Keep themselves alive AND keep the suspect alive. In a confrontation, if one person is must be shot I hope it is the policeman and not the innocent kid on the way home from school.
I'm sure most police personnel would rather it be this as well. But it's not their job to play superhero and take the bullet for a civilian. IF they do, it's simply their choice as individuals. And is counter to their first duty.
The job of the police in that situation is to make sure no one is shot, to make sure that innocent people are not shot, AND to make sure that guilty people are also not shot.
WRONG.
It is the job of a police officer to keep themselves alive and to enforce the law. If enforcing the law means "nobody gets shot"? Great! If enforcing the law means that "someone got shot"? It sucks, but that's life. The use of lethal force should be kept to a minimum. The use of force should be kept to a minimum. But, above all else, the officer should strive to come out of this alive, as they can't do their job if they're dead. Which makes the situation much, MUCH worse.
What we have now is untenable. They've created a war zone but without rules.
Okay, "they" isn't just misguided police officers. The public, mostly the self-entitled thugs and assorted lowlifes have done their parts to turn it into a war zone as well. Don't try to just foist the blame all on the cops.
Sure it's expensive, but human lives are priceless. Shooting deaths by cops should never become a daily news item, and yet that is what has happened.
We're also a far more globalized society now with 24x7 "news" coverage reporting everything that happens minutes after it happens. You think thugs and social justice elitists aren't copycatting things and provoking police?
Crazy thug pulls a gun on a group of cops and gets shot down. Oh, and happens to be black.
I don't think anyone's asking them to jump in front of a bullet.
That's just the thing though, that's EXACTLY what's being asked here. Hell, your quip about them being in body armor shows that there's that expectation there.
You ever been SHOT? Hurts like a motherfucker!
You ever been shot in body armor? It hurts LESS, but isn't like you simply iron-man through getting shot. It still hurts like fuck and you can still be injured by it.
Can they manage risk? SURE!
But when bad shit goes down, their FIRST priority is to keep THEMSELVES alive.
If they think they can save others while holding to that priority? GREAT!
If they think they can't? Well, it sucks to be the other guy...
You keep talking about "their job". You don't even know what their job IS. You have some romantic notion that a police officer's job is to play superhero to the public and put themselves in danger to rescue people.
BZZZZT! WRONG!
Police are LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS. Their job is to stop, apprehend, and detain lawbreakers.
They're not rescue personnel. PERIOD.
If they ACT like this, on occasion, more power to them! They're no different than any other citizen acting as a good samaritan. But it isn't their job.
I always get concerned whenever a police captains/spokemen/union reps says something to the effect of "our first priority is going home safely at night". Police's first priority should always making sure members of the public go home safely at the end of the day. There is a problem when soldiers on patrol in an active combat zone have more restrictive rules of engagement than police officers cruising down a city street. Stop being law enforcement officers. GO back to being peace officers.
This is The Lifesaver's Dilemma.
How many people can a dead cop protect?
ZERO.
A police officer's FIRST duty is to keep themselves alive so they can uphold the law and protect as many people as feasible.
Okay, everyone deserves to be paid for their work.
The main thing with ads is that they're stealing bandwidth (and time) from the END USER. And, as users have worked to block out the most egregious, the ad networks seek more and more egregious ways to inject bigger, more-badly-behaved ads into content. And, at the same time, the hind end of the ad beast, whats' considered LEAST egregious, eventually migrates toward more annoying, intrusive behaviors.
Worse, badly maintained ad networks can KILL the ability to access content. And worst of all, badly SECURED ad networks leave their viewer base open to getting their computers compromised.
Again, sites deserve to be paid for their content. But the proliferation of adblockers is the public's way of saying "You're asking too much for that."
Actually, most of the kinetic force in a modern reactor explosion is water overpressure. Sure, there's SOME hydrogen being lit off. But mostly it's water going "You heated me. I'm expanding whether you like it or not."
Which has 1/30th our land area and a quarter of our populace. Germany's roughly the size of Montana. So the issues of delivering power reliably to the whole country are simply NOT comparable.
Come back when you have better information.
Nope. Downtime for maintenance
You seldom, if ever, pull an entire multi-core nuclear facility COMPLETELY down. You simply bring another reactor up as you're cooling the one you need to service down. As for emergency situations, that's universal across ALL forms of power. And emergency reactor dumps aren't THAT common. If they were, nuclear never would have gotten off the ground to begin with. As for your ass-pull numbers on "unexpected failures"...
In some ways its actually much worse than intermittent renewable sources
Because a drain in the reaction tank is plugged by a supercooled chunk of the reaction medium itself.
