXE booting and the necessary network hardware to wire them all together, you are really just building a maintenance nightmare. It might be fun to play with a cluster, but you'd do better to buy a couple of machines with as many cores as you can. It will take less space, less power, less fumbling around with configurations, less time and likely be cheaper than trying to cram all the old stuff into some random rack space.
If you insist on doing this, I suggest the following. 1. Only use *identical* hardware. (Or at least hardware that can run on exactly the same kernel image, modules and configurations) with the maximum memory and fastest networks you can. 2. Make sure you have well engineered Power supplies and cooling. 3. PXE boot all but one machine and make sure your cluster "self configures" based on the hardware that shows up when you turn it on because you will always have something broken. 4. Don't use local storage for anything more than swap, everything comes over the network... 5. Use multiple network segments, split between storage network and operational network.
By the way... For the sake of any local radio operations, please make sure you don't just unpack all the hardware from it's cases and spread it out on the work bench. Older hardware can be really big RFI generators. Consider keeping it in a rack that offers at least some shielding.
And to my point.. IF one decides to go the armed conflict route, best to do it in such a way that it is over as soon as possible without drawing China into the mix. Of course that is easier said than done.
I wonder though, now that Un has unilaterally scrapped the agreement, could we not just say "Ok dude, your nuclear and rocket launching sites are now going to be turned into smoking rubble." Then send a few cruise missiles over to handle that in the middle of the night? I would expect him to try and cross the DMZ at that point, so we'd just defend South Korea and drive them back only far enough to take their capital.
I don't know.. The problems with this are many.. We'd have to be totally sure that China would sit on their hands so one would have to have an agreement with them in advance, which means they'd know in advance and you'd have to assume North Korea, and China would have to get something they want out of the deal. Hmmm... Interesting options though..
In the mean time, they have their fingers in their ears yelling "I CAN NOT HEAR YOU!" over and over. They are just throwing a fit because they don't like that the rest of the world (sans China in some ways) told them to stop being stupid by poking the bear, stop trying to build a nuclear weapon and long range rockets so we can let you play.
All we do now is sit back and ignore the provocation unless they actually do start shooting at which point we had better be ready. Any conflict needs to be two things: 1. Very quick, because if the Chinese get into this in a big way, it won't be good for either side. We also don't want the UN to start setting rules of engagement or something... 2. Lead to an unconditional surrender of North Korea so we don't have to wait another 50 years to do this all again.
Actually, all we need to do is ignore them... Unless, one really believes that it might be time to effect a bit of freedom in the northern part of Korea and deliver a whole population from starvation...
I don't disagree with you about the way software is licensed being distasteful, but it is what it is.
You are free to develop your own software and license it any way you choose, so you can change how things are done. Just write software that everybody wants and the world will be yours. Where I don't like how huge software companies license their wares, it is their software and they can license it any way they see fit, just like you can.
They say own it now which implies resale is allowed.
If you try (like on Ebay with Windows CDs) you get told no, it's licenced only. you do NOT own it.
Because that is the truth. You don't own a copy of it, you own a license to use it within the terms of the license agreement. Many license agreements these days do NOT allow the transfer to a third party. That E-Bay doesn't allow these kinds of items to be listed is basically because they don't want folks who don't know any better from being ripped off or sold licenses that cannot be transferred and then having to deal with all the customer complaints such sales would produce. Can't blame them.
If you need a copy of the install media for that original version of XP, then you should have kept a copy of it. By law it is fair use to copy install media, or keep backups of your computer that contains copies of your licensed software. So shame on you for not keeping a backup.
Yes, but you cannot instantly create 10 copies of a book, sell them to be used in 10 different locations. A physical book is it's own "copy protection" in that you cannot simply hit a button, duplicate it, then transfer the copy to somebody else to use.
It really IS the process that results in the textbook issues. Your example is not a good one, they do teach evolution in the public schools, dispute your representation otherwise.
There is no *credible* evidence that the nut jobs in NK can do more than set off a nuclear device built in a cave and sling a small object into low earth orbit. These things have been demonstrated. But putting the nuclear device on a rocket and sending the thing very far is *NOT* something they have demonstrated and is considerably more complex than what they've done so far.
