The answer is no. People asking these kinds of questions watch too much Star Trek, and want a Geordi La Forge explanation for something that exists outside TV-land.
I mean, if we had a working warp engine, would you attempt to explain its mechanics to the lay person? "Umm, see, there's this stuff, called physics...wait, have you heard of chemistry? Well, there's this stuff called chemistry...Actually, have you ever heard of the scientific method?"
That war was fought and lost a long time ago. It was found that I type development was too dangerous for the common people, and legislated out of existence. Just think about how you were taught 'to think', then take a look at the people around you, and ask yourself, is any of this really necessary?
He said implemented, he didn't say that it worked. Contractors make bank on SAP installs, I'd be very happy spending 5 years implementing the forever project with no downside save boredom.
You know, when you to assemble something, and you have a few pieces (like screws) left over, it's not that you're a genius, and those parts were unnecessary (usually).
I imagine something similar with the employment issue...chronic unemployment issues speaks of a bigger problem, perhaps of some people with an obtuse vision of how things ought to be.
Well, the other option is/. performing real research / reporting, which, as the site has changed hands so many times, probably lacks the crew necessary to do that.
And how might one find some tech news / discussions, were they looking for it? Well, keeping a permanent IRC window open to #linux on freenet might be a good place to start; there are probably a few other channels that are filled with idle chatter and interesting topics, if one looks; there are always mailing lists...and there are newsgroups (NNTP), which contain useful stuff if you stop browsing alt.binaries.*.
Let's not guss this one up: AI, like regular I (in so far as we can tell), is a state machine. Doesn't matter how many databases you attach to it, or what language you write it in, you're dealing with a state machine.
Call me when Computer Science progresses beyond using state machines.
I prefer Base64 encoding the inputs, and continuing in my meandering way to build things from SQL strings. Quite frankly, no expects the Base64 encoding, and it works on, I think, everything...just need to write an extra function to decode the data when looking for stuff in the database.
Money? That and if this happened on a military install, they'd be sporting an even larger black eye than they currently have ("You trusted Amazon? What's wrong with you?" vs. "Our nation's elite military 'cyber-warriors' can't secure a simple database from opportunistic h@x0rs...how the hell are they going to protect us from {enemy}?"). The first one is a gaff, the second one is a congressional inquisition into 'what exactly do you do with all that money we give you.'
Well, let's start with the usual suspects. Did a contractor / employee have access to it, and, I don't know, have the WeatherBug application running in the background?
Hush. They finally fixed this (an annoyance every time I install Firefox / load up a new Linux install), and that's a good thing.
Now if they could find themselves a leader...someone who doesn't think that Apple or Google or Microsoft are the people they should be copying / working for, then maybe FF will have a future.
"So how do we know that any other present or future reactors don't have problems of a similar magnitude?"
By looking at the blueprints, etc. We've come a long way since the first batch of nuclear reactors, and have a better idea what works, and what doesn't. Aside from nuclear chemistry / physics, there's stuff that standard (if there is such a thing) engineers can spot with garden variety thermodynamics (i.e. that isn't going to work / is super-unstable).
"From what I read, the safety measures at Fukushima were considered to be acceptable before the tsunami, but what was not accounted for was that the whole island dropped in elevation, so the effects of the wave were greater than could have been imagined."
And the Iraqi Minister of Information said that American soldiers were slaughtering themselves at the gates to Baghdad. The safety measures were inadequate (but will be labeled adequate because the whole saving face thing / no one wants to be sued); from a nuclear chemistry point of view, contaminating a reactor with sea water is just about the worst thing you can do.
"How many other reactors are there where a catastrophic event may exceed the design parameters?"
I'll play your game. All of them. A coal powerplant can explode when dealing with a catastrophic event exceeding its design parameters; so can a wind turbine (not a reactor, but you get the point). However, with nuclear power, you may want to focus more on the addition of passive safety devices (i.e. the reactor can go out of control, and the containment vessel won't breach; hydrogen gas won't be produced; adequate cooling doesn't rely on active cooling; etc.); those things can mitigate any problem from expanding to another stage.
"The problem is that the consequences of a single nuclear accident are huge."
