I wasn't trying to write code there - merely state that there would probably be a strong correlation with one and the other. If an individual was in one group, I'd think they'd be more likely than the general population to be in the other. Probably by quite some margin.
Police always have ways of getting these images, of varying legality and effectiveness - for example, they can always pose as someone looking for such material if that wouldn't fall foul of their local entrapment laws.
The problem, though, is that the abuser isn't always going to be obvious in these images - I know that (EXTREMELY hypothetically) if the acts were illegal but the images of the acts legal - which actually was the case in Denmark for a while, BTW - I'd make sure that were I an abuser in such an image I wasn't identifiable.
But if they're legal then there's a market and we have a stronger mechanism to feed their production - so more motivation for abusers to harm children. Not good.
I follow the logic of your scenario of submitting them to the police, I'm just not sure I agree. If nothing else, were they legal and were you handing them in to allow identification of an abuser, the probability of you having come by them with no interest in them at all is low. There's a good chance you're one of the featured abusers (so not going to hand them in) or a customer for such material - so handing them in makes getting hold of it harder. Why should you?
Anyway, this isn't really a pleasant topic to discuss so I'll leave it there.
I think you've got this backwards. Sorry for not making myself clearer.
If the real thing can't be practically distinguished from the fake then the standard defence when caught with the real thing becomes to state that it's fake. They can't prove it isn't beyond reasonable doubt (which is what they'd have to do to convict you of posessing illegal material) so you get off. By legalising the fake you make it effectively impossible to prosecute the real thing.
The music point is a bit of a bad example here. No matter what the RIAA et al might try and persuade us of, copying music does not directly result in the exploitation and abuse of a vulnerable group. Production of child pornography does. If child porn is legal, by definition you legalise a market which requires children to be abused. If it is to be banned effectively (as opposed to the ban becoming a joke for the reason I've stated above) you need to ban the fake as well.
We tend to give people the benefit of the doubt over here too, by tradition. Doesn't mean some arent' trying to change that:( Anyway - there's such a thing as looking at the reasonable consequences. Here, giving someone the benefit of the doubt about the legality of their production does severe damage to a group with little capability to defend themselves. Not good.
If you can prove beyond reasonable doubt that an image is a fake and not genuine, I can see your argument even if I'm not sure I agree.
If you can't (which seems to be the position right now) then if the fakes are legal you can't prosecute for the real thing - which I don't think the majority of slashdotters (or the community at large) wants.
The simple point being that maintaining a ban on the real thing is impossible if the virtual is legal. We've all seen photoshopped spoof images of all sorts of types (no, not necessarily porn...) and they're by no means always detectable. If you can't prove an image is a fake, you can't prove that an image is genuine either. At which point you can't convict for the real thing.
I'm not necessarily a fan of currently policing tactics but the idea that having more policeman on the beat is a panacea is dangerous.
Someone did the research a little while ago and looked up how long a cop on the beat would have to walk around for before they were statistically likely to catch some criminal act. Assuming normal work patterns and so on, the figure was something like 80 years!
All it does is pacify a nervous, misinformed public who've been told by right-wing politicians and media that it's the only metric worth considering. No matter that they actually caused most of the problems, because the current bunch aren't attempting to tackle them in the misguided way they'd like and pandering to ignorance, they're clearly not doing a good job.
A greater percentage of our policemen on the beat would increase crime levels as they wouldn't be able to properly develop and use intelligence, or respond rapidly to distress calls. After all, which would you prefer if you've just dialled 999 / 911 / 112 (pick one depending on area) - to hope there's a policeman within 5-10 minutes walk who can amble across to you, or to know there's one in a car who can drive over and thus cover a far greater area with the same response times?
We need to get beyond kneejerk politics and listen to the academic researchers, people.
Last tme I heard, DNA test results actually didn't pin guilt on you that tightly. Something like 1 in a million - which sounds high but means there's statistically something like 6,000 people in the world who could have produced that same result.