Their rocket skills still have serious issues and have only succeeded in getting some useless space junk into low earth orbit, once, after multiple tries and failures. Who knows how large their ground based nuclear device is and how much it weighs, but it's unlikely to be anything small and light enough to mount on their rockets.
So we have some crazy guy trying to tell you he's fired his gun, knows how to load and aim it and won't hesitate to shoot you. Problem is you already know that he only has 2 rounds, both of which he already set off by pounding them with a hammer and the squirt gun he's holding is almost empty.
Funny part here is that about all we can do at this point is prohibit the sale of water to load his squirt gun because we've already banned everything else.
In 1836, having defeated Mexico's army, sent to rid the territory of white settlers on Mexico's land, Texas was an independent country. It is unknown if that status could have been maintained without help from the outside but it was largely accomplished without official help from the United States. Literally stuck between a rock and a hard place, facing war with Mexico and looking to solidify it's future freedom, Texas became part of the United States. Something that really ticked off Mexico at the time and was a primary cause of the Mexican American war.
The fact remains, Texas was independent country, albeit only for a decade. (1836 to about 1846)
You quote from a Texas document similar to ones adopted by Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Virgina written at the start of the Civil War. So this quote was NOT about Texas independence, but about the southern grievances that lead to the Civil war in 1861. This document was penned nearly 30 years after Texas won it's independence from Mexico by capturing Santa Anna and sending his army packing.
So, that quote doesn't have anything to do with Texas Independence, you Yankee carpet bagger..
An A/C that Hasn't been to Austin, I can tell. It's like a little chunk of California fell off in the middle of Texas with all that entails. Having lived in both, San Francisco has nothing on Austin.
The political process of approving text books for public schools in Texas leaves some things to be desired, but public schools in Texas are usually pretty good from what I've seen.
Point made, but don't miss my point. The Alamo happened only a few years before Texas entered the Union and the attitude that leads to men to actually DIE for the cause and not just write strong words pervades this state's culture and history. Texans fought for their independence from Mexico, just like the the colonies did from England, only we did it 75 years later. We entered the Union as the ONLY independent country and this independent spirit is alive and well here. Remember the Alamo means more than many know.
I've only had to hold my wife's hand though this pregnancy process, but I can tell you that mjr167 is totally correct. Modesty consists of a series of awkward positions with paper and thin sheets in the medical world and any mother who goes though that process *should* have the right to kill their teenager for being disrespectful. (OK.. At least she should have the right to *complain* about being disrespected... )
Those who look in from the outside have to look hard to find "issues" they can point to do disparage the State of Texas and the people who live within it's borders. If this is the best you can come up with to malign the state, move on along, nothing really to see here.
Texas isn't perfect, nobody who lives here will make that claim, but our conservative roots serve us well in both social and economic benefits that prove that conservationism is not automatically a bad thing.
Minimum wage in Texas goes farther than Minimum wage in New York. So what does your claim mean? Not much.. Children not insured? So are you then claiming they don't get the care they need for some reason? Again, what does this mean? Again Not much. Children in poverty? In relation to children living at the same income level in New York who's poorer then? But then *having* a job is better than not having work, even if it's minimum wage... At least it is in Texas it is. I'm not sure about the rest of the country.
"Victory or Death!" may sound silly to you, but the saying came from Texas just prior to March 6, 1863.
Actually, Texas has a higher standard for search and seizure protection and has for decades. Ask anyone who works in criminal defense (I used to there), the standard for criminal cases in Texas isn't the US Constitution, it is the Texas Constitution.
My point is that news about Texas usually illustrates just how stupid their government is. For once, they look progressive.
As opposed to looking like what? Liberals?
As stupid as the government of Texas may or may not be, seems that Texas is doing pretty well overall since 2008 by keeping Unemployment well under the national average and actually *growing* its economic activity along with its population. Texas has managed to keep its budget in relative balance though the whole downturn as well. This was done by being *conservative* in outlook and generally right of center Republican with active Tea Party involvement at all levels.
If you think this policy is "progressive" then I wonder if you will like it as much when I say it looks pretty darned conservative from the eyes of this Texan.
More to the point would be the windows blue screen from the Windows 98 based display host... Don't laugh, I've seen Windows 98 in "mission critical" parts of a national cellular system in a small country within the last 5 years.
There's something to be said for shooting a crazy guy waving a gun in your face, ya know?