Only if the nuclear reactor is built the way most evil overlord's lairs are built on TV; the evil overlord dies, and inexplicably, the entire fortress begins crumbling around the heroes; same idea with nuclear reactors...don't buy your cement / concrete from the lowest bidder / the mob.
The Chernobyl type of reactor has a positive void coefficient, which means that when a part of the water is replaced by steam the power will increase. At the Chernobyl experiment the steam content in the coolant channels increased suddenly causing a catastrophic power excursion. The presented analyses give details about the importance of the magnitude of the void coefficient. Also the delayed neutrons behaviour is described.
Chernobyl was essentially a bunch of scientists / engineers throwing a kegger, while performing dangerous experiments with defective parts...also, the kegs are spiked with acid (LSD). I'm not saying it can't happen again (that level of OMG WTF are you guys doing?), but let me ask you: when's the last time your college put the physics prof, who likes to juggle with lit blowtorches and chainsaws, up for tenure?
Fukushima is, and we are still getting details about this one, so I could be wrong (like pulling teeth, getting information...), apparently a triple problem: 1.) cultural: Japanese don't like to lose face in front of people, so covering up stuff has been a problem, 2.): engineering: whoever okay'ed the plans to use the ocean as reactor coolant...I mean as an emergency design feature...should not be let near anything more threatening than string for the rest of their lives; actually, I take that back, the string is potentially a problem in their hands, give them nothing, 3.) accounting: having built said badly designed reactor (but still better designed than Chernobyl's, apparently), management was intent on getting their money's worth, which meant running the reactor until it posed a crisis-level threat to human safety, or someone decommissioned / upgraded the reactor, whichever they hit first; if you like money (RoI, Return on Investment), which option do you think they went with?
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, I've been high before, who hasn't?
The answer is no. People asking these kinds of questions watch too much Star Trek, and want a Geordi La Forge explanation for something that exists outside TV-land.
I mean, if we had a working warp engine, would you attempt to explain its mechanics to the lay person? "Umm, see, there's this stuff, called physics...wait, have you heard of chemistry? Well, there's this stuff called chemistry...Actually, have you ever heard of the scientific method?"
Most of us want IE 6 to die more than we hate what Mozilla has just pulled here.
Mozilla: "We did it for money!"
That war was fought and lost a long time ago. It was found that I type development was too dangerous for the common people, and legislated out of existence. Just think about how you were taught 'to think', then take a look at the people around you, and ask yourself, is any of this really necessary?
That's because they needed 4 Laws.
He said implemented, he didn't say that it worked. Contractors make bank on SAP installs, I'd be very happy spending 5 years implementing the forever project with no downside save boredom.
You know, when you to assemble something, and you have a few pieces (like screws) left over, it's not that you're a genius, and those parts were unnecessary (usually).
I imagine something similar with the employment issue...chronic unemployment issues speaks of a bigger problem, perhaps of some people with an obtuse vision of how things ought to be.
Just be wealthy, and that won't be a problem.
Well, the other option is /. performing real research / reporting, which, as the site has changed hands so many times, probably lacks the crew necessary to do that.
And how might one find some tech news / discussions, were they looking for it? Well, keeping a permanent IRC window open to #linux on freenet might be a good place to start; there are probably a few other channels that are filled with idle chatter and interesting topics, if one looks; there are always mailing lists...and there are newsgroups (NNTP), which contain useful stuff if you stop browsing alt.binaries.*.
Let's not guss this one up: AI, like regular I (in so far as we can tell), is a state machine. Doesn't matter how many databases you attach to it, or what language you write it in, you're dealing with a state machine.
Call me when Computer Science progresses beyond using state machines.
They don't need it. It has already been said, a nuclear attack on Japan will be treated like a nuclear attack on the continental US.
We can always expand it with an amendment...
I prefer Base64 encoding the inputs, and continuing in my meandering way to build things from SQL strings. Quite frankly, no expects the Base64 encoding, and it works on, I think, everything...just need to write an extra function to decode the data when looking for stuff in the database.
Money? That and if this happened on a military install, they'd be sporting an even larger black eye than they currently have ("You trusted Amazon? What's wrong with you?" vs. "Our nation's elite military 'cyber-warriors' can't secure a simple database from opportunistic h@x0rs...how the hell are they going to protect us from {enemy}?"). The first one is a gaff, the second one is a congressional inquisition into 'what exactly do you do with all that money we give you.'