We do have some form of self-incrimination protection - firstly we have a right not to answer questions put to us (and silence, as I recall, can't be taken to infer guilt) while the Human Rights Act gives us some protection, too. Sorry, not a lawyer so I don't know the details.
I can actually see why they want to do this - there have been cases in Britain of convictions getting thrown out as, even though there was good evidence, part of the evidence was a DNA sample which was taken in a previous investigation but didn't result in a conviction and it wasn't thrown away (whew!). Still not sure it's a good idea, mind you, but it's not as bad as it might look.
1) You miss the point. Go to the alternative platforms and you get the voice recorder without needing to add anything to your machine, PLUS you get a bigger screen and all the adantages that gives. Realy, try a Psion or WinCE machine and you'll realise how small a PalmOS screen really is.
2) Surely a significant part of the problem though is trying to scrawl them down in a hurry? Whereas graffiti, if it's to achieve usable accuracy, really needs you to be slow and precise...
3) Gladly, but it seems daft to deliberately pick such a poor choice.
1) Why bother, though, when they're built in to WinCE and EPOC machines as a rule? Which also then give a bigger screen size so allow a better interface and more info on screen at once?
2) I'd actually dispute that, having used it for some time. I found it reasonably inaccurate and very slow. The WinCE system seemed better in a short play but I now can't see myself leaving the world of keyboards and my Psion 5. As accurate as any keyboard and nearly as fast as a normal keyboard. Lots less inconvenient than it looks, too.
I'd rather have something supported too, but there are better supported products. The PalmOS really isn't the be all and end all of handheld computing - in fact, I'd say it's a pretty bad solution.
I'd still say no as they seem to be tied to Graffiti - too slow and inaccurate. I'd hate to see something as important as medical notes dependent on this.
If I want to take a piece of GPL'd code (say a library) and integrate it into my application, I have to license the application under a GPL-compatible license. Boom - infection. If I want to do the same thing with some BSD code, I don't have to release that under BSD - I could release it under anything, GPL included.
Looking at the title, that's wrong as well. Integrating a part of a copyrighted work into a public domain work by no means transfers the whole to the copyright of the original copyright holder. It's not necessarily entirely public domain either but it's considerably less viral than the GPL approach.
I don't dispute that the GPL is under scrutiny and debate - but I'm yet to come across suggestions for making it non-viral. This, in some ways, actually causes problems - I remember a while back someone who wished to port / release (sorry, can't remember which) a GPL'd system library to BeOS. As BeOS isn't GPL'd (or GPL compatible) it was actually illegal for that to be done...
While it remains viral, I can't see that it's playing nice by any stretch of the imagination. I can see exactly the argument about weight of licensed code but that only makes it the PRACTICAL thing to do, not the RIGHT thing to do. Bit of a difference.
I see the exact point about not playing nicely with other free licenses, but surely the license at fault in that respect is the GPL? I mean, it's the one which places the onerous requirements on the game, NOT the APSL or whatever. It's the one which infects everything it touches.
Yet the GPL is seen as sacred and beyond criticism. Oh well.
If you think that's massive, go for it. You're entitled to your opinion.
The point, though, is that the earlier posters were suggesting that we had 50% taxation. No, we don't go that high, even if you're earning a little under double the average salary.
The other point is that the average American would consider health insurance an essential. That bumps up the essential cost of living beyond simple taxation - and it tends to cost more per user than a simple universal tax-funded scheme.
Well done - my experience, though, would have to be the exact opposite to that.
I've had three different leaf switch joysticks and none of them were even remotely precise or responsive. One failed completely (leaf spring went), one partially. The microswitched buttons on my Cyborg 3D are extremely precise and have a short action, while my old microswitched Konix SpeedKing was also very precise.
From long hours of experience with both (leaf switches exclusively for the first few years) I can honestly say that I much prefer microswitches and wouldn't go back without a very good demonstration of exactly why a particular stick was better in spite of leaf switches.