There is also something to be said about realizing that the "gun" is made of plastic, has an orange tip and shoots only a stream of water dispute what the crazy waving it says.
NK is just engaging in it's standard procedure as we ramp up towards a serious discussion about it's latest nuclear test at the UN security council. They have a long history of making outlandish threats that over reach their actual capacity, used in a effort to push as far as they can in their favor, or at least that's how they see it. Personally, I believe that they would be much better served if they decided to "play ball" nicely with the rest of the world, but that would involve a dismantling of their power structure (or at least the risk of it) so the powers to be won't go there. It also might lead to an actual declaration of peace and the unification of Korea which would *surely* put the Kim's out of power and into prison in short order.
Slashdot Mirror
Safe, sustainable and cost effective nuclear power is not only possible but should be our priority!
I'm not suggesting we not use Nuclear power more, we should, but I think there are limits to what Nuclear can do for us at this point. Electricity is not easily stored, in fact, it must be generated the instant it is used. Our electrical consumption varies a lot by the time of day, the season, and location. But Nuclear reactors are not easily throttled up and down on such short cycles. Usually it takes days to plan for and bring a nuclear plant from a low power output up to full power and days to efficiently throttle back down. During some phases of the fuel cycle (towards the end mostly) this is the most trouble and more than one reactor has been unexpectedly out of service for refueling due to throttling down to fast (as in a SCRAM event).
I bring this up to simply point out that you will still need fossil fueled plants to handle the peak loads, because nuclear plants have their limits.
By my reading of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methane_clathrate one can extract the gas by heating the stuff to a specific point at which point the ice melts. You can also lower the pressure enough and the methane will exit on its own. I'm guessing they will do a little bit of both, some fracking followed by pumping out the fluid. Then nature will take its course and gas will rise to the top. The trick will be trying to control the pressure in the well because I understand the liberation of the gas can happen quickly and be hard to stop at times.
Obviously even multimillion dollar vaults get penetrated from time to time.
I don't think your comparison is valid. What is inside (say money or gold) is desirable enough somebody will risk life and limb break in. Breaking into a Nuclear reactor containment structure, while possible, is not going to contain much in the way of desirable things to take and the risks to life will be pretty high. How many folks would want to break into one, hit their lifetime radiation exposure limits in seconds, and attempt to steal what's inside? And what will they get? Miles of radio active copper wire? Radiation sources which are extremely easy to track along with the people carrying them? My point is that nobody really wants to break into a containment structure, while a bank vault has stuff they want.
So the real question is how often will the containment structure be compromised though accidental means? So far, out of thousands of years worth of reactor operating experience, we've only seen two contaminant structure failures. One killed a handful of people (between 100 and 200) and released quite a bit of radiation in Russia and eastern Europe and was caused by a seriously stupid operational error compounded by a reactor design that was nearly as stupid. The two stupids added up to one big stupid mess. The second containment breach event was caused by an extraordinary natural disaster which was outside of the design limits coupled with some seriously poor contingency plans, but hasn't killed anybody. All in all this doesn't seem too bad of a record to me.
It's safer per operating hour than riding in an automobile, or going on a commercial fight.
Unless you have a large number of identical machines capable of PXE booting and the necessary network hardware to wire them all together, you are really just building a maintenance nightmare. It might be fun to play with a cluster, but you'd do better to buy a couple of machines with as many cores as you can. It will take less space, less power, less fumbling around with configurations, less time and likely be cheaper than trying to cram all the old stuff into some random rack space.
If you insist on doing this, I suggest the following. 1. Only use *identical* hardware. (Or at least hardware that can run on exactly the same kernel image, modules and configurations) with the maximum memory and fastest networks you can. 2. Make sure you have well engineered Power supplies and cooling. 3. PXE boot all but one machine and make sure your cluster "self configures" based on the hardware that shows up when you turn it on because you will always have something broken. 4. Don't use local storage for anything more than swap, everything comes over the network... 5. Use multiple network segments, split between storage network and operational network.
By the way... For the sake of any local radio operations, please make sure you don't just unpack all the hardware from it's cases and spread it out on the work bench. Older hardware can be really big RFI generators. Consider keeping it in a rack that offers at least some shielding.