Well, let's start with the usual suspects. Did a contractor / employee have access to it, and, I don't know, have the WeatherBug application running in the background?
Agreed, advertising is just modern day whoring...well, putting on a display by a brothel, for a brothel. It's drawing room like behavior.
Not going with the crowd isn't exactly a sign of deficiency of intelligence.
Yes, Two-Day Shipping is fast, but when it takes several days for the seller to ship the damn thing, that don't mean much!
Hush. They finally fixed this (an annoyance every time I install Firefox / load up a new Linux install), and that's a good thing.
Now if they could find themselves a leader...someone who doesn't think that Apple or Google or Microsoft are the people they should be copying / working for, then maybe FF will have a future.
"So how do we know that any other present or future reactors don't have problems of a similar magnitude?"
By looking at the blueprints, etc. We've come a long way since the first batch of nuclear reactors, and have a better idea what works, and what doesn't. Aside from nuclear chemistry / physics, there's stuff that standard (if there is such a thing) engineers can spot with garden variety thermodynamics (i.e. that isn't going to work / is super-unstable).
"From what I read, the safety measures at Fukushima were considered to be acceptable before the tsunami, but what was not accounted for was that the whole island dropped in elevation, so the effects of the wave were greater than could have been imagined."
And the Iraqi Minister of Information said that American soldiers were slaughtering themselves at the gates to Baghdad. The safety measures were inadequate (but will be labeled adequate because the whole saving face thing / no one wants to be sued); from a nuclear chemistry point of view, contaminating a reactor with sea water is just about the worst thing you can do.
"How many other reactors are there where a catastrophic event may exceed the design parameters?"
I'll play your game. All of them. A coal powerplant can explode when dealing with a catastrophic event exceeding its design parameters; so can a wind turbine (not a reactor, but you get the point). However, with nuclear power, you may want to focus more on the addition of passive safety devices (i.e. the reactor can go out of control, and the containment vessel won't breach; hydrogen gas won't be produced; adequate cooling doesn't rely on active cooling; etc.); those things can mitigate any problem from expanding to another stage.
"The problem is that the consequences of a single nuclear accident are huge."
Only if the nuclear reactor is built the way most evil overlord's lairs are built on TV; the evil overlord dies, and inexplicably, the entire fortress begins crumbling around the heroes; same idea with nuclear reactors...don't buy your cement / concrete from the lowest bidder / the mob.
To clarify AC's point: https://www.euronuclear.org/e-...
The Chernobyl type of reactor has a positive void coefficient, which means that when a part of the water is replaced by steam the power will increase. At the Chernobyl experiment the steam content in the coolant channels increased suddenly causing a catastrophic power excursion. The presented analyses give details about the importance of the magnitude of the void coefficient. Also the delayed neutrons behaviour is described.
Chernobyl was essentially a bunch of scientists / engineers throwing a kegger, while performing dangerous experiments with defective parts...also, the kegs are spiked with acid (LSD). I'm not saying it can't happen again (that level of OMG WTF are you guys doing?), but let me ask you: when's the last time your college put the physics prof, who likes to juggle with lit blowtorches and chainsaws, up for tenure?
Fukushima is, and we are still getting details about this one, so I could be wrong (like pulling teeth, getting information...), apparently a triple problem: 1.) cultural: Japanese don't like to lose face in front of people, so covering up stuff has been a problem, 2.): engineering: whoever okay'ed the plans to use the ocean as reactor coolant...I mean as an emergency design feature...should not be let near anything more threatening than string for the rest of their lives; actually, I take that back, the string is potentially a problem in their hands, give them nothing, 3.) accounting: having built said badly designed reactor (but still better designed than Chernobyl's, apparently), management was intent on getting their money's worth, which meant running the reactor until it posed a crisis-level threat to human safety, or someone decommissioned / upgraded the reactor, whichever they hit first; if you like money (RoI, Return on Investment), which option do you think they went with?
Most things result in hazardous waste. As an aside, one of the waste products of nuclear reactors was / is ozone.
Eternal September is coming to an end? Might be time to break out the NNTP client, and check out Usenet.