No, taxes aren't anything like 50% in the UK with our (almost) entirely free health service. Believe me, it's very nice knowing that you won't have to pay a fortune out to get essential healthcare - or, for that matter, worry that if you're diagnosed with something nasty you might lose insurance.
If you're curious about the rates in detail, go to http://www.moneyextra.com/tax/lib3.htm - if you just want the basics, it's (approximately) 22% to $42,500 US and 40% above that. Not exactly massive.
The difference is that we spend a tiny fraction of what the US does on the military, even per head of population. As do most European countries.
Actually, personally I prefer the feel of microswitches to leaf contacts. Best joystick I've ever had (OK, different class of design) is my current Cyborg 3D, in part due to its microswitched buttons.
Anyway. Leaf switches also used to be used in seriously cheap joysticks (on the grounds that bent copper was cheaper than 4 microswitches) back in the digital stick days and could get pretty unreliable and vague pretty quickly.
If you're seriously worried about the noise of the microswitches then 1) the sound on the cabinet isn't really loud enough - microswitches aren't _that_ loud_ and 2) you could probably do with thicker MDF for your case. Most of the noise problem is due to them being mounted in thin plastic for a domestic application. Not exactly the case with one of these things, is it?
I know personally I'd agree with the last point though. You could set up a system where the controllers were mounted in their own independent box, screw-mounted. Interfacing it wouldn't be _that_ hard, really:)
As I recall, Hydrogen burns with a very pale blue flame. Against the sky it'd be almost invisible - but it'd also rise so fast that it would burn only briefly if at all. The consensus on the programme I saw was that it couldn't have burnt in any quantity.
Eyewitness reports clearly stated the flame was yellowy-red, pointing to the doping performed on the canvas envelope. Which, as the previous poster stated, was pretty much rocket fuel and wasn't properly mounted to the chassis - so, flies through an electrical storm, builds up a charge which arcs across the body as some parts dissipate their charge through the docking rope and others don't. Result? Fire.
To a degree that's a spurious question since needs, to some degree, are redefined around the possibilities. Yes, in some ways that makes them wants but let's be honest here. We managed before computers so they're really wants themselves.
The point I was making was that an A1200 can't really hack it because the screen resolutions available make (some) document composition harder than it needs to be, while the CPU power for deciding JPEGs isn't there so you'll have a hard time on the web - that is, if you don't get irritated by the low screen resolution messing up the pages first.
Now, I know screen resolution is less of an issue with Amigas as the programs have a lower resolution as an assumption so 640*512 is actually pretty workable for most stuff (doesn't mean I didn't enjoy 1152*864 on my GFX card;) but it _does_ limit you. And believe me, you'd get irritated with JPEGs decoding that slowly pretty fast. Which reminds me - you'd probably want an uprated serial port to survive on the web. Easy enough to do, but it would be needed.
Web and e-mail define a lot of our needs now, and an A1200 would begin to hit problems them. E-mail would be fine 99% of the time with most of the problems coming from attachments, but the web wouldn't.
If you were happy to leave the web well alone, though, you could cover pretty much any non-games domestic use on an A1200 with a RAM card. Surprisingly well, too.
I suspect you'd find a problem with some drives, actually.
When the Escom machines came out, it was noticed that they couldn't play some games. Zeewolf 2 (wonderful fun!) was noticed as a problem just before release and fixed.
Seems they'd used drives which didn't support a certain interrupt - RS-RDY or something like that, never was a programmer at that level. Anyway, this wasn't a problem for OS-legal stuff because the OS didn't use it, but some games did with their fancy formats to help protect against copying. So they didn't work on these new machines:(
Fortunately I had one of the old ones;)
Anyway. It wasn't a serious issue and the disks could still be read, but you will almost certainly find standard issue PC FDDs which, no matter what you did to them, could not fully support an Amiga FDD's featureset.
