I suggest you contact the authors of "Angry Birds" or other top iOS titles, and ask them how badly they've been "ripped off"...;-)
The one thing that's unfortunate about Apple's stance with iOS is the limitation to only apps developed with Xcode/ObjC. That certainly makes doing cross-platform development harder.
That's the best joke I've heard in a loooong time! 0 constantly has the media fawning over his every word. It's not as though they ever ask him a tough question, investigate him in any meaningful way, or point out his very obvious flaws.
Well, except for Fox News, sometimes.
and with a weak economy they'll just swiftboat him.
If the economy doesn't improve substantially, there'll be no need to "swiftboat" him. He'll be summarily run out of town on a rail (high speed no doubt).
One can only hope he'll continue is disastrous and un-American policies for a few more months - without actually completely destroying the dollar. Osama will be a distant memory come election time, while $6/gallon gas will be an unpleasant, in-your-face reality.
We have an old router which is plugged into a spare port on our optical switch (fiber to the home), and has an open wireless G for anyone to use, configured to assign DHCP addresses from 192.168.200.x where x is 175-200, and with SSID of "All Connections Logged".
What good does it do to "log connections" if the MAC address can be spoofed?
What you need to watch out for is someone pulling up on the street, downloading mass child porn, and heading off into the sunset. The FBI will be well aware that you could be "spoofing" a MAC address yourself. You might not be convicted, but it sure as heck would be a major hassle - and what is the benefit again? Let the freeloaders buy some bandwidth themselves...
Please provide any proof I'm wrong. Any. Since we both know you're a complete fucking idiot and a troll. Shut the fuck up and get off your sister. Holy shit you are stupid.
I see - I'm wrong because we have almost no capability to actually produce fusion power in any meaningful way and it has been so for the last several decades and absolutely looks like the case for at least the next several decades and EVERYONE involved says MAJOR milestones (exactly as I fucking said) would still be missing (including a complete lack of materials science) to actually have anything which would hope to deliver fusion.
So you're position is 100% I'm wrong because you don't want it to be so. You are a fucking idiot. Holy shit you are stupid.
So I see your position has changed from "200 years" to "at least the next several decades"? Which is it? I'm the stupid one?
You'd better see the doctor about your blood pressure, I'm sure it's elevated.
For the rest of what I have to say, read my response to your other profanity-laced rant.;-)
We literally are closer to some type of extra-solar exploration than we are fusion power.
This also deserves a response, which I neglected.
You are predicting something that's already happened. Congratulations!
The Voyager 1 probe has reached the heliopause, and of course it has escape velocity from the Sun. Extra-solar exploration, ho! Face it, predictions aren't your strong suit.
Amusingly, that's precisely what I was telling you.
It's also quite funny that you're claiming "physicist" (sic) support your view, when the person who discovered the principle that makes fission possible (Einstein) was dead wrong about its practicality. He didn't think it would ever work, not even claiming it would take hundreds of years. He was proven wrong within ten years.
Once again (and I hope it sinks in this time) technology predictions are hard, and many extremely smart people have been burned making them. I'll laugh thinking of this thread if I hear of the first net energy producing fusion reactor going live. It may not happen, but I'm not stupid enough to make a prediction one way or the other.;-)
Fusion researchers have done an excellent job in pushing their lies and PR so as to continue receiving funding but it would literally be a miracle to have fusion power plants running in less than a couple hundred years; with five to six hundred years being far more realistic.
Wow, a prophet right here on/.!
I'd really like to know which orifice you pulled your numbers from? We are possibly at the edge of the AI singularity, meaning soon we might build a computer smart enough to build a smarter computer. It's a fairly short track from there to IQ 10,000. I strongly suspect such an AI would have very little trouble designing a working fusion reactor. This will likely all happen well within 100 years, possibly within the next twenty years.
Even ignoring the possibility of a singularity, mere humans could well invent a working fusion reactor in the near term. Advances in science and technology aren't very predictable. Let me give you a few examples:
"... too far-fetched to be considered."
-- Editor of Scientific American, in a letter to Robert Goddard about Goddard's
idea of a rocket-accelerated airplane bomb, 1940
(German V2 missiles came down on London 3 years later)
"A rocket will never be able to leave the Earth's atmosphere."
-- New York Times, 1936
"There is not the slightest indication that nuclear energy will ever be obtainable. It would mean the atom would have to be shattered at will."
-- Albert Einstein, German-born American physicist, 1932
Given that even Einstein was dead wrong in some of his predictions, I don't have a lot of faith in what you're saying here...;-)
I mean, anyone who doesn't know that iOS is a "closed" platform at this point only has themselves to blame.
