go ahead, mod me down. you wish to use force to have me "behave." i don't respond to that. if someone says something incredibly stupid to me, i am calling them a moron. if your policy is to mod me down for that, so be it. we shall do this dance forever. because i am not swayed. i am incapable of holding my tongue when confronted ignorance. if this is a personal fault, so be it, it will be my fault to my deathbed. i am simply unable to hold back on judging someone's intelligence when they say something ignorant and/ or low iq
i don't understand the theoretical virtue of silence or kindness in the face of stupidity
that is true if you are dealing with someone in a longterm relationship who understands integrity and accountability
but you are dealing with a herd, a hysterical uneducated mob. therefore, there is no need to worry about what they want long term. long term, they don't exist as a cohesive entity. when gas goes to $8/ gallon, you watch how quickly Joe Q. Public changes his mind on pebble bed reactors. so tear down the dinosaurs. by the time you are done tearing down the dinosaurs, the public will be begging for relief on energy costs, and new passively safe nuclear will sound just fine
if you don't want to be treated rudely, don't be stupid. i'm not your father. it is not my job to lovingly hold your hand and guide you through the world. if you say something stupid, i'm calling you stupid. got it?
cars kill more people than terrorism. cars kill more people than cancer. cars kill more people than pedophiles...
blah blah blah
zzz
this refrain is the sturdiest indicator for me that i am in a conversation with an idiot. someone with no sense of proportion, compare and contrast, context... look, morons: there are dozens of other variables in play: preventability, intent, cost acceptability, trade offs, risk factors, potential size of costs, ease of pinning accountability, personal versus public decisions, financial loss versus human loss... on and on and on the other factors go. those other factors are what the fucking discussion is about, morons. yet whenever someone tries to discuss an accident, a category of cause of death, anything about human morality, some dimwitted asshole has to try to collapse the entire fucking discussion with a "yeah but cars kill more people than..."
god, i want to strangle someone whenever i hear this brain dead puerile stupidity
to me, it's right up there with "yeah but correlation is not causation..." and other really just plain low iq comments you constantly find in internet forums. completely predictable brain failure
completely predictable, hmmm... ok, here goes:
as a matter of public record here on slashdot, in case anyone else claims this recurrent phenomenon as their own old faithful source of brain fail, i'm going to now go out and claim the puerile thought process "yeah but cars kill more..."as my own godwin's law:
"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1."
circletimessquare law:
"As an online discussion about causes of death grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving motor vehicle accidents, for the purpose of trying to say the cause of death is not worth examining, approaches 1."
and just in case, circletimessquare second law:
"As an online discussion about a new scientific observation grows longer, especially involving the soft sciences, the probability of someone mentioning correlation not being causation approaches 1."
ok, there you go: i, circletimessquare, claimed these forms of logical coherence failure, right here, on pi day 2011, in a comment thread on slashdot. so you future wikipedia contributors better fucking google first before you make proper attribution. thanks
i'm seriously going to reach out through my keyboard across the internet and through the asshole's monitor and strangle the next fucking retard who responds to a comment of mine with "correlation is not causation" or "yeah but cars kill more people than..."
