pre 1999 is not documented online, you'll need to make a trip to DC and they'll let you in the document room. Looks like you have the link to the rest already.
Also, don't confuse nuclear weapons incidents with nuclear power, unless that's just intentional on your part.
All nuclear plant incidents are publicly reported, including security related incidents. Certain details may not always be available for obvious reasons.
Walk yourself through the steps, support structure and equipment that would be required to pull that off balanced against the likelihood of getting caught. Then you might sleep better. Evil ones tend to choose easier paths.
If anything about nuclear facilities is to be secure at all the rules, regulations and operations governing the entire structure need to be knowable when circumstance requires it.
And they are. Clearly, the writing of this article was not one of those circumstances.
When one of your leading examples is an unsuccessful attempt at a plant under construction, where it doesn't even matter because there is no nuclear material even on site, then you might find reason to be a tiny bit critical rather than blindly accepting. However, the article does point out that so far the security approach has worked quite well in the US.
And another blatant attempt to spread it. Any significant sabotage to a nuke plant that actually leads to a nuclear release is a whole lot harder to pull off than the perception given off in this article.
Seems they might also want to look into the possibility of boxes that download in advance. I'd be happy to 'subscribe' to some of the content, or queue up for download as it would ensure optimal quality regardless of bandwidth and QOS. I know that is a pretty big departure from the simple server client approach they have built upon, but it would open new doors.
Isn't there a bit of irony in the idea, in a time of global warming attributed to greenhouse capture of solar heat, to capture even more solar energy and send it to earth? A large amount of that energy will be dissipated as heat eventually.
In the end, it seems like a cost prohibitive pipe dream.
Stop making sense. You are supposed to react emotionally to stuff like this.
A true oligarchy would look much different than what we have. All societies have a relatively small group of individuals with greater influence than the masses, some call them leaders. It is inherently human.
Everyone knows the US is a representative democracy by structure, not a pure democracy where everyone votes votes on everything. Also, the definition of a democracy is not that every person has a large influence. A large population reduces the influence of any single person. Individuals can have a fairly large influence in lcoal government, and less as you move up to State and Federal. That will be true in the purest of democracies.
So, it would have been much more accurate in the summary to state that the US has characteristics of an oligarchy. And that would be stating the obvious.
If one panel provides all you need during daylight hours you use 2 or 3 or 4 and store it in a battery.
This, and not nuclear it undisputably the way of the future. There is no such thing as a safe nuclear plant. I'm sure the people that had to leave Fukushima prefecture would disagree about the lack of danger to public health. Would you live there now?
Convenient to just blow it off. Germany is already seeing grid problems, and are destined to buy their power from nuclear plants in France and those that Poland is likely to build.
Solar is costly without the battery. Adding batteries increases cost tremendously and reduces efficiency. Seems that you like to ignore the cost part. Cost factors heavily into any viable solution. Solar does look very attractive when you ignore the details.
There is no safe anything. Its a matter of risk vs benefit. No airplane is safe. No car is safe. No solar panel is safe.
Would I leave near Fukushima? Yes, in any area where folks are allowed to live I would live. In those areas cleared for living in the future I would live. Why would I be willing? Because I have experience in this area and understand the risks. I understand the fears of those who just get informed by the media and movies.
And remember, 1 MW of installed solar capacity on average generates less than 1/5 of the electrical energy of 1 MW of installed base load generation. Many conveniently ignore that when spouting numbers.
If you look at countries like Germany and India who are becoming less and less dependant on fossil fuels, it's because of solar, not nuclear and in fact the trend is to get away from nuclear. They're always way over budget to build, way more expensive to run and in some cases cost too much to decommission so they sit there..
The nuclear phase out in Germany has actually increased their dependance on fossil fuels. Coal burning has shot up. Germany has a huge energy cost problem coming if they continue down the no nuke path. Nuclear helped pay for a large portion of the solar/wind buildup. As nukes are shut down, that money source goes away. Much higher energy bill and/or taxes will be needed to offset the lost generation, not to mention the ever increasing cost of wind turbine overhauls and even replacement of first generation solar installations.