If the reaction starts to run away? The plug melts. The fuel drains away from the catalyst. The reaction stops.
If the power to the generator goes out? The plug melts. The fuel drains away from the catalyst. The reaction stops.
Someone sabotages the plug cooler? The plug melts. The fuel drains away from the catalyst. The reaction stops.
And there's no crazy boiling water system inside the reactor itself to overheat and blow up (this is what explodes in reactor accidents). And with a simple design like this, there's no Rube Goldberg domino machine controlling the system and trying to circumvent every possible way of being, itself, circumvented.
This is the problem with current solid fuel boiling water reactors. They're heavily over-engineered to try and compensate for every little implausible or impossible corner case a sick mind could imagine. However, the larger and more complex it becomes, the more ways there are to fuck it up. And it's a never-ending vicious cycle.
As for "perfect" systems that never fail?
As soon as you can show me 100% failure-proof solar and wind systems.
There's no such thing as 100% failure-proof.
However, done right, even failure mode can be 100% safe.
Solar and Wind are *NOT* "options" for baseline power.
Not with our current grid system. Not even if we rebuilt into a proper national grid, spec'ed to maximize the solar/wind contributions.
And I wish people would STOP trying to push this sort of bullshit. Solar and wind currently provide a TINY fraction of the national power load. Scaling up to provide all of it, were it even possible with current tech, would basically leave vast swaths of the country buried under panels or reflectors (in the case of solar thermal). Leaving said tracts of land useless for pretty much anything else.
Nuclear is a 365-day-a-year baseline power solution. And far more energy-dense than any renewables out there. The main problem is that too many people have been conditioned with "Nookyoolur = BOMZ!" fear and antipathy. As such, we've seen even simple issues blown COMPLETELY out of proportion. And every and any issue is treated like "the plant blew up and we have thousands of people dead because of it".
There have been approximately 371 deaths in the nuclear power industry since 1950. Most of them being uranium miners. There have been approximately ZERO civilian deaths. And most of the overseas casualties have been plant workers in poorly designed/maintained/operated facilities.
That I know of, there's been approximately 3 deaths in the solar industry since the 1970's. All of them during install. That totally discounts deaths among silica miners, as other industries utilize silica-based products too.
As for "reduced consumption".
You be the first to volunteer to go shiver in a cave in the winter, roast in the desert in the summer and generally never use modern electronics again.
Consumption of power is only ever going to INCREASE in the US. Any efficiencies realized will simply be subsumed in further consumption.
Realistically, what I'd like to see is a modernized grid with a base generation of nuclear fission (for now) with additional load covered renewable resources mated to power storage technology.
This can tide us over while we race to find out if nuclear fusion will become a viable power source.
After that, baseline nuclear fusion augmented by renewables with power storage technology.
1: Buy a gun, preferably something rifle-like with a decent range on it and a reputation for accuracy. 2: Buy ammo. 3: Buy MORE ammo. 4: Shoot anyone involved in advancing this idiotic agenda. 5: Repeat steps 2, 3 and 4 until you achieve your objective or are caught and killed.
English does not "borrow" from other languages. English corners other languages in dark alleys, hits them over the head, and then rifles through their pockets for loose grammar.
Slashdot Mirror
Has elaborate eastern-style headgear? Y/N
Looks african/middle eastern? Y/N
Looks fanatical? Y/N
Shake Magic 8-Ball (Result): _________________________
That's pretty much it. There's no process or real criteria here. And anyone telling you differently is full of shit. Including President OhBlahBlah.
Sorry, but a one-way TELEVISED trip to Mars isn't "feasible".
It's a goddamn extended snuff film. Nothing more, nothing less.
Keep themselves alive AND keep the suspect alive. In a confrontation, if one person is must be shot I hope it is the policeman and not the innocent kid on the way home from school.
I'm sure most police personnel would rather it be this as well.
But it's not their job to play superhero and take the bullet for a civilian. IF they do, it's simply their choice as individuals. And is counter to their first duty.
The job of the police in that situation is to make sure no one is shot, to make sure that innocent people are not shot, AND to make sure that guilty people are also not shot.
WRONG.
It is the job of a police officer to keep themselves alive and to enforce the law.
If enforcing the law means "nobody gets shot"? Great!
If enforcing the law means that "someone got shot"? It sucks, but that's life.
The use of lethal force should be kept to a minimum.
The use of force should be kept to a minimum.
But, above all else, the officer should strive to come out of this alive, as they can't do their job if they're dead. Which makes the situation much, MUCH worse.
What we have now is untenable. They've created a war zone but without rules.