right, and if there was a problem, someone got killed. or maybe 2 or 3 people. you cleaned up the wreckage, you buried the bodies, you moved on
but i'll tell you what: if ford made nuclear powered cars, ford better have designed them from the get go with passive safety philosophy. because there is no "oops, my bad, move on" with nuclear power. you fuck up with nuclear power, you're stuck with uninhabited areas of countryside for generations: you don't "just move on". there is no moving on. you fuck up, you're stuck with it for a long long time
so no, i'm sorry, nuclear power engineering is not like early cars, or a computer program, or a bridge, or the hindenberg... or any number of technologies where you screw up, you kill a bunch of people, you clean up the mess you move on. you don't MOVE ON with nuclear power mistakes
if you don't get that key philosophical understanding about why nuclear power is so different, stop delivering opinions on it
oh my god, a pron actress bio on wikipedia
on
Happy Pi Day
·
· Score: 1
i used to look up pron actresses on wikipedia all the time, then at some point a few years ago, they just stop showing up
that's the real reason wikipedia deletionists suck
hey arrogant wikipedia adequacy trolls: give me back my Lily Thai page
the common man also doesn't want to pay $8/ gallon gasoline, which is where we are headed. so when push comes to shove, he'll look at nuclear again. when he does that, it would be nice not to have any fresh nuclear accidents on his mind. so tear down the dinosaurs. by the time you are done with that, we will be at $8/ gallon, and the common man will be getting "i love pebble beds" tattooed on his derrier
we are talking about NUCLEAR POWER. not a cheese factory or a blimp. you poison some people with bad cheese, you crash the hindenburg: ok, lesson learned, some people died, move on. nuclear power, you have to understand, involves the possibility for mistakes that results in vast areas of land uninhabitable for decades or centuries. that's not funny. therefore, you overdesign nuclear plants with safeguards in mind for the most unlikely of events. the fukushima plant? they put the 2 backup diesel generators in the basement. which were flooded by tsunami. because the seawall was never going to fail
guess what: the walls failed, the generators flooded. all you had to do was put the diesel generators on the roof! or one on the roof and one in the basement
but no. now you have cooling problem. honest mistake? there are no honest mistakes when you are dealing with nuclear power. this is not like you dropped your coffee mug on your pants in the morning. oh well, my bad, move on. there is NO MOVING ON with a nuclear accident. this is a technology where if you make a mistake, you fuck up vast areas of the countryside for generations. you make a mistake, you are stuck with it for a long, long time
so overdesign. then you overdesign some more. then you go back to the drawing board, and you overdesign for the most obscure problem or threat. why? because it's NUCLEAR POWER. if you don't understand why that is so dangerous and so different, stop delivering opinions on it
people better wrap their heads around this idea that you have to be obscenely paranoid about possible problems when designing, building, and operating nuclear plants. there is never an "oops, my bad, carry on" with nuclear power. fi you don't see that, stop talking about nuclear power, you don't understand why it is different from designing a car, a bridge, a computer program
those hippies and hysterical uneducated types would like nothing more than to see existing reactors shut down. and i agree with them, in the name of preserving a future for nuclear power
get rid of the old shoddy decrepit badly designed systems, before another tsunami/ chernobyl/ 3 mile island. and isn't shutting down the liabilities the first step in replacing them with nuclear power that we can rest comfortable with? give the hippies and the science illiterates what they want: by them time the old plants are ripped down, gas will be $8/ gallon, and then everyone will be screaming for energy relief. bring in the CANDU and pebble beds
you talk as if nuclear engineers are just hired draftsmen in the employ of the pinheads who make the real mistake. completely lame, false conception of the problem on your part
when i say "nuclear engineers are to blame" i am pointing my finger at yes, that draftsman, and also the guy sitting in the CEO chair: the whole design/ engineering organization
"You might want to point that passion somewhere else."
excuse me? do you know what integrity means?
there is no such thing as political pressure that can convince a genuine engineer or construction head or plant operator with the slightest shred of personal integrity to design something deficient and put his name on that design. what cowardice. if you are a man of integrity and of your word, and your employ is in the field of engineering and design or construction and operation of something critical, and you participate in a large scale project: a bridge, a building, a computer program that runs a critical component, a nuclear power plant, etc: you are going to make damn sure that design is sound. or you're an irresponsible asshole who is in the wrong field of endeavor
if a design isn't sound, and your name is attached to it, and you play your lame ass redirect blame game, "not my fault", then you are a slug who no one should ever employ for any engineering job, ever. what you do is you stand up and say "i will not sign my name to this, this design is deficient." and if the guys in the executive suite doesn't listen to you, you stand up, you leave, and you blow a whistle. because the guy who goes "oh well, that's shoddy design, but not my problem": you are a coward and a blockhead and you are a man of zero integrity. you should be tried for a white collar crime. am i pointing my passion somewhere wrong asshole? are we not talking about critical systems whose failure might result in human death or injury or the loss of millions? your attitude, you have no business designing or engineering any critical system, ever
do you know what that passion is called asshole? it's called having a simple human conscience. so why don't you try pointing your ignorance somewhere else
you stand behind your work, like a man with pride and integrity in his work. or you get a bottle of alcohol, you quit your job, and you go home and sit in front of a tv all day. because that's all you sound like you are fit for. with your scumbag attitude you have no business in the design, construction, or operation of any device, structure, or program that might impact human lives
quit now. pick another field. before you kill someone, asshole
interesting note:
on
Happy Pi Day
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
as an aside, both CANDU and pebble beds still have potential problems and weaknesses. nuclear power is inherently dangerous. so what i call upon the nuclear engineers of the world is to improve on CANDU and pebble bed designs: make nuclear reactor design as passively safe as possible.wWe can't afford for you not to. we can't afford radiation leaks and melt downs. As a simple matter of not polluting the world and because these events really turn the public off on the idea of nuclear power. we need nuclear power, we can't rely completely yon other means (until we get fusion off the ground)
nuclear engineers of the world, step up: design a nuclear power plant as passively safe as possible
The future of nuclear power, if there is any, is something like a pebble bed reactor, which is passively safe: all of the support equipment, all of the nuclear plant personnel: it can all fail and they can all leave, and nothing bad will happen:
The DESIGN PHILOSOPHY of 1960s era nuclear power is what is killing nuclear power as a viable alternative in this world. Yes, people react in fear and panic and hysteria. So? Did you honestly expect any other reaction possible amongst the general populace, ever? Panic and hysteria is a CONSTANT of humanity. Their impression of nuclear power has been, uh, contaminated, and that's just simple human psychology, there's no getting around that.