Er, no, you couldn't do everything you'd want to on an A1200. And this is speaking as someone who loves Amigas dearly and has 5 in the room he's in right now.
Firstly, there's no real way of upgrading the GFX. Yes, there are add-on busboards and the like but they involve some pretty extensive (and expensive) additions so you're effectively stuck at 640*512 in 256 not that fast colours. Not pretty.
Secondly, you'll be surprised to discover just how much CPU time some stuff takes. Decoding JPEGs is one thing I remember taking an absolute age compared to what we're used to on PCs.
I'd say we could cover most of our needs on an A4000 - definitely one like mine with basically a ported SVGA card, an 060 processor, big drives and a load of RAM. But the 1200 isn't up to that sort of thing, speaking as someone who held out on one until '98.
You _can_ reprocess, yes, but I wouldn't recommend it.
Notice I'm a Brit. We have the two relevant components here for reprocessing - the Sellafield plant and a fast breeder reactor at Douneray. Neither runs anywhere near as cheaply or efficiently as they were predicted to, while they produce some pretty unpleasant waste. Both are considered failed experiments from all I see, neither likely to be replaced when their operating life ends.
The other thing to consider with nuclear reprocessing is that it necessitates rather more transportation of highly radioactive materials than would otherwise be needed. This is definitely something to be avoided, as the security precautions needed to transport this safely are very stringent, while the risk of contamination of the surrounding environment is phenomenal. Some here will probably remember the Mark Thomas Comedy Product's investigation into this very issue, and it was extremely painful reading for BNFL.
Reprocessing delays the problem at best and amplifies it considerably at worst.
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly.
I wasn't trying to write code there - merely state that there would probably be a strong correlation with one and the other. If an individual was in one group, I'd think they'd be more likely than the general population to be in the other. Probably by quite some margin.
Police always have ways of getting these images, of varying legality and effectiveness - for example, they can always pose as someone looking for such material if that wouldn't fall foul of their local entrapment laws.
The problem, though, is that the abuser isn't always going to be obvious in these images - I know that (EXTREMELY hypothetically) if the acts were illegal but the images of the acts legal - which actually was the case in Denmark for a while, BTW - I'd make sure that were I an abuser in such an image I wasn't identifiable.
But if they're legal then there's a market and we have a stronger mechanism to feed their production - so more motivation for abusers to harm children. Not good.
I follow the logic of your scenario of submitting them to the police, I'm just not sure I agree. If nothing else, were they legal and were you handing them in to allow identification of an abuser, the probability of you having come by them with no interest in them at all is low. There's a good chance you're one of the featured abusers (so not going to hand them in) or a customer for such material - so handing them in makes getting hold of it harder. Why should you?
Anyway, this isn't really a pleasant topic to discuss so I'll leave it there.
I think you've got this backwards. Sorry for not making myself clearer.
:( Anyway - there's such a thing as looking at the reasonable consequences. Here, giving someone the benefit of the doubt about the legality of their production does severe damage to a group with little capability to defend themselves. Not good.
If the real thing can't be practically distinguished from the fake then the standard defence when caught with the real thing becomes to state that it's fake. They can't prove it isn't beyond reasonable doubt (which is what they'd have to do to convict you of posessing illegal material) so you get off. By legalising the fake you make it effectively impossible to prosecute the real thing.
The music point is a bit of a bad example here. No matter what the RIAA et al might try and persuade us of, copying music does not directly result in the exploitation and abuse of a vulnerable group. Production of child pornography does. If child porn is legal, by definition you legalise a market which requires children to be abused. If it is to be banned effectively (as opposed to the ban becoming a joke for the reason I've stated above) you need to ban the fake as well.
We tend to give people the benefit of the doubt over here too, by tradition. Doesn't mean some arent' trying to change that
If you can prove beyond reasonable doubt that an image is a fake and not genuine, I can see your argument even if I'm not sure I agree.