A "closed-platform" that the company actively markets to children and turns out to be hostile to their best interests cannot blame anyone but itself when a lawsuit comes crashing down on their head.
With their "walled garden" Apple is saying "these applications are safe. We give our stamp of approval. In fact, you can get no other apps than the ones we approve". If those apps prey on children, it's no longer the developers who are to blame, but Apple.
Your argument comes crashing down, though, given that adults are the only ones with access to the iTunes store, and able to enable payments. So, unless you were in the group of those burned by the 15 minute window after logging into iTunes (since fixed), it is entirely your fault if your child is able to make in-app purchases. Not Apple's.
Further, by not giving your child access to the store, he or she has no way to download apps of which you don't approve - or update the ones already on the device. Sounds like good parenting to me.
My first thought was that the 392 MW would be at noon on June 21. The important figure is of course the average MWH it will generate per day/year.
I'd guess it'll have a hard time seeming significant compared with nuclear power. I was just reading about the new Indian nuke plant complex the Russians are building, which is expected to generate 62 GW...or about 150 times as much, day or night, sunny or cloudy.
Listen up douche bag the Japanese government upgraded the accident at the fukushima power plant to level 7. The accident is a MAJOR ISSUE.
Oh really? Do tell. How would you compare it, on a scale of one to ten, to the earthquake and tsunami that killed 25,000+ people? How many people has this nuclear incident killed again?
No amount of dick riding on your part is going to make that go away. We don't need assholes like you saying everything is ok.
Neither the GP or I are saying 'everything is ok'. However, it is also not, in any way, a 'major disaster'. TEPCO (and the Japanese government) did not prepare properly for this event, and the reactors involved are of a very old design. Given those two facts, it's not too surprising that we're where we are. It is not an indictment of nuclear power in general, though. Nuclear power is a) absolutely necessary going forward and b) safer than any realistic alternative.
No it's not. This problem has been going on for a month and is not getting better.
Uh, genius, I suggest your read the article... Here's a sample:
Still, the upgraded severity reading does not reflect a recent deterioration at the plant. Rather, it suggests Japan’s evolving understanding of the damage that occurred there one month ago — and the contamination that has been leaking ever since.
Read that several times until you understand it.
There are seriously health and environmental consequences here, as well as long term economic problems.
Being an apologist for an industry that has eschewed safety and oversight does not help fix the problem.
The problem with this line of attack is that a) nuclear has, overall, a much better safety record that any other large-scale power generation method (especially excluding Chernobyl which had a criminally poor design and criminally stupid management) and b) the nuclear industry is much more focused on safety than almost any other human enterprise.
You want people to trust nuclear power. You want people to believe nuclear power is a safe energy source. Then offer constructive suggestions to fix the problem. Admit there were problems with oversight, safety and design and work to fix those issues.
First, build reactors using one of the much safer, modern designs.
Second, if the site is in an area subject to Magnitude 9+ earthquakes and tsunamis, actually plan for Magnitude 9+ earthquakes and tsunamis.
There, that wasn't too hard was it.
TEPCO didn't have the first option, but it sure as hell had the second, didn't it? I suggest you remember that if the diesel emergency backup generators had been stored in a tsunami proof bunker, this entire disaster would likely have been avoided. At worst, it would have been a much smaller issue. There also should have been a contingency plan to helicopter in such generators if needed.
Stop being a nuclear apologist fuck.
Realist is more like it.
Instead, I guess you advocate sticking with fossil fuel power generation, estimated to kill over 200,000 people annually. Or what about "clean" hydroelectric? I wonder if you realize it was responsible for the worst energy related death toll in history, when the Banqiao Dam in China failed, and as many as 230,000 people died? Nothing is absolutely safe, but nuclear power is better than the alternatives.
Social conservatives don't want educated children, they want obidient children.
That would be "obedient" children. Too funny.
I would say most parents want well educated children who are good citizens, meaning they see the many benefits of society and want to contribute positively. Despite the nihilistic views of some, the world is still full of opportunity, and we live in truly amazing times in terms of science and engineering. I do think our society is close to a criticality in some ways, but it may pass through it to become better than ever.
You know I never really cared for GWB either but mocking the man's intelligence when he was smart enough to get elected Governor of one of the largest states in the Union and then beat the best the Democratic Party had to offer twice in a national election is pretty pathetic.
Not only that GWB has a MBA from Harvard. 0 has kept his records closed, why is that do you suppose? Don't the American people deserve to see the school accomplishments of the "smartest President ever"? What was his SAT/ACT score I wonder?
Look cowboy, we're three weeks into this thing and it's nowhere close to over. It still gets worse every day.