So I blame one group here: 1960s, 1950s era nuclear engineers. It is their fault why nuclear power is becoming politically unacceptable. They designed plants that needed to be actively safe. THAT is the real reason we are having problems in Japan now, why we had problems at 3 mile island, why we had problems at Chernobyl: someone has to be there, certain equipment has to work, or there will be trouble. BAD DESIGN. It's just a matter of time before operator error or a geological/ meteorological event causes the active safety system to fail. Nuclear engineers of the '50s and '60s honestly should have foreseen that. Nuclear plants, from the beginning, should have been designed that should something bad happen, the system just naturally gravitates to a harmless state. But in the 1960s, they put in plants that naturally gravitate to a harmful state, and require constant effort to keep safe. Really, really bad design.
Nuclear engineers from a half century ago genuinely failed us. They genuinely fucked up, and we are paying for their shoddy design. And so is the future of nuclear power. Because we have passively safe nuclear designs like pebble bed reactors now. But we may never see them in full use, ever, because public opinion has been poisoned, maybe irreparably. You can't blame the common man for that. He cannot shrug and forget being irradiated. But nuclear engineers, they should have known, they should designed better systems. It is their fault.
you don't know the japanese. they're population is declining, they have tons of old people to support, but they'd rather build health robots than allow filipino nurses in the country. right, that'll work. other countries whine and complain about immigration. but the japanese are a step beyond: they scrub the very possibility of immigration from ever happening. don't want to muddy the master race, see, with lesser asian races
this is getting into an argument about moral relativism and moral absolutism
which i will say this about:
i'm very sick of this respect for cultural relativity that says something stupid is ok in another place out of "respect" for culture
to me, this is ignorance beyond words. there is only one standard of morality for the entire world. it is a human morality. please note i said HUMAN morality. i didn't say american morality, or european morality. i said HUMAN morality. so the typical tired attack that i am trying impose my culture on other people is a bullshit attack, because there are just as many abuses of human morality in europe and the usa that needs addressing
i am not going to rant for 50 paragraphs, i am simply going to say this: cultural differences do not trump human rights. they are called human rights. not western rights, or caucasian rights, or rich people's rights. human rights are human rights are human rights. where human rights are abridged, i don't fucking care what you say about culture, it's simple WRONG
and for you to say "that's wrong what they are doing, but it's ok, because it's far away, it's over there" to me is vile ignorance and cowardice. the planet earth is one tiny dust ball in space. in an age of the internet and jet air travel, distances mean nothing
so have a human conscience, and when something wrong goes on somewhere else, condemn it. sensitivity to "cultural differences" is completely morally, intellectually, and logically incoherent of you, and is a kind of chicken shit desire to be a coward. to turn a blind eye to something going wrong somewhere in the world because those people are "different". how fucking condescending and patronizing of you. a human being is a human being is a human being. doesn't matter where they live. they deserve the same consideration as you
i've been to montreal, i've taken pictures there where people wandered into the shot. have i violated their rights? no
you can make a law about anything you want. that automatically doesn't make the law common sense or something you must respect. clearly this quebec law is irrational and deserves to be overturned
you really support the notion that just taking a picture in public means you can't publish it without contacting every person who wanders in the shot? clearly, no. so the only common sense idea is that IF you go in public, images of you in that public area are open and free for all. to say you get to go out IN PUBLIC and still control your image there, is delusionally wrong
I just want everyone in the New York City area to rest comfortable tonight with the knowledge that they built the Indian Point Nuclear Facility RIGHT ON TOP OF THE RAMAPO FAULT LINE.