Meanwhile, after years of heavy investment and the richest subsidies ever seen for any power source, in 2013 solar generated less than one half of one percent of US electrical output. That includes commercial and residential solar. Wind has done much better in that regard.
The new nuclear plants coming on line in the US will offset much more carbon, much more quickly that equivalent solar investment.
Unrealistic risk perception driving uneducated fear is key problem for nuclear. Even at Fukushima, and accident that was easily preventable by simply not siting and designing for a known event, 4 Units experiencing the worst accident scenario, no detectable public health risk is expected, no deaths. A relatively small section of land will be off limits for some time period. A small price to pay for the many millions of tons of coal that was never burnt, CO2 and radioactive particulates never spewed, and coal ash never piled. Yes, nuclear waste is a big drawback, but put it scale with the benefits and its clearly our best proven technological path forward. Politics makes the waste problem worse, there are solutions.
And if the sun starts shining 24 hours a day, then maybe solar will be able to help a little.
As a teen I remember writing a small game program in BASIC on a sheet of "programming pad'. Then calling my friend and reading it over the phone while he entered it on his TRS-80. The game was called Catch. A little man got fired out and you had to catch him with the curser before he hit the ground. It worked first time no flaws. I didn't get to see it for over a week. We played that game quite often.
Why do people think it's best to leave others living in the stone age?
These tribes have struck a balance with their environment, which makes them different from the 'ever expanding' cultures. Somehow, their population and footprint remains relatively stable. Why would it be best for them for us to disturb that balance?
Curios notes: But in the end, don't these tribes need to interact with others to really thrive, even if purely for the reason of genetic diversity? Typically, how 'old' are these tribes? Are destroying a society that's been around for 75 years, 200 years, 500years? How long will they last on their own?
Which makes me wonder...what is the likelihood there are any undiscovered tribes?
^OK, ignore that part... the result of skipping the summary and skimming the article.... Although I still wonder if they are really truly "uncontacted" tribes.
We have considerably less data on the isolated tribes that die out before we meet them.
We'd better find the rest before they die too.
Which makes me wonder...what is the likelihood there are any undiscovered tribes? This lesson learned may never have the chance to be applied from here on out.
^Get to a 1000 mile range for an 8 hour charge with a reasonable price point and you'll see mass market adoption because there are a large number of drivers who rarely drive that far. Folks that buy those cars won't complain.
Seems that we have a unnecessary complaint about future complainers.
He's on it. Its next on his list. Right after he closes Gitmo, creates transparency, reduces the income gap, and fixes heath care (again and again), all while making the world love us again.
Point taken, my wording could have been better. But interpreting results loses scientific value if its done through a narrow lens. A true scientific study would have included some consideration of other probably causes and included in the analysis.
The charts don't explain the rising trend before the internet was really highly accessible, and frankly I don't think they correlate all that well. While the internet would logically play a role, I think our societies' ability to further explain the world through science and implement technologies that control the world around us give rise to more folks being critical of religious ideas. Also, TV certainly plays a role.
It appears to me this study carries a flaw that many do, which is the intent to prove something rather than discover it. To me, the question is not clearly answered.
If you have clients that don't need DLNA or transcoding, IMO, there is no reason to have PLEX. Its not for everyone. Transcoding = quality loss. Also, I would never purchase a pogoplug, as it would add zero value to my system. There may be benefits to some, but everyone's needs are different.
Slashdot Mirror
pre 1999 is not documented online, you'll need to make a trip to DC and they'll let you in the document room. Looks like you have the link to the rest already.
Also, don't confuse nuclear weapons incidents with nuclear power, unless that's just intentional on your part.
All nuclear plant incidents are publicly reported, including security related incidents. Certain details may not always be available for obvious reasons.