Er, no. It is now getting better every day. The one major issue, a water leak, has been plugged. Unless that plug fails, things will improve from here. Relax, princess.
There may still be (probably is) ongoing unplanned criticality in not one, not two, but three reactors at the same site.
I've seen not one claim for continued criticality. Citation?
Reactor one has admittedly breached primary containment, and reactor two probably but not admittedly so.
Citation? I've not seen those reports. I do agree that it's likely at least one vessel was breached, extent unknown.
The potential for a much worse incident than Chernobyl still exists.
That is simply not true, unless there's another major natural disaster in the area. Chernobyl released 1/3 of a reactor core into the atmosphere, nothing like that will happen at Fukushima.
If one of these three reactors pops the entire site is a no-operations zone, and that means the other three reactors and their spent fuel ponds also go up for lack of rescue, and maybe even spent fuel in five and six as well. We don't have any data on what that level of contamination does to the ocean because Chernobyl wasn't on the shore and it was only 1/10th this much fuel - but it can't be good. Before this is over the entire planet may be drinking Fukushima tea.
Once again, you're quite wrong. Much larger releases have occurred in the past, directly into the ocean. They were the H-bomb tests at Bikini atoll. You will note that life went on with barely a hiccup, looking at the Pacific as a whole (and yes I think it was horrible what happened to the residents and Japanese fishermen).
Unacceptable levels of radioactivity have already been found in little fish 40 miles from this plant. Little fish are eaten by bigger fish, and big fish swim very far. As Cesium goes to the top of the food chain measurable amounts will be in our tin of tuna for the rest of time.
"Measurable amounts" is a meaningless statement. Medically detrimental amounts? Highly unlikely. At any rate, tuna contains mercury and is best avoided. Mahi, on the other hand, is typically harvested at three years old and has a lot less time to concentrate pollutants of any kind. Salmon are similar. Both taste better.;-)
Every ship that sails the sea has barnacles on its hull, and barnacles soak up iodine, cesium and plutonium like you wouldn't believe.
Clearly we should be creating barnacle farms all around the Fukushima area.:-)
Japan is completely hosed now, as they will shortly be cut off from the global economy. Ships will soon not even dare venture to the west coast of Japan, as they'll be delayed in every port thereafter for many years. India has banned all Japanese food imports, and they're India - they don't block incoming food trivially.
I can see that cleaning the scary barnacles off the ships would be a technical challenge of monumental proportions...:-P
I think you'll find you're wrong again, and that Japanese food (and ships) will be welcome again worldwide before long. Say, three months from now at the most.
That one reactor that used Plutonium MOX has enough toxic Plutonium in it to kill hundreds of millions of people. Saying there's only one reactor using Plutonium doesn't make it all OK now.
Wow, I wonder how many billions of people the plutonium in (and produced by) the over 500 nuclear weapons exploded above ground during tested could have killed?!? It's amazing anyone survived, isn't it? lol
All of the fuel rods contain some plutonium you fuck.
As far as the original content (which is the statement the OP made) you are quite wrong:
Since September 2010, Unit 3 has been fueled by a small fraction (6%)[5] of mixed-oxide (MOX) fuel, rather than the low enriched uranium (LEU) used in the other reactors.
Of course there is some Pu content in the spent rods (~0.89%), but not nearly as much as in the MOX fuel. Further, there is almost no chance that this Pu will become widely distributed. So it is pretty well a non-issue as far as we can tell now.
I hope every nuclear apologist goes and chokes on a bag of cocks.
I see your erudition and civility are right on par with your knowledge...;-)
I guess you could care less about the 200,000 folks dying every year from pollution? Did you know that burning coal spreads a good bit of radioactivity into the environment?
"The smell of ACs burning in the morning - the smell of victory!" lol
I get what you are trying to say with this, but honestly when everyone says its safe, yet these kind of "accidents" can still occur it makes you step back and really weigh the positives and negatives.
For instance, in these plants they are using plutonium mox fuel. That shit has a halflife of 20,000 years. So it wont be completely nonreactive for approximately 250,000 years or 12000 human generations. Sure it shouldn't happen, and there were no doubt many mistakes by this particular company. But even if it is a possibility that this would happen, and it obviously is, should we not reconsider the long term environmental and other effects when we are possibly going to be affecting forward 12000 generations in the future?
Actually, just one of the six reactors is using plutonium.
Regardless, there has been no large release of such material, nor is there likely to be any. Despite the impression you get from the many extremely alarmist articles, the cores are cooling off and the situation is improving. Probably the worst thing that's happened is a small amount of radioactive cesium has been released into the ocean.
So far in my life time (30 years) there have been 3 major nuclear accidents. Does this not at least warrant a second look?