Fault Lines never die, they just fade away. So while they have a big one in Japan or California every 100 years, it might be every 100,000 years for the Ramapo Fault Line. So we could get a big one tomorrow, or in a thousand years. No one knows. But its not like you even need an Earthquake for something awful to happen at Indian Point: its old and crumbling. It has frequent safety violations and infrastructure failures. Any number of problems could happen. From human error to just plain catastrophic failure due to age.
I'm not against nuclear power. Modern Pebble Bed Reactors are extremely safe: you can stand up and walk away from them, nothing happens. But the Indian Point Nuclear Facility is ancient, crumbling, outmoded technology, and it needs to be shut down ASAP. Just like the one in Japan that is failing:
Its like an old car: if you insist its time to get rid of the junker, it doesn't mean you are against all cars.
Listen carefully, those who are for more nuclear power, as am I: you have to understand the greatest enemy of wider use of nuclear power is not tree hugging hippies, but old nuclear reactors, based on technology that requires constant monitoring, in decrepit states. Because when, not if, they fail, all of public opinion moves against nuclear power. We need to shut down the old shoddy Indian Point Nuclear Facility NOW.
Slashdot Mirror
go ahead, mod me down. you wish to use force to have me "behave." i don't respond to that. if someone says something incredibly stupid to me, i am calling them a moron. if your policy is to mod me down for that, so be it. we shall do this dance forever. because i am not swayed. i am incapable of holding my tongue when confronted ignorance. if this is a personal fault, so be it, it will be my fault to my deathbed. i am simply unable to hold back on judging someone's intelligence when they say something ignorant and/ or low iq
i don't understand the theoretical virtue of silence or kindness in the face of stupidity
that is true if you are dealing with someone in a longterm relationship who understands integrity and accountability
but you are dealing with a herd, a hysterical uneducated mob. therefore, there is no need to worry about what they want long term. long term, they don't exist as a cohesive entity. when gas goes to $8/ gallon, you watch how quickly Joe Q. Public changes his mind on pebble bed reactors. so tear down the dinosaurs. by the time you are done tearing down the dinosaurs, the public will be begging for relief on energy costs, and new passively safe nuclear will sound just fine
because the point you bring up is stupid
if you don't want to be treated rudely, don't be stupid. i'm not your father. it is not my job to lovingly hold your hand and guide you through the world. if you say something stupid, i'm calling you stupid. got it?
cars kill more people than terrorism. cars kill more people than cancer. cars kill more people than pedophiles...
blah blah blah
zzz
this refrain is the sturdiest indicator for me that i am in a conversation with an idiot. someone with no sense of proportion, compare and contrast, context... look, morons: there are dozens of other variables in play: preventability, intent, cost acceptability, trade offs, risk factors, potential size of costs, ease of pinning accountability, personal versus public decisions, financial loss versus human loss... on and on and on the other factors go. those other factors are what the fucking discussion is about, morons. yet whenever someone tries to discuss an accident, a category of cause of death, anything about human morality, some dimwitted asshole has to try to collapse the entire fucking discussion with a "yeah but cars kill more people than..."
god, i want to strangle someone whenever i hear this brain dead puerile stupidity
to me, it's right up there with "yeah but correlation is not causation..." and other really just plain low iq comments you constantly find in internet forums. completely predictable brain failure
completely predictable, hmmm... ok, here goes:
as a matter of public record here on slashdot, in case anyone else claims this recurrent phenomenon as their own old faithful source of brain fail, i'm going to now go out and claim the puerile thought process "yeah but cars kill more..."as my own godwin's law:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law
"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1."
circletimessquare law:
"As an online discussion about causes of death grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving motor vehicle accidents, for the purpose of trying to say the cause of death is not worth examining, approaches 1."
and just in case, circletimessquare second law:
"As an online discussion about a new scientific observation grows longer, especially involving the soft sciences, the probability of someone mentioning correlation not being causation approaches 1."