If you can't (which seems to be the position right now) then if the fakes are legal you can't prosecute for the real thing - which I don't think the majority of slashdotters (or the community at large) wants.
That's the line in Britain.
The simple point being that maintaining a ban on the real thing is impossible if the virtual is legal. We've all seen photoshopped spoof images of all sorts of types (no, not necessarily porn...) and they're by no means always detectable. If you can't prove an image is a fake, you can't prove that an image is genuine either. At which point you can't convict for the real thing.
I'd still personally consider the two to be similar _enough_ but yes, I see what you mean.
:) What he's doing in a party which was nominally socialist until recently I will never understand.
The Netherlands are interesting as a social study in some ways so glad to hear you like it.
And I'd happily work to get rid of Jack Straw
I'm not necessarily a fan of currently policing tactics but the idea that having more policeman on the beat is a panacea is dangerous.
Someone did the research a little while ago and looked up how long a cop on the beat would have to walk around for before they were statistically likely to catch some criminal act. Assuming normal work patterns and so on, the figure was something like 80 years!
All it does is pacify a nervous, misinformed public who've been told by right-wing politicians and media that it's the only metric worth considering. No matter that they actually caused most of the problems, because the current bunch aren't attempting to tackle them in the misguided way they'd like and pandering to ignorance, they're clearly not doing a good job.
A greater percentage of our policemen on the beat would increase crime levels as they wouldn't be able to properly develop and use intelligence, or respond rapidly to distress calls. After all, which would you prefer if you've just dialled 999 / 911 / 112 (pick one depending on area) - to hope there's a policeman within 5-10 minutes walk who can amble across to you, or to know there's one in a car who can drive over and thus cover a far greater area with the same response times?
We need to get beyond kneejerk politics and listen to the academic researchers, people.
We do have some form of self-incrimination protection - firstly we have a right not to answer questions put to us (and silence, as I recall, can't be taken to infer guilt) while the Human Rights Act gives us some protection, too. Sorry, not a lawyer so I don't know the details.
I can actually see why they want to do this - there have been cases in Britain of convictions getting thrown out as, even though there was good evidence, part of the evidence was a DNA sample which was taken in a previous investigation but didn't result in a conviction and it wasn't thrown away (whew!). Still not sure it's a good idea, mind you, but it's not as bad as it might look.
1) You miss the point. Go to the alternative platforms and you get the voice recorder without needing to add anything to your machine, PLUS you get a bigger screen and all the adantages that gives. Realy, try a Psion or WinCE machine and you'll realise how small a PalmOS screen really is.
2) Surely a significant part of the problem though is trying to scrawl them down in a hurry? Whereas graffiti, if it's to achieve usable accuracy, really needs you to be slow and precise...
3) Gladly, but it seems daft to deliberately pick such a poor choice.
1) Why bother, though, when they're built in to WinCE and EPOC machines as a rule? Which also then give a bigger screen size so allow a better interface and more info on screen at once?
2) I'd actually dispute that, having used it for some time. I found it reasonably inaccurate and very slow. The WinCE system seemed better in a short play but I now can't see myself leaving the world of keyboards and my Psion 5. As accurate as any keyboard and nearly as fast as a normal keyboard. Lots less inconvenient than it looks, too.
I'd rather have something supported too, but there are better supported products. The PalmOS really isn't the be all and end all of handheld computing - in fact, I'd say it's a pretty bad solution.
I'd still say no as they seem to be tied to Graffiti - too slow and inaccurate. I'd hate to see something as important as medical notes dependent on this.
No, I'm sorry, that's wrong.
If I want to take a piece of GPL'd code (say a library) and integrate it into my application, I have to license the application under a GPL-compatible license. Boom - infection. If I want to do the same thing with some BSD code, I don't have to release that under BSD - I could release it under anything, GPL included.