I'm not sure what you mean by "a second look". The worst by a long shot of those "major accidents" (neither Three Mile Island or Fukushima has produced a confirmed fatality so far) was Chernobyl, which happened in the Ukraine. The reactor design was quite slipshod, with no containment vessel among other safety features. Even so, it required the operators to disable safety features in a stunning display of stupidity and poor judgement for the disaster to occur. How to you propose to globally outlaw or regulate nuclear power in sovereign nations, many of which hate the US and the UN? What about France, which generates 80% of its power from nuclear, and has had exactly 0 problems?
When you balance the actual track record of nuclear power safety against the estimated 200,000 people that die every year from fossil fuel energy generation, nuclear appears to be far safer. Then there's the global warming argument against energy production that creates CO2. And no, there is no way that "alternative energy" such as wind, solar and geothermal can take up the slack in a meaningful way.
There are plenty of these unsafe plants active in the world, and yes I am aware there are safe reactor designs (CANDU). But when you factor in human greed, nuke plants run by the lowest bidder, should we even be doing it?
Given the alternatives, and the need to perfect nuclear for space exploration purposes, yes.
I was VERY pro nuclear power before this complete mess that has happened. Even though we will run out of uranium by 2100, even though fuel stays reactive for tens of thousands of years. But honestly, if the japanese cant even do it right, what hope do we have for any country out there?
The timescales alone are enough to make one pause. Can you really trust the next 12,000 generations of man to not have any accidents with spent fuel? Is that something that we should be burdening our future generations with for a short term gain today?
There is a realistic solution to safely disposing of nuclear waste - package it appropriately and drop it at the mid-Pacific subduction zone.
The only problem with that idea is that nuclear waste is potentially quite valuable, as it could be reprocessed. You should also read up on thorium reactors, in which the Chinese are heavily investing.
iPads will slowly migrate into a niche of over-priced, over-hyped, prestige products - while a huge collection of product spreading over a very wide range of market niches will slowly take over the market. From ultra-cheap under-100$ (there's a 100€ Android tablet sold in my post office. And its currently on sale at an even lower price-point) done by asian companies trying to out-compete each-other in term of price and/or battery life, all the way up to other big companies trying to out-compete each other in terms of features. While all, at the same time leveraging the shared advantages of open platforms.
But that takes time. A few years, maybe. Not a merely months after the release of the first iPads.
iPads are at a nice sweet spot with their hardware, and they're a great value - especially compared to the Xoom and it's ilk. Unlike the old days, Apple has tremendous economies of scale, it is now the #1 flash memory purchaser. (Irony: flash memory good, Flash software baaad.)
You'll note that nothing like what you're describing has occurred with iPods, even after many years of their market domination.
I think iPads will continue to dominate the pad market for many years, especially if Apple loosens the reins a bit with something like an adult-only app store.
But you've touched on the real reason why Mac's are unsuitable for web dev and why no web dev I've ever met has used one
You should get out more, in many circles Macs are simply the preferred development platform.
things render differently on Mac's. Even Firefox and Chrome cant provide the same experience on Windows or Linux.
Er, the way around this is use a VM to test on Windows. That way you can hit all the major browsers, including Safari - which you can't (legally) run under a VM under Windows or Linux. Do you really bother testing Linux based browsers? Catering to 1% of the browsing public, as opposed to the 10%+ using Macs and Safari?
Not to mention that.net
.Nyet is only "favored" if you're deploying on Windows Server. Otherwise, it's ugly, overengineered crap best avoided.
and flash are favoured languages of the web dev. Both of which are against the will of Steve.
Flash works fine on the Mac. iOS is a different beast. But regardless, that isn't to say that Flash is a great technology, or something one should be using going forward. It's not just Apple that's anti-Flash, Google and many other entities are pushing HTML 5 + Javascript for most new development.
Mac, render different.
The Mac browsers are cake compared to the beauty that is IEEEEE 6, 7, 8 & 9.:P
Slashdot Mirror
Laptops with Intel are thick, bulky, heavy and still take three minutes to boot.
Except the Apple variety, of course... :-)
Fairly good analysis, especially in that both absolute prices and margins have dropped considerably.
What would have been a $300,000 server not all that long ago is now a $3,000 server... ;-)
Yes, the modern reactor of Japan worked very well. Until it didn't.
The "modern" reactor that was designed and built 40 years ago?!?
That word does not mean what you think it means.
I suggest you contact the authors of "Angry Birds" or other top iOS titles, and ask them how badly they've been "ripped off"... ;-)
The one thing that's unfortunate about Apple's stance with iOS is the limitation to only apps developed with Xcode/ObjC. That certainly makes doing cross-platform development harder.