And to my point.. IF one decides to go the armed conflict route, best to do it in such a way that it is over as soon as possible without drawing China into the mix. Of course that is easier said than done.
I wonder though, now that Un has unilaterally scrapped the agreement, could we not just say "Ok dude, your nuclear and rocket launching sites are now going to be turned into smoking rubble." Then send a few cruise missiles over to handle that in the middle of the night? I would expect him to try and cross the DMZ at that point, so we'd just defend South Korea and drive them back only far enough to take their capital.
I don't know.. The problems with this are many.. We'd have to be totally sure that China would sit on their hands so one would have to have an agreement with them in advance, which means they'd know in advance and you'd have to assume North Korea, and China would have to get something they want out of the deal. Hmmm... Interesting options though..
In the mean time, they have their fingers in their ears yelling "I CAN NOT HEAR YOU!" over and over. They are just throwing a fit because they don't like that the rest of the world (sans China in some ways) told them to stop being stupid by poking the bear, stop trying to build a nuclear weapon and long range rockets so we can let you play.
All we do now is sit back and ignore the provocation unless they actually do start shooting at which point we had better be ready. Any conflict needs to be two things: 1. Very quick, because if the Chinese get into this in a big way, it won't be good for either side. We also don't want the UN to start setting rules of engagement or something... 2. Lead to an unconditional surrender of North Korea so we don't have to wait another 50 years to do this all again.
Actually, all we need to do is ignore them... Unless, one really believes that it might be time to effect a bit of freedom in the northern part of Korea and deliver a whole population from starvation...
I don't disagree with you about the way software is licensed being distasteful, but it is what it is.
You are free to develop your own software and license it any way you choose, so you can change how things are done. Just write software that everybody wants and the world will be yours. Where I don't like how huge software companies license their wares, it is their software and they can license it any way they see fit, just like you can.
They say own it now which implies resale is allowed. If you try (like on Ebay with Windows CDs) you get told no, it's licenced only. you do NOT own it.
Because that is the truth. You don't own a copy of it, you own a license to use it within the terms of the license agreement. Many license agreements these days do NOT allow the transfer to a third party. That E-Bay doesn't allow these kinds of items to be listed is basically because they don't want folks who don't know any better from being ripped off or sold licenses that cannot be transferred and then having to deal with all the customer complaints such sales would produce. Can't blame them.
If you need a copy of the install media for that original version of XP, then you should have kept a copy of it. By law it is fair use to copy install media, or keep backups of your computer that contains copies of your licensed software. So shame on you for not keeping a backup.
Yes, but you cannot instantly create 10 copies of a book, sell them to be used in 10 different locations. A physical book is it's own "copy protection" in that you cannot simply hit a button, duplicate it, then transfer the copy to somebody else to use.
It really IS the process that results in the textbook issues. Your example is not a good one, they do teach evolution in the public schools, dispute your representation otherwise.
There is no *credible* evidence that the nut jobs in NK can do more than set off a nuclear device built in a cave and sling a small object into low earth orbit. These things have been demonstrated. But putting the nuclear device on a rocket and sending the thing very far is *NOT* something they have demonstrated and is considerably more complex than what they've done so far.
Their rocket skills still have serious issues and have only succeeded in getting some useless space junk into low earth orbit, once, after multiple tries and failures. Who knows how large their ground based nuclear device is and how much it weighs, but it's unlikely to be anything small and light enough to mount on their rockets.
So we have some crazy guy trying to tell you he's fired his gun, knows how to load and aim it and won't hesitate to shoot you. Problem is you already know that he only has 2 rounds, both of which he already set off by pounding them with a hammer and the squirt gun he's holding is almost empty.
Funny part here is that about all we can do at this point is prohibit the sale of water to load his squirt gun because we've already banned everything else.
In 1836, having defeated Mexico's army, sent to rid the territory of white settlers on Mexico's land, Texas was an independent country. It is unknown if that status could have been maintained without help from the outside but it was largely accomplished without official help from the United States. Literally stuck between a rock and a hard place, facing war with Mexico and looking to solidify it's future freedom, Texas became part of the United States. Something that really ticked off Mexico at the time and was a primary cause of the Mexican American war.