Walk yourself through the steps, support structure and equipment that would be required to pull that off balanced against the likelihood of getting caught. Then you might sleep better. Evil ones tend to choose easier paths.
If anything about nuclear facilities is to be secure at all the rules, regulations and operations governing the entire structure need to be knowable when circumstance requires it.
And they are. Clearly, the writing of this article was not one of those circumstances.
When one of your leading examples is an unsuccessful attempt at a plant under construction, where it doesn't even matter because there is no nuclear material even on site, then you might find reason to be a tiny bit critical rather than blindly accepting. However, the article does point out that so far the security approach has worked quite well in the US.
And another blatant attempt to spread it. Any significant sabotage to a nuke plant that actually leads to a nuclear release is a whole lot harder to pull off than the perception given off in this article.
Seems they might also want to look into the possibility of boxes that download in advance. I'd be happy to 'subscribe' to some of the content, or queue up for download as it would ensure optimal quality regardless of bandwidth and QOS. I know that is a pretty big departure from the simple server client approach they have built upon, but it would open new doors.
Isn't there a bit of irony in the idea, in a time of global warming attributed to greenhouse capture of solar heat, to capture even more solar energy and send it to earth? A large amount of that energy will be dissipated as heat eventually.
In the end, it seems like a cost prohibitive pipe dream.
Stop making sense. You are supposed to react emotionally to stuff like this.
A true oligarchy would look much different than what we have. All societies have a relatively small group of individuals with greater influence than the masses, some call them leaders. It is inherently human.
Correct.
Everyone knows the US is a representative democracy by structure, not a pure democracy where everyone votes votes on everything. Also, the definition of a democracy is not that every person has a large influence. A large population reduces the influence of any single person. Individuals can have a fairly large influence in lcoal government, and less as you move up to State and Federal. That will be true in the purest of democracies.
So, it would have been much more accurate in the summary to state that the US has characteristics of an oligarchy. And that would be stating the obvious.
I somehow doubt what you are saying.
If one panel provides all you need during daylight hours you use 2 or 3 or 4 and store it in a battery.
This, and not nuclear it undisputably the way of the future. There is no such thing as a safe nuclear plant. I'm sure the people that had to leave Fukushima prefecture would disagree about the lack of danger to public health. Would you live there now?
Convenient to just blow it off. Germany is already seeing grid problems, and are destined to buy their power from nuclear plants in France and those that Poland is likely to build.
Solar is costly without the battery. Adding batteries increases cost tremendously and reduces efficiency. Seems that you like to ignore the cost part. Cost factors heavily into any viable solution. Solar does look very attractive when you ignore the details.
There is no safe anything. Its a matter of risk vs benefit. No airplane is safe. No car is safe. No solar panel is safe.
Would I leave near Fukushima? Yes, in any area where folks are allowed to live I would live. In those areas cleared for living in the future I would live. Why would I be willing? Because I have experience in this area and understand the risks. I understand the fears of those who just get informed by the media and movies.
And remember, 1 MW of installed solar capacity on average generates less than 1/5 of the electrical energy of 1 MW of installed base load generation. Many conveniently ignore that when spouting numbers.
If you look at countries like Germany and India who are becoming less and less dependant on fossil fuels, it's because of solar, not nuclear and in fact the trend is to get away from nuclear. They're always way over budget to build, way more expensive to run and in some cases cost too much to decommission so they sit there. .
The nuclear phase out in Germany has actually increased their dependance on fossil fuels. Coal burning has shot up. Germany has a huge energy cost problem coming if they continue down the no nuke path. Nuclear helped pay for a large portion of the solar/wind buildup. As nukes are shut down, that money source goes away. Much higher energy bill and/or taxes will be needed to offset the lost generation, not to mention the ever increasing cost of wind turbine overhauls and even replacement of first generation solar installations.
Meanwhile, after years of heavy investment and the richest subsidies ever seen for any power source, in 2013 solar generated less than one half of one percent of US electrical output. That includes commercial and residential solar. Wind has done much better in that regard.