The Far Right will still find some way to complain about this and slam Obama.
Nothing "Far Right" in noting that:
The good news is that this came far enough ahead of the 2012 election that 0bama will be toast anyhow. ;-)
After all, the Republicans own the media
That's the best joke I've heard in a loooong time! 0 constantly has the media fawning over his every word. It's not as though they ever ask him a tough question, investigate him in any meaningful way, or point out his very obvious flaws.
Well, except for Fox News, sometimes.
and with a weak economy they'll just swiftboat him.
If the economy doesn't improve substantially, there'll be no need to "swiftboat" him. He'll be summarily run out of town on a rail (high speed no doubt).
One can only hope he'll continue is disastrous and un-American policies for a few more months - without actually completely destroying the dollar. Osama will be a distant memory come election time, while $6/gallon gas will be an unpleasant, in-your-face reality.
Here's the way we do it
We have an old router which is plugged into a spare port on our optical switch (fiber to the home), and has an open wireless G for anyone to use, configured to assign DHCP addresses from 192.168.200.x where x is 175-200, and with SSID of "All Connections Logged".
What good does it do to "log connections" if the MAC address can be spoofed?
What you need to watch out for is someone pulling up on the street, downloading mass child porn, and heading off into the sunset. The FBI will be well aware that you could be "spoofing" a MAC address yourself. You might not be convicted, but it sure as heck would be a major hassle - and what is the benefit again? Let the freeloaders buy some bandwidth themselves...
Holy shit you are stupid. Period.
Please provide any proof I'm wrong. Any. Since we both know you're a complete fucking idiot and a troll. Shut the fuck up and get off your sister. Holy shit you are stupid.
I see - I'm wrong because we have almost no capability to actually produce fusion power in any meaningful way and it has been so for the last several decades and absolutely looks like the case for at least the next several decades and EVERYONE involved says MAJOR milestones (exactly as I fucking said) would still be missing (including a complete lack of materials science) to actually have anything which would hope to deliver fusion.
So you're position is 100% I'm wrong because you don't want it to be so. You are a fucking idiot. Holy shit you are stupid.
So I see your position has changed from "200 years" to "at least the next several decades"? Which is it? I'm the stupid one?
You'd better see the doctor about your blood pressure, I'm sure it's elevated.
For the rest of what I have to say, read my response to your other profanity-laced rant. ;-)
Wow! Your stupidity is literally brilliant.
I can only hope you die a horrible death before you can pass on your genetics. Holy shit are you fucking dumb.
If you knew anything about debate, you would know that what you just wrote actually reads "I concede."
Have a nice day. :-)
We literally are closer to some type of extra-solar exploration than we are fusion power.
This also deserves a response, which I neglected.
You are predicting something that's already happened. Congratulations!
The Voyager 1 probe has reached the heliopause, and of course it has escape velocity from the Sun. Extra-solar exploration, ho! Face it, predictions aren't your strong suit.
So please, keep your ignorance to yourself.
Amusingly, that's precisely what I was telling you.
It's also quite funny that you're claiming "physicist" (sic) support your view, when the person who discovered the principle that makes fission possible (Einstein) was dead wrong about its practicality. He didn't think it would ever work, not even claiming it would take hundreds of years. He was proven wrong within ten years.
Once again (and I hope it sinks in this time) technology predictions are hard, and many extremely smart people have been burned making them. I'll laugh thinking of this thread if I hear of the first net energy producing fusion reactor going live. It may not happen, but I'm not stupid enough to make a prediction one way or the other. ;-)
Fusion researchers have done an excellent job in pushing their lies and PR so as to continue receiving funding but it would literally be a miracle to have fusion power plants running in less than a couple hundred years; with five to six hundred years being far more realistic.
Wow, a prophet right here on /.!
I'd really like to know which orifice you pulled your numbers from? We are possibly at the edge of the AI singularity, meaning soon we might build a computer smart enough to build a smarter computer. It's a fairly short track from there to IQ 10,000. I strongly suspect such an AI would have very little trouble designing a working fusion reactor. This will likely all happen well within 100 years, possibly within the next twenty years.
Even ignoring the possibility of a singularity, mere humans could well invent a working fusion reactor in the near term. Advances in science and technology aren't very predictable. Let me give you a few examples:
Given that even Einstein was dead wrong in some of his predictions, I don't have a lot of faith in what you're saying here... ;-)
A "closed-platform" that the company actively markets to children and turns out to be hostile to their best interests cannot blame anyone but itself when a lawsuit comes crashing down on their head.
With their "walled garden" Apple is saying "these applications are safe. We give our stamp of approval. In fact, you can get no other apps than the ones we approve". If those apps prey on children, it's no longer the developers who are to blame, but Apple.