Looking at the title, that's wrong as well. Integrating a part of a copyrighted work into a public domain work by no means transfers the whole to the copyright of the original copyright holder. It's not necessarily entirely public domain either but it's considerably less viral than the GPL approach.
I don't dispute that the GPL is under scrutiny and debate - but I'm yet to come across suggestions for making it non-viral. This, in some ways, actually causes problems - I remember a while back someone who wished to port / release (sorry, can't remember which) a GPL'd system library to BeOS. As BeOS isn't GPL'd (or GPL compatible) it was actually illegal for that to be done...
While it remains viral, I can't see that it's playing nice by any stretch of the imagination. I can see exactly the argument about weight of licensed code but that only makes it the PRACTICAL thing to do, not the RIGHT thing to do. Bit of a difference.
I see the exact point about not playing nicely with other free licenses, but surely the license at fault in that respect is the GPL? I mean, it's the one which places the onerous requirements on the game, NOT the APSL or whatever. It's the one which infects everything it touches.
Yet the GPL is seen as sacred and beyond criticism. Oh well.
<duck>
If you think that's massive, go for it. You're entitled to your opinion.
The point, though, is that the earlier posters were suggesting that we had 50% taxation. No, we don't go that high, even if you're earning a little under double the average salary.
The other point is that the average American would consider health insurance an essential. That bumps up the essential cost of living beyond simple taxation - and it tends to cost more per user than a simple universal tax-funded scheme.
Well done - my experience, though, would have to be the exact opposite to that.
I've had three different leaf switch joysticks and none of them were even remotely precise or responsive. One failed completely (leaf spring went), one partially. The microswitched buttons on my Cyborg 3D are extremely precise and have a short action, while my old microswitched Konix SpeedKing was also very precise.
From long hours of experience with both (leaf switches exclusively for the first few years) I can honestly say that I much prefer microswitches and wouldn't go back without a very good demonstration of exactly why a particular stick was better in spite of leaf switches.
No, taxes aren't anything like 50% in the UK with our (almost) entirely free health service. Believe me, it's very nice knowing that you won't have to pay a fortune out to get essential healthcare - or, for that matter, worry that if you're diagnosed with something nasty you might lose insurance.
If you're curious about the rates in detail, go to http://www.moneyextra.com/tax/lib3.htm - if you just want the basics, it's (approximately) 22% to $42,500 US and 40% above that. Not exactly massive.
The difference is that we spend a tiny fraction of what the US does on the military, even per head of population. As do most European countries.
Actually, personally I prefer the feel of microswitches to leaf contacts. Best joystick I've ever had (OK, different class of design) is my current Cyborg 3D, in part due to its microswitched buttons.
:)
Anyway. Leaf switches also used to be used in seriously cheap joysticks (on the grounds that bent copper was cheaper than 4 microswitches) back in the digital stick days and could get pretty unreliable and vague pretty quickly.
If you're seriously worried about the noise of the microswitches then 1) the sound on the cabinet isn't really loud enough - microswitches aren't _that_ loud_ and 2) you could probably do with thicker MDF for your case. Most of the noise problem is due to them being mounted in thin plastic for a domestic application. Not exactly the case with one of these things, is it?
I know personally I'd agree with the last point though. You could set up a system where the controllers were mounted in their own independent box, screw-mounted. Interfacing it wouldn't be _that_ hard, really
I think we have a misunderstanding here.
As I recall, Hydrogen burns with a very pale blue flame. Against the sky it'd be almost invisible - but it'd also rise so fast that it would burn only briefly if at all. The consensus on the programme I saw was that it couldn't have burnt in any quantity.
Eyewitness reports clearly stated the flame was yellowy-red, pointing to the doping performed on the canvas envelope. Which, as the previous poster stated, was pretty much rocket fuel and wasn't properly mounted to the chassis - so, flies through an electrical storm, builds up a charge which arcs across the body as some parts dissipate their charge through the docking rope and others don't. Result? Fire.