The new nuclear plants coming on line in the US will offset much more carbon, much more quickly that equivalent solar investment.
Unrealistic risk perception driving uneducated fear is key problem for nuclear. Even at Fukushima, and accident that was easily preventable by simply not siting and designing for a known event, 4 Units experiencing the worst accident scenario, no detectable public health risk is expected, no deaths. A relatively small section of land will be off limits for some time period. A small price to pay for the many millions of tons of coal that was never burnt, CO2 and radioactive particulates never spewed, and coal ash never piled. Yes, nuclear waste is a big drawback, but put it scale with the benefits and its clearly our best proven technological path forward. Politics makes the waste problem worse, there are solutions.
And if the sun starts shining 24 hours a day, then maybe solar will be able to help a little.
As a teen I remember writing a small game program in BASIC on a sheet of "programming pad'. Then calling my friend and reading it over the phone while he entered it on his TRS-80. The game was called Catch. A little man got fired out and you had to catch him with the curser before he hit the ground. It worked first time no flaws. I didn't get to see it for over a week. We played that game quite often.
Then it was on to FORTRAN punch cards.
NOT the good old days.
Why do people think it's best to leave others living in the stone age?
These tribes have struck a balance with their environment, which makes them different from the 'ever expanding' cultures. Somehow, their population and footprint remains relatively stable. Why would it be best for them for us to disturb that balance?
Curios notes: But in the end, don't these tribes need to interact with others to really thrive, even if purely for the reason of genetic diversity? Typically, how 'old' are these tribes? Are destroying a society that's been around for 75 years, 200 years, 500years? How long will they last on their own?
Which makes me wonder...what is the likelihood there are any undiscovered tribes?
^OK, ignore that part... the result of skipping the summary and skimming the article.... Although I still wonder if they are really truly "uncontacted" tribes.
We have considerably less data on the isolated tribes that die out before we meet them.
We'd better find the rest before they die too.
Which makes me wonder...what is the likelihood there are any undiscovered tribes? This lesson learned may never have the chance to be applied from here on out.
Due to Russia's activities in the Ukraine, the US is going to start giving all Russian enterprises a hard time, any way they can.
Going to need superconducting charge cables. My mom sure isn't going to be wrestling 00 gauge charge cables into a connector.
>
No problem, we'll just 3D print em'. 3D printing will solve all our problems.
For that matter, why don't we just 3D print a fully charged battery?
^Get to a 1000 mile range for an 8 hour charge with a reasonable price point and you'll see mass market adoption because there are a large number of drivers who rarely drive that far. Folks that buy those cars won't complain.
Seems that we have a unnecessary complaint about future complainers.
I think there are many great possibilities for 3D printing beyond the UAV / plastic gun craze, though.
You are on to something. A 3D printed aerial assault vehicle with 3D printed armaments! All printed in 23 hours!
Quick!!! A 3D printer can print something! This is newsworthy fodder for Slashdot!!
And call it what it is. In this case, a glider.
He's on it. Its next on his list. Right after he closes Gitmo, creates transparency, reduces the income gap, and fixes heath care (again and again), all while making the world love us again.
Point taken, my wording could have been better. But interpreting results loses scientific value if its done through a narrow lens. A true scientific study would have included some consideration of other probably causes and included in the analysis.
The charts don't explain the rising trend before the internet was really highly accessible, and frankly I don't think they correlate all that well. While the internet would logically play a role, I think our societies' ability to further explain the world through science and implement technologies that control the world around us give rise to more folks being critical of religious ideas. Also, TV certainly plays a role.
It appears to me this study carries a flaw that many do, which is the intent to prove something rather than discover it. To me, the question is not clearly answered.
If you have clients that don't need DLNA or transcoding, IMO, there is no reason to have PLEX. Its not for everyone. Transcoding = quality loss. Also, I would never purchase a pogoplug, as it would add zero value to my system. There may be benefits to some, but everyone's needs are different.