Your argument comes crashing down, though, given that adults are the only ones with access to the iTunes store, and able to enable payments. So, unless you were in the group of those burned by the 15 minute window after logging into iTunes (since fixed), it is entirely your fault if your child is able to make in-app purchases. Not Apple's.
Further, by not giving your child access to the store, he or she has no way to download apps of which you don't approve - or update the ones already on the device. Sounds like good parenting to me.
I'm fairly sure this lawsuit is a looooser.
is expected to generate 392 MW of solar power
FTFY
My first thought was that the 392 MW would be at noon on June 21. The important figure is of course the average MWH it will generate per day/year.
I'd guess it'll have a hard time seeming significant compared with nuclear power. I was just reading about the new Indian nuke plant complex the Russians are building, which is expected to generate 62 GW...or about 150 times as much, day or night, sunny or cloudy.
Listen up douche bag the Japanese government upgraded the accident at the fukushima power plant to level 7. The accident is a MAJOR ISSUE.
Oh really? Do tell. How would you compare it, on a scale of one to ten, to the earthquake and tsunami that killed 25,000+ people? How many people has this nuclear incident killed again?
No amount of dick riding on your part is going to make that go away. We don't need assholes like you saying everything is ok.
Neither the GP or I are saying 'everything is ok'. However, it is also not, in any way, a 'major disaster'. TEPCO (and the Japanese government) did not prepare properly for this event, and the reactors involved are of a very old design. Given those two facts, it's not too surprising that we're where we are. It is not an indictment of nuclear power in general, though. Nuclear power is a) absolutely necessary going forward and b) safer than any realistic alternative.
No it's not. This problem has been going on for a month and is not getting better.
Uh, genius, I suggest your read the article... Here's a sample:
Read that several times until you understand it.
There are seriously health and environmental consequences here, as well as long term economic problems.
We will have to see about that. If it's like the aftermath of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings, there's not that much to worry about.
Being a dick about it is not going to fix it.
Very eloquent.
Being an apologist for an industry that has eschewed safety and oversight does not help fix the problem.
The problem with this line of attack is that a) nuclear has, overall, a much better safety record that any other large-scale power generation method (especially excluding Chernobyl which had a criminally poor design and criminally stupid management) and b) the nuclear industry is much more focused on safety than almost any other human enterprise.
You want people to trust nuclear power. You want people to believe nuclear power is a safe energy source. Then offer constructive suggestions to fix the problem. Admit there were problems with oversight, safety and design and work to fix those issues.
First, build reactors using one of the much safer, modern designs.
Second, if the site is in an area subject to Magnitude 9+ earthquakes and tsunamis, actually plan for Magnitude 9+ earthquakes and tsunamis.
There, that wasn't too hard was it.
TEPCO didn't have the first option, but it sure as hell had the second, didn't it? I suggest you remember that if the diesel emergency backup generators had been stored in a tsunami proof bunker, this entire disaster would likely have been avoided. At worst, it would have been a much smaller issue. There also should have been a contingency plan to helicopter in such generators if needed.
Stop being a nuclear apologist fuck.
Realist is more like it.
Instead, I guess you advocate sticking with fossil fuel power generation, estimated to kill over 200,000 people annually. Or what about "clean" hydroelectric? I wonder if you realize it was responsible for the worst energy related death toll in history, when the Banqiao Dam in China failed, and as many as 230,000 people died? Nothing is absolutely safe, but nuclear power is better than the alternatives.
Social conservatives don't want educated children, they want obidient children.
That would be "obedient" children. Too funny.
I would say most parents want well educated children who are good citizens, meaning they see the many benefits of society and want to contribute positively. Despite the nihilistic views of some, the world is still full of opportunity, and we live in truly amazing times in terms of science and engineering. I do think our society is close to a criticality in some ways, but it may pass through it to become better than ever.
We shall see, but I'm cautiously optimistic. :-)
You know I never really cared for GWB either but mocking the man's intelligence when he was smart enough to get elected Governor of one of the largest states in the Union and then beat the best the Democratic Party had to offer twice in a national election is pretty pathetic.
Not only that GWB has a MBA from Harvard. 0 has kept his records closed, why is that do you suppose? Don't the American people deserve to see the school accomplishments of the "smartest President ever"? What was his SAT/ACT score I wonder?
0 is an outright sham and disgrace.
Look cowboy, we're three weeks into this thing and it's nowhere close to over. It still gets worse every day.
Er, no. It is now getting better every day. The one major issue, a water leak, has been plugged. Unless that plug fails, things will improve from here. Relax, princess.