To a degree that's a spurious question since needs, to some degree, are redefined around the possibilities. Yes, in some ways that makes them wants but let's be honest here. We managed before computers so they're really wants themselves.
;) but it _does_ limit you. And believe me, you'd get irritated with JPEGs decoding that slowly pretty fast. Which reminds me - you'd probably want an uprated serial port to survive on the web. Easy enough to do, but it would be needed.
The point I was making was that an A1200 can't really hack it because the screen resolutions available make (some) document composition harder than it needs to be, while the CPU power for deciding JPEGs isn't there so you'll have a hard time on the web - that is, if you don't get irritated by the low screen resolution messing up the pages first.
Now, I know screen resolution is less of an issue with Amigas as the programs have a lower resolution as an assumption so 640*512 is actually pretty workable for most stuff (doesn't mean I didn't enjoy 1152*864 on my GFX card
Web and e-mail define a lot of our needs now, and an A1200 would begin to hit problems them. E-mail would be fine 99% of the time with most of the problems coming from attachments, but the web wouldn't.
If you were happy to leave the web well alone, though, you could cover pretty much any non-games domestic use on an A1200 with a RAM card. Surprisingly well, too.
I suspect you'd find a problem with some drives, actually.
:(
;)
When the Escom machines came out, it was noticed that they couldn't play some games. Zeewolf 2 (wonderful fun!) was noticed as a problem just before release and fixed.
Seems they'd used drives which didn't support a certain interrupt - RS-RDY or something like that, never was a programmer at that level. Anyway, this wasn't a problem for OS-legal stuff because the OS didn't use it, but some games did with their fancy formats to help protect against copying. So they didn't work on these new machines
Fortunately I had one of the old ones
Anyway. It wasn't a serious issue and the disks could still be read, but you will almost certainly find standard issue PC FDDs which, no matter what you did to them, could not fully support an Amiga FDD's featureset.
Er, no, you couldn't do everything you'd want to on an A1200. And this is speaking as someone who loves Amigas dearly and has 5 in the room he's in right now.
Firstly, there's no real way of upgrading the GFX. Yes, there are add-on busboards and the like but they involve some pretty extensive (and expensive) additions so you're effectively stuck at 640*512 in 256 not that fast colours. Not pretty.
Secondly, you'll be surprised to discover just how much CPU time some stuff takes. Decoding JPEGs is one thing I remember taking an absolute age compared to what we're used to on PCs.
I'd say we could cover most of our needs on an A4000 - definitely one like mine with basically a ported SVGA card, an 060 processor, big drives and a load of RAM. But the 1200 isn't up to that sort of thing, speaking as someone who held out on one until '98.
Map
Send someone a postcard from Hell
Hell freezes over with some regularity. It's a small town in Norway. Little way down the road from Trondheim.
n t=M4&lon=10.9761&lat=63.4037&scale=500 000&place=Hell,+,+Norway&db=w3&local=" >Map</a>
<a href="http://uk2.multimap.com/map/browse.cgi?clie
<a href="http://www.hell.no/">Send someone a postcard from Hell</a>
Sorry to be boring about this...
You _can_ reprocess, yes, but I wouldn't recommend it.
Notice I'm a Brit. We have the two relevant components here for reprocessing - the Sellafield plant and a fast breeder reactor at Douneray. Neither runs anywhere near as cheaply or efficiently as they were predicted to, while they produce some pretty unpleasant waste. Both are considered failed experiments from all I see, neither likely to be replaced when their operating life ends.
The other thing to consider with nuclear reprocessing is that it necessitates rather more transportation of highly radioactive materials than would otherwise be needed. This is definitely something to be avoided, as the security precautions needed to transport this safely are very stringent, while the risk of contamination of the surrounding environment is phenomenal. Some here will probably remember the Mark Thomas Comedy Product's investigation into this very issue, and it was extremely painful reading for BNFL.
Reprocessing delays the problem at best and amplifies it considerably at worst.