The fact remains, Texas was independent country, albeit only for a decade. (1836 to about 1846)
You quote from a Texas document similar to ones adopted by Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Virgina written at the start of the Civil War. So this quote was NOT about Texas independence, but about the southern grievances that lead to the Civil war in 1861. This document was penned nearly 30 years after Texas won it's independence from Mexico by capturing Santa Anna and sending his army packing.
So, that quote doesn't have anything to do with Texas Independence, you Yankee carpet bagger..
An A/C that Hasn't been to Austin, I can tell. It's like a little chunk of California fell off in the middle of Texas with all that entails. Having lived in both, San Francisco has nothing on Austin.
The political process of approving text books for public schools in Texas leaves some things to be desired, but public schools in Texas are usually pretty good from what I've seen.
Point made, but don't miss my point. The Alamo happened only a few years before Texas entered the Union and the attitude that leads to men to actually DIE for the cause and not just write strong words pervades this state's culture and history. Texans fought for their independence from Mexico, just like the the colonies did from England, only we did it 75 years later. We entered the Union as the ONLY independent country and this independent spirit is alive and well here. Remember the Alamo means more than many know.
I've only had to hold my wife's hand though this pregnancy process, but I can tell you that mjr167 is totally correct. Modesty consists of a series of awkward positions with paper and thin sheets in the medical world and any mother who goes though that process *should* have the right to kill their teenager for being disrespectful. (OK.. At least she should have the right to *complain* about being disrespected... )
Those who look in from the outside have to look hard to find "issues" they can point to do disparage the State of Texas and the people who live within it's borders. If this is the best you can come up with to malign the state, move on along, nothing really to see here.
Texas isn't perfect, nobody who lives here will make that claim, but our conservative roots serve us well in both social and economic benefits that prove that conservationism is not automatically a bad thing.
Minimum wage in Texas goes farther than Minimum wage in New York. So what does your claim mean? Not much.. Children not insured? So are you then claiming they don't get the care they need for some reason? Again, what does this mean? Again Not much. Children in poverty? In relation to children living at the same income level in New York who's poorer then? But then *having* a job is better than not having work, even if it's minimum wage... At least it is in Texas it is. I'm not sure about the rest of the country.
"Victory or Death!" may sound silly to you, but the saying came from Texas just prior to March 6, 1863.
Well put... This Texan agrees. Remember the Alamo!
Yea, if you are liberal... Don't come here and ruin it for the rest of us... :)
Actually, Texas has a higher standard for search and seizure protection and has for decades. Ask anyone who works in criminal defense (I used to there), the standard for criminal cases in Texas isn't the US Constitution, it is the Texas Constitution.
My point is that news about Texas usually illustrates just how stupid their government is. For once, they look progressive.
As opposed to looking like what? Liberals?
As stupid as the government of Texas may or may not be, seems that Texas is doing pretty well overall since 2008 by keeping Unemployment well under the national average and actually *growing* its economic activity along with its population. Texas has managed to keep its budget in relative balance though the whole downturn as well. This was done by being *conservative* in outlook and generally right of center Republican with active Tea Party involvement at all levels.
If you think this policy is "progressive" then I wonder if you will like it as much when I say it looks pretty darned conservative from the eyes of this Texan.
Your ISP is going to love that....
But are we telling them to start doing something or just line up?
It may be valuable, but if you have to carry 1 tone of extra weight to carry the sensors and wire I'm not sure the cost is going to be worth it.
More to the point would be the windows blue screen from the Windows 98 based display host... Don't laugh, I've seen Windows 98 in "mission critical" parts of a national cellular system in a small country within the last 5 years.
There's something to be said for shooting a crazy guy waving a gun in your face, ya know?
There is also something to be said about realizing that the "gun" is made of plastic, has an orange tip and shoots only a stream of water dispute what the crazy waving it says.
NK is just engaging in it's standard procedure as we ramp up towards a serious discussion about it's latest nuclear test at the UN security council. They have a long history of making outlandish threats that over reach their actual capacity, used in a effort to push as far as they can in their favor, or at least that's how they see it. Personally, I believe that they would be much better served if they decided to "play ball" nicely with the rest of the world, but that would involve a dismantling of their power structure (or at least the risk of it) so the powers to be won't go there. It also might lead to an actual declaration of peace and the unification of Korea which would *surely* put the Kim's out of power and into prison in short order.