There may still be (probably is) ongoing unplanned criticality in not one, not two, but three reactors at the same site.
I've seen not one claim for continued criticality. Citation?
Reactor one has admittedly breached primary containment, and reactor two probably but not admittedly so.
Citation? I've not seen those reports. I do agree that it's likely at least one vessel was breached, extent unknown.
The potential for a much worse incident than Chernobyl still exists.
That is simply not true, unless there's another major natural disaster in the area. Chernobyl released 1/3 of a reactor core into the atmosphere, nothing like that will happen at Fukushima.
If one of these three reactors pops the entire site is a no-operations zone, and that means the other three reactors and their spent fuel ponds also go up for lack of rescue, and maybe even spent fuel in five and six as well. We don't have any data on what that level of contamination does to the ocean because Chernobyl wasn't on the shore and it was only 1/10th this much fuel - but it can't be good. Before this is over the entire planet may be drinking Fukushima tea.
Once again, you're quite wrong. Much larger releases have occurred in the past, directly into the ocean. They were the H-bomb tests at Bikini atoll. You will note that life went on with barely a hiccup, looking at the Pacific as a whole (and yes I think it was horrible what happened to the residents and Japanese fishermen).
Unacceptable levels of radioactivity have already been found in little fish 40 miles from this plant. Little fish are eaten by bigger fish, and big fish swim very far. As Cesium goes to the top of the food chain measurable amounts will be in our tin of tuna for the rest of time.
"Measurable amounts" is a meaningless statement. Medically detrimental amounts? Highly unlikely. At any rate, tuna contains mercury and is best avoided. Mahi, on the other hand, is typically harvested at three years old and has a lot less time to concentrate pollutants of any kind. Salmon are similar. Both taste better. ;-)
Every ship that sails the sea has barnacles on its hull, and barnacles soak up iodine, cesium and plutonium like you wouldn't believe.
Clearly we should be creating barnacle farms all around the Fukushima area. :-)
Japan is completely hosed now, as they will shortly be cut off from the global economy. Ships will soon not even dare venture to the west coast of Japan, as they'll be delayed in every port thereafter for many years. India has banned all Japanese food imports, and they're India - they don't block incoming food trivially.
I can see that cleaning the scary barnacles off the ships would be a technical challenge of monumental proportions... :-P
I think you'll find you're wrong again, and that Japanese food (and ships) will be welcome again worldwide before long. Say, three months from now at the most.
That one reactor that used Plutonium MOX has enough toxic Plutonium in it to kill hundreds of millions of people. Saying there's only one reactor using Plutonium doesn't make it all OK now.
Wow, I wonder how many billions of people the plutonium in (and produced by) the over 500 nuclear weapons exploded above ground during tested could have killed?!? It's amazing anyone survived, isn't it? lol
Your alarmism is literally comical. Get a clue.
Just
All of the fuel rods contain some plutonium you fuck.
As far as the original content (which is the statement the OP made) you are quite wrong:
Of course there is some Pu content in the spent rods (~0.89%), but not nearly as much as in the MOX fuel. Further, there is almost no chance that this Pu will become widely distributed. So it is pretty well a non-issue as far as we can tell now.
From Wikipedia.
I hope every nuclear apologist goes and chokes on a bag of cocks.
I see your erudition and civility are right on par with your knowledge... ;-)
I guess you could care less about the 200,000 folks dying every year from pollution? Did you know that burning coal spreads a good bit of radioactivity into the environment?
"The smell of ACs burning in the morning - the smell of victory!" lol
Have some sympathy, even if you KNOW they are wrong. In fact, the more certain you are, the more you should keep your socially challenged mouths shut.
Pot, meet kettle. Kettle, pot.
I'm sure you're just as charming and influential in person. :-)
I get what you are trying to say with this, but honestly when everyone says its safe, yet these kind of "accidents" can still occur it makes you step back and really weigh the positives and negatives.
For instance, in these plants they are using plutonium mox fuel. That shit has a halflife of 20,000 years. So it wont be completely nonreactive for approximately 250,000 years or 12000 human generations. Sure it shouldn't happen, and there were no doubt many mistakes by this particular company. But even if it is a possibility that this would happen, and it obviously is, should we not reconsider the long term environmental and other effects when we are possibly going to be affecting forward 12000 generations in the future?
Actually, just one of the six reactors is using plutonium.
Regardless, there has been no large release of such material, nor is there likely to be any. Despite the impression you get from the many extremely alarmist articles, the cores are cooling off and the situation is improving. Probably the worst thing that's happened is a small amount of radioactive cesium has been released into the ocean.
So far in my life time (30 years) there have been 3 major nuclear accidents. Does this not at least warrant a second look?