ok, there you go: i, circletimessquare, claimed these forms of logical coherence failure, right here, on pi day 2011, in a comment thread on slashdot. so you future wikipedia contributors better fucking google first before you make proper attribution. thanks
i'm seriously going to reach out through my keyboard across the internet and through the asshole's monitor and strangle the next fucking retard who responds to a comment of mine with "correlation is not causation" or "yeah but cars kill more people than..."
mod parent up
right, and if there was a problem, someone got killed. or maybe 2 or 3 people. you cleaned up the wreckage, you buried the bodies, you moved on
but i'll tell you what: if ford made nuclear powered cars, ford better have designed them from the get go with passive safety philosophy. because there is no "oops, my bad, move on" with nuclear power. you fuck up with nuclear power, you're stuck with uninhabited areas of countryside for generations: you don't "just move on". there is no moving on. you fuck up, you're stuck with it for a long long time
so no, i'm sorry, nuclear power engineering is not like early cars, or a computer program, or a bridge, or the hindenberg... or any number of technologies where you screw up, you kill a bunch of people, you clean up the mess you move on. you don't MOVE ON with nuclear power mistakes
if you don't get that key philosophical understanding about why nuclear power is so different, stop delivering opinions on it
i used to look up pron actresses on wikipedia all the time, then at some point a few years ago, they just stop showing up
that's the real reason wikipedia deletionists suck
hey arrogant wikipedia adequacy trolls: give me back my Lily Thai page
assholes
the common man also doesn't want to pay $8/ gallon gasoline, which is where we are headed. so when push comes to shove, he'll look at nuclear again. when he does that, it would be nice not to have any fresh nuclear accidents on his mind. so tear down the dinosaurs. by the time you are done with that, we will be at $8/ gallon, and the common man will be getting "i love pebble beds" tattooed on his derrier
we are talking about NUCLEAR POWER. not a cheese factory or a blimp. you poison some people with bad cheese, you crash the hindenburg: ok, lesson learned, some people died, move on. nuclear power, you have to understand, involves the possibility for mistakes that results in vast areas of land uninhabitable for decades or centuries. that's not funny. therefore, you overdesign nuclear plants with safeguards in mind for the most unlikely of events. the fukushima plant? they put the 2 backup diesel generators in the basement. which were flooded by tsunami. because the seawall was never going to fail
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/14/world/asia/japan-fukushima-nuclear-reactor.html
(facepalm)
guess what: the walls failed, the generators flooded. all you had to do was put the diesel generators on the roof! or one on the roof and one in the basement
but no. now you have cooling problem. honest mistake? there are no honest mistakes when you are dealing with nuclear power. this is not like you dropped your coffee mug on your pants in the morning. oh well, my bad, move on. there is NO MOVING ON with a nuclear accident. this is a technology where if you make a mistake, you fuck up vast areas of the countryside for generations. you make a mistake, you are stuck with it for a long, long time
so overdesign. then you overdesign some more. then you go back to the drawing board, and you overdesign for the most obscure problem or threat. why? because it's NUCLEAR POWER. if you don't understand why that is so dangerous and so different, stop delivering opinions on it
people better wrap their heads around this idea that you have to be obscenely paranoid about possible problems when designing, building, and operating nuclear plants. there is never an "oops, my bad, carry on" with nuclear power. fi you don't see that, stop talking about nuclear power, you don't understand why it is different from designing a car, a bridge, a computer program
how fast did 1904 cars go?
those hippies and hysterical uneducated types would like nothing more than to see existing reactors shut down. and i agree with them, in the name of preserving a future for nuclear power
get rid of the old shoddy decrepit badly designed systems, before another tsunami/ chernobyl/ 3 mile island. and isn't shutting down the liabilities the first step in replacing them with nuclear power that we can rest comfortable with? give the hippies and the science illiterates what they want: by them time the old plants are ripped down, gas will be $8/ gallon, and then everyone will be screaming for energy relief. bring in the CANDU and pebble beds
you talk as if nuclear engineers are just hired draftsmen in the employ of the pinheads who make the real mistake. completely lame, false conception of the problem on your part
when i say "nuclear engineers are to blame" i am pointing my finger at yes, that draftsman, and also the guy sitting in the CEO chair: the whole design/ engineering organization
"You might want to point that passion somewhere else."