Okay, "they" isn't just misguided police officers. The public, mostly the self-entitled thugs and assorted lowlifes have done their parts to turn it into a war zone as well. Don't try to just foist the blame all on the cops.
Sure it's expensive, but human lives are priceless. Shooting deaths by cops should never become a daily news item, and yet that is what has happened.
We're also a far more globalized society now with 24x7 "news" coverage reporting everything that happens minutes after it happens. You think thugs and social justice elitists aren't copycatting things and provoking police?
Crazy thug pulls a gun on a group of cops and gets shot down. Oh, and happens to be black.
30 years ago, they were statistics.
Now, they're news.
And social justice causes!
Fuck that noise.
Oh Christ's Wounds...
Will you at least MAKE an attempt to read the thread to see what's being talked about?
A police officer's first duty is to keep themselves alive.
Their second duty is to enforce the law.
At NO point is it their duty to rescue people at the risk of their own life.
What was being implied was that they should be putting themselves in front of people as meat shields, because they're wearing body armor...
Which is BULLSHIT.
Now, go back and READ the discussion before busting in with more idiocy.
No, the issue itself is actually referred to as the Lifesavers' (or Life Savers') Dilemma.
How many people can a dead cop protect?
I don't think anyone's asking them to jump in front of a bullet.
That's just the thing though, that's EXACTLY what's being asked here.
Hell, your quip about them being in body armor shows that there's that expectation there.
You ever been SHOT? Hurts like a motherfucker!
You ever been shot in body armor? It hurts LESS, but isn't like you simply iron-man through getting shot. It still hurts like fuck and you can still be injured by it.
Can they manage risk? SURE!
But when bad shit goes down, their FIRST priority is to keep THEMSELVES alive.
If they think they can save others while holding to that priority? GREAT!
If they think they can't? Well, it sucks to be the other guy...
You keep talking about "their job". You don't even know what their job IS. You have some romantic notion that a police officer's job is to play superhero to the public and put themselves in danger to rescue people.
BZZZZT! WRONG!
Police are LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS. Their job is to stop, apprehend, and detain lawbreakers.
They're not rescue personnel. PERIOD.
If they ACT like this, on occasion, more power to them! They're no different than any other citizen acting as a good samaritan. But it isn't their job.
Yeah. But most of their threatening crazies aren't packing heat either.
I always get concerned whenever a police captains/spokemen/union reps says something to the effect of "our first priority is going home safely at night". Police's first priority should always making sure members of the public go home safely at the end of the day. There is a problem when soldiers on patrol in an active combat zone have more restrictive rules of engagement than police officers cruising down a city street. Stop being law enforcement officers. GO back to being peace officers.
This is The Lifesaver's Dilemma.
How many people can a dead cop protect?
ZERO.
A police officer's FIRST duty is to keep themselves alive so they can uphold the law and protect as many people as feasible.
And calls himself Crimson Dynamo?
Okay, everyone deserves to be paid for their work.
The main thing with ads is that they're stealing bandwidth (and time) from the END USER.
And, as users have worked to block out the most egregious, the ad networks seek more and more egregious ways to inject bigger, more-badly-behaved ads into content.
And, at the same time, the hind end of the ad beast, whats' considered LEAST egregious, eventually migrates toward more annoying, intrusive behaviors.
Worse, badly maintained ad networks can KILL the ability to access content.
And worst of all, badly SECURED ad networks leave their viewer base open to getting their computers compromised.
Again, sites deserve to be paid for their content. But the proliferation of adblockers is the public's way of saying "You're asking too much for that."
Ah. Cherry picking Wikipedia to find one of the molten salts that could explode. Rather than the more common UF4.
And I don't deny that nuclear has issues.
But ALL forms of power generation have issues. I'm simply not ignoring the issues that other forms of power bring to the table.
Actually, most of the kinetic force in a modern reactor explosion is water overpressure. Sure, there's SOME hydrogen being lit off. But mostly it's water going "You heated me. I'm expanding whether you like it or not."
In 2013, Germany...
Which has 1/30th our land area and a quarter of our populace. Germany's roughly the size of Montana. So the issues of delivering power reliably to the whole country are simply NOT comparable.
Come back when you have better information.
Nope. Downtime for maintenance
You seldom, if ever, pull an entire multi-core nuclear facility COMPLETELY down. You simply bring another reactor up as you're cooling the one you need to service down.
As for emergency situations, that's universal across ALL forms of power. And emergency reactor dumps aren't THAT common. If they were, nuclear never would have gotten off the ground to begin with.