I'm not sure what you mean by "a second look". The worst by a long shot of those "major accidents" (neither Three Mile Island or Fukushima has produced a confirmed fatality so far) was Chernobyl, which happened in the Ukraine. The reactor design was quite slipshod, with no containment vessel among other safety features. Even so, it required the operators to disable safety features in a stunning display of stupidity and poor judgement for the disaster to occur. How to you propose to globally outlaw or regulate nuclear power in sovereign nations, many of which hate the US and the UN? What about France, which generates 80% of its power from nuclear, and has had exactly 0 problems?
When you balance the actual track record of nuclear power safety against the estimated 200,000 people that die every year from fossil fuel energy generation, nuclear appears to be far safer. Then there's the global warming argument against energy production that creates CO2. And no, there is no way that "alternative energy" such as wind, solar and geothermal can take up the slack in a meaningful way.
There are plenty of these unsafe plants active in the world, and yes I am aware there are safe reactor designs (CANDU). But when you factor in human greed, nuke plants run by the lowest bidder, should we even be doing it?
Given the alternatives, and the need to perfect nuclear for space exploration purposes, yes.
I was VERY pro nuclear power before this complete mess that has happened. Even though we will run out of uranium by 2100, even though fuel stays reactive for tens of thousands of years. But honestly, if the japanese cant even do it right, what hope do we have for any country out there?
The timescales alone are enough to make one pause. Can you really trust the next 12,000 generations of man to not have any accidents with spent fuel? Is that something that we should be burdening our future generations with for a short term gain today?
There is a realistic solution to safely disposing of nuclear waste - package it appropriately and drop it at the mid-Pacific subduction zone.
The only problem with that idea is that nuclear waste is potentially quite valuable, as it could be reprocessed. You should also read up on thorium reactors, in which the Chinese are heavily investing.
Further reading: 'No safe levels' of radiation in Japan
"Al-Jazeera, the nuclear experts!" Sure...
You should also realize that the Middle East is driven by oil revenue, and anything written there will
iPads will slowly migrate into a niche of over-priced, over-hyped, prestige products - while a huge collection of product spreading over a very wide range of market niches will slowly take over the market. From ultra-cheap under-100$ (there's a 100€ Android tablet sold in my post office. And its currently on sale at an even lower price-point) done by asian companies trying to out-compete each-other in term of price and/or battery life, all the way up to other big companies trying to out-compete each other in terms of features. While all, at the same time leveraging the shared advantages of open platforms.
But that takes time. A few years, maybe. Not a merely months after the release of the first iPads.
iPads are at a nice sweet spot with their hardware, and they're a great value - especially compared to the Xoom and it's ilk. Unlike the old days, Apple has tremendous economies of scale, it is now the #1 flash memory purchaser. (Irony: flash memory good, Flash software baaad.)
You'll note that nothing like what you're describing has occurred with iPods, even after many years of their market domination.
I think iPads will continue to dominate the pad market for many years, especially if Apple loosens the reins a bit with something like an adult-only app store.
Except that, no matter what, all the iDevices are completely closed, and thighly controlled by an anally-retentive Apple.
That is one heck of a Freudian slip there, bucko! Grats!
There may be materials that get past that, but that's the perception, folks. They need a cover.
You are somewhat perceptive with this comment. In fact, the iPad 2 rollout was accompanied by a quite innovative...cover.
It's just another example of excellent, minimalist design from Apple.
They need to be isolated from dirty fingers
LOL...OK whatever level of insight I attributed to your first remark just went out the, er, window.
But you've touched on the real reason why Mac's are unsuitable for web dev and why no web dev I've ever met has used one
You should get out more, in many circles Macs are simply the preferred development platform.
things render differently on Mac's. Even Firefox and Chrome cant provide the same experience on Windows or Linux.
Er, the way around this is use a VM to test on Windows. That way you can hit all the major browsers, including Safari - which you can't (legally) run under a VM under Windows or Linux. Do you really bother testing Linux based browsers? Catering to 1% of the browsing public, as opposed to the 10%+ using Macs and Safari?
Not to mention that .net
.Nyet is only "favored" if you're deploying on Windows Server. Otherwise, it's ugly, overengineered crap best avoided.
and flash are favoured languages of the web dev. Both of which are against the will of Steve.
Flash works fine on the Mac. iOS is a different beast. But regardless, that isn't to say that Flash is a great technology, or something one should be using going forward. It's not just Apple that's anti-Flash, Google and many other entities are pushing HTML 5 + Javascript for most new development.
Mac, render different.
The Mac browsers are cake compared to the beauty that is IEEEEE 6, 7, 8 & 9. :P