excuse me? do you know what integrity means?
there is no such thing as political pressure that can convince a genuine engineer or construction head or plant operator with the slightest shred of personal integrity to design something deficient and put his name on that design. what cowardice. if you are a man of integrity and of your word, and your employ is in the field of engineering and design or construction and operation of something critical, and you participate in a large scale project: a bridge, a building, a computer program that runs a critical component, a nuclear power plant, etc: you are going to make damn sure that design is sound. or you're an irresponsible asshole who is in the wrong field of endeavor
if a design isn't sound, and your name is attached to it, and you play your lame ass redirect blame game, "not my fault", then you are a slug who no one should ever employ for any engineering job, ever. what you do is you stand up and say "i will not sign my name to this, this design is deficient." and if the guys in the executive suite doesn't listen to you, you stand up, you leave, and you blow a whistle. because the guy who goes "oh well, that's shoddy design, but not my problem": you are a coward and a blockhead and you are a man of zero integrity. you should be tried for a white collar crime. am i pointing my passion somewhere wrong asshole? are we not talking about critical systems whose failure might result in human death or injury or the loss of millions? your attitude, you have no business designing or engineering any critical system, ever
do you know what that passion is called asshole? it's called having a simple human conscience. so why don't you try pointing your ignorance somewhere else
you stand behind your work, like a man with pride and integrity in his work. or you get a bottle of alcohol, you quit your job, and you go home and sit in front of a tv all day. because that's all you sound like you are fit for. with your scumbag attitude you have no business in the design, construction, or operation of any device, structure, or program that might impact human lives
quit now. pick another field. before you kill someone, asshole
also albert einstein's birthday
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein
March 14, 1879
that I did, an oversight. CANDU is also passively safe
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CANDU_reactor
as an aside, both CANDU and pebble beds still have potential problems and weaknesses. nuclear power is inherently dangerous. so what i call upon the nuclear engineers of the world is to improve on CANDU and pebble bed designs: make nuclear reactor design as passively safe as possible.wWe can't afford for you not to. we can't afford radiation leaks and melt downs. As a simple matter of not polluting the world and because these events really turn the public off on the idea of nuclear power. we need nuclear power, we can't rely completely yon other means (until we get fusion off the ground)
nuclear engineers of the world, step up: design a nuclear power plant as passively safe as possible
Tree hugging hippies?
No.
Hysterical, science illiterate journalism?
No.
The greatest enemy of nuclear power is 1960s era nuclear plant technology. It is an active safety model, rather than a passive safety model:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_Safety
The future of nuclear power, if there is any, is something like a pebble bed reactor, which is passively safe: all of the support equipment, all of the nuclear plant personnel: it can all fail and they can all leave, and nothing bad will happen:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pebble_bed_reactor
The DESIGN PHILOSOPHY of 1960s era nuclear power is what is killing nuclear power as a viable alternative in this world. Yes, people react in fear and panic and hysteria. So? Did you honestly expect any other reaction possible amongst the general populace, ever? Panic and hysteria is a CONSTANT of humanity. Their impression of nuclear power has been, uh, contaminated, and that's just simple human psychology, there's no getting around that.
So I blame one group here: 1960s, 1950s era nuclear engineers. It is their fault why nuclear power is becoming politically unacceptable. They designed plants that needed to be actively safe. THAT is the real reason we are having problems in Japan now, why we had problems at 3 mile island, why we had problems at Chernobyl: someone has to be there, certain equipment has to work, or there will be trouble. BAD DESIGN. It's just a matter of time before operator error or a geological/ meteorological event causes the active safety system to fail. Nuclear engineers of the '50s and '60s honestly should have foreseen that. Nuclear plants, from the beginning, should have been designed that should something bad happen, the system just naturally gravitates to a harmless state. But in the 1960s, they put in plants that naturally gravitate to a harmful state, and require constant effort to keep safe. Really, really bad design.