As for your ass-pull numbers on "unexpected failures"...
In some ways its actually much worse than intermittent renewable sources
Bullshit. Keep up the greenwashing though.
How about something like this?
A molten salt reactor.
It's DEFAULT state is "no reaction".
Because a drain in the reaction tank is plugged by a supercooled chunk of the reaction medium itself.
If the reaction starts to run away? The plug melts. The fuel drains away from the catalyst. The reaction stops.
If the power to the generator goes out? The plug melts. The fuel drains away from the catalyst. The reaction stops.
Someone sabotages the plug cooler? The plug melts. The fuel drains away from the catalyst. The reaction stops.
And there's no crazy boiling water system inside the reactor itself to overheat and blow up (this is what explodes in reactor accidents).
And with a simple design like this, there's no Rube Goldberg domino machine controlling the system and trying to circumvent every possible way of being, itself, circumvented.
This is the problem with current solid fuel boiling water reactors. They're heavily over-engineered to try and compensate for every little implausible or impossible corner case a sick mind could imagine. However, the larger and more complex it becomes, the more ways there are to fuck it up. And it's a never-ending vicious cycle.
As for "perfect" systems that never fail?
As soon as you can show me 100% failure-proof solar and wind systems.
There's no such thing as 100% failure-proof.
However, done right, even failure mode can be 100% safe.
So, basically Solar gets a pass and a whitewash on it's environmental record because you say so?
Come back when you're serious.
I volunteer you to be medically sterilized and have any offspring you may have already produced eliminated first!
Right. You want to use things like Solar and Wind at peak times.
For everything else, there's nuclear.
And you know who's pushing the solar and wind farms the most?
The gas company. Because a lot of these solar and wind facilities being put in are actually:
Solar + Gas backup
Wind + Gas backup
In your area maybe it does.
In the US, we're pretty much AT Peak Hydro right now.
Environmental concerns over the repercussions of implementing new hydro has dropped new hydro projects to virtually nil.
Hell, we're ripping down Hydro dams to revert areas to their natural ecology.
Solar and Wind are *NOT* "options" for baseline power.
Not with our current grid system.
Not even if we rebuilt into a proper national grid, spec'ed to maximize the solar/wind contributions.
And I wish people would STOP trying to push this sort of bullshit.
Solar and wind currently provide a TINY fraction of the national power load. Scaling up to provide all of it, were it even possible with current tech, would basically leave vast swaths of the country buried under panels or reflectors (in the case of solar thermal). Leaving said tracts of land useless for pretty much anything else.
Nuclear is a 365-day-a-year baseline power solution. And far more energy-dense than any renewables out there.
The main problem is that too many people have been conditioned with "Nookyoolur = BOMZ!" fear and antipathy.
As such, we've seen even simple issues blown COMPLETELY out of proportion. And every and any issue is treated like "the plant blew up and we have thousands of people dead because of it".
There have been approximately 371 deaths in the nuclear power industry since 1950. Most of them being uranium miners.
There have been approximately ZERO civilian deaths.
And most of the overseas casualties have been plant workers in poorly designed/maintained/operated facilities.
That I know of, there's been approximately 3 deaths in the solar industry since the 1970's. All of them during install.
That totally discounts deaths among silica miners, as other industries utilize silica-based products too.
As for "reduced consumption".
You be the first to volunteer to go shiver in a cave in the winter, roast in the desert in the summer and generally never use modern electronics again.
Consumption of power is only ever going to INCREASE in the US. Any efficiencies realized will simply be subsumed in further consumption.
Realistically, what I'd like to see is a modernized grid with a base generation of nuclear fission (for now) with additional load covered renewable resources mated to power storage technology.
This can tide us over while we race to find out if nuclear fusion will become a viable power source.
After that, baseline nuclear fusion augmented by renewables with power storage technology.
In a few billion years, we're fucked!
Proof that self-entitled cockbags can fuck up anything.
1: Buy a gun, preferably something rifle-like with a decent range on it and a reputation for accuracy.
2: Buy ammo.
3: Buy MORE ammo.
4: Shoot anyone involved in advancing this idiotic agenda.
5: Repeat steps 2, 3 and 4 until you achieve your objective or are caught and killed.
English does not "borrow" from other languages.
English corners other languages in dark alleys, hits them over the head, and then rifles through their pockets for loose grammar.
Well, unlike you, I'm not required to ask "would you like fries with that".
Nor are $5 worth of McDonalds food part of my perks package...
No. I'm more geared to dependable income.
Sure, $65/hour isn't as huge an earner, but at least I don't have to worry about it drying up tomorrow.