Nuclear engineers from a half century ago genuinely failed us. They genuinely fucked up, and we are paying for their shoddy design. And so is the future of nuclear power. Because we have passively safe nuclear designs like pebble bed reactors now. But we may never see them in full use, ever, because public opinion has been poisoned, maybe irreparably. You can't blame the common man for that. He cannot shrug and forget being irradiated. But nuclear engineers, they should have known, they should designed better systems. It is their fault.
it's japan, so we're talking about an argentina syndrome:
http://www.antipodemap.com/
http://www.japanfortheuninvited.com/articles/kobe-earthquake.html
you don't know the japanese. they're population is declining, they have tons of old people to support, but they'd rather build health robots than allow filipino nurses in the country. right, that'll work. other countries whine and complain about immigration. but the japanese are a step beyond: they scrub the very possibility of immigration from ever happening. don't want to muddy the master race, see, with lesser asian races
well done
they turned down help after the kobe earthquake in 1995. because it was from nations like china and korea
there's no racism like asian racism
this time they are accepting aid from china and korea. this earthquake makes 1995 look like a hiccup
this is getting into an argument about moral relativism and moral absolutism
which i will say this about:
i'm very sick of this respect for cultural relativity that says something stupid is ok in another place out of "respect" for culture
to me, this is ignorance beyond words. there is only one standard of morality for the entire world. it is a human morality. please note i said HUMAN morality. i didn't say american morality, or european morality. i said HUMAN morality. so the typical tired attack that i am trying impose my culture on other people is a bullshit attack, because there are just as many abuses of human morality in europe and the usa that needs addressing
i am not going to rant for 50 paragraphs, i am simply going to say this: cultural differences do not trump human rights. they are called human rights. not western rights, or caucasian rights, or rich people's rights. human rights are human rights are human rights. where human rights are abridged, i don't fucking care what you say about culture, it's simple WRONG
and for you to say "that's wrong what they are doing, but it's ok, because it's far away, it's over there" to me is vile ignorance and cowardice. the planet earth is one tiny dust ball in space. in an age of the internet and jet air travel, distances mean nothing
so have a human conscience, and when something wrong goes on somewhere else, condemn it. sensitivity to "cultural differences" is completely morally, intellectually, and logically incoherent of you, and is a kind of chicken shit desire to be a coward. to turn a blind eye to something going wrong somewhere in the world because those people are "different". how fucking condescending and patronizing of you. a human being is a human being is a human being. doesn't matter where they live. they deserve the same consideration as you
"common sense is absurd"
and that's all we need to know about how you think
i've been to montreal, i've taken pictures there where people wandered into the shot. have i violated their rights? no
you can make a law about anything you want. that automatically doesn't make the law common sense or something you must respect. clearly this quebec law is irrational and deserves to be overturned
you really support the notion that just taking a picture in public means you can't publish it without contacting every person who wanders in the shot? clearly, no. so the only common sense idea is that IF you go in public, images of you in that public area are open and free for all. to say you get to go out IN PUBLIC and still control your image there, is delusionally wrong
as soon as you step out your front door, you are in public, and anyone can take a picture of you, without any need for permission
in your private abode, or someone else's privater abode, the opposite is true
I just want everyone in the New York City area to rest comfortable tonight with the knowledge that they built the Indian Point Nuclear Facility RIGHT ON TOP OF THE RAMAPO FAULT LINE.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramapo_Fault#Earthquake_hazards_in_the_New_York_City_area
Morons.
Fault Lines never die, they just fade away. So while they have a big one in Japan or California every 100 years, it might be every 100,000 years for the Ramapo Fault Line. So we could get a big one tomorrow, or in a thousand years. No one knows. But its not like you even need an Earthquake for something awful to happen at Indian Point: its old and crumbling. It has frequent safety violations and infrastructure failures. Any number of problems could happen. From human error to just plain catastrophic failure due to age.
I'm not against nuclear power. Modern Pebble Bed Reactors are extremely safe: you can stand up and walk away from them, nothing happens. But the Indian Point Nuclear Facility is ancient, crumbling, outmoded technology, and it needs to be shut down ASAP. Just like the one in Japan that is failing:
Its like an old car: if you insist its time to get rid of the junker, it doesn't mean you are against all cars.
Listen carefully, those who are for more nuclear power, as am I: you have to understand the greatest enemy of wider use of nuclear power is not tree hugging hippies, but old nuclear reactors, based on technology that requires constant monitoring, in decrepit states. Because when, not if, they fail, all of public opinion moves against nuclear power. We need to shut down the old shoddy Indian Point Nuclear Facility NOW.