More heat = more energy available, so yes it is that 'black and white'.
The effects, as described here and as predicted, won't be black and white. Some places get too much rain others get less rain. The Sea level rise is going to be pretty constant across the global since water tends to self level:)
bury the waste in a deep subduction zone in the Earth's crust.
A novel idea.
An issue that I see is that the containers of the waste need to be strong enough to resist geologic forces. Otherwise as it starts its journey down the waste is released and may come back up with the water and magma vents common to such subduction zones.
But otherwise seems somewhat feasible.
Wouldn't drilling a 'really deep' whole in a non-geologic zone work just as well? If it's 15 miles down in the middle of a plate with no seismic activity, seems a reasonable risk to me.
First the came for the status bar....I said nothing.
Then they came for the URL bar....I said nothing.
Next they came for me and there was no one left to speak...;-P
Yes, the design to allow extensions is a cardinal feature of FF - extensibility. But, how far down the road do we take it?
Are back buttons next? after all mouse gestures work just fine. How about 'refresh'? you can just back and reload the page instead. Properties? bah, install an extension if you want to actually configure the application.
If there are 2 basic units of functionality in a 'browser' they are the URL bar and the status bar. (the latter is pretty damned standard in a lot (most?) applications. Knowing the 'status' is something most people at some point want to show.
I'm not saying force it to display. It previously could be easily hidden or shown. Why take the removal step? just makes no sense.
We don't want nor need your tears. FF 4 is ugly and has moronic design decisions. No status bar? really? not hidden, completely gone. Now that the world is trained to look for the padlock for SSL connections, they remove where that item sits and expect people to understand 'Site Identity Button'.
The explanation for this is patently ridiculous, from here
When viewing a website, the Site Identity Button will display in one of three colors - gray, blue, or green. Clicking on the Site Identity Button will display security information about the website, with a matching gray, blue, or green "Passport Officer" icon. "
Seriously? they wonder why they are losing market share?
The only fallout of concern from Fukushima is political, not nuclear.
Given the cost is estimated at $300 billion dollars to rebuild the country, that is 'cost' renewable sources don't have when they fail. Nuclear cannot ever fail, and since we humans are the ones building and operating them, failures are going to happen.
And thanks for ignoring my actual arguments, by the way. That's classy of you.
Actually I did. You said no sane person could call mining and feedstock transport bad. I gave clear reasons why it *is* bad.
You said nuclear costs aren't a problem. I clearly showed that there are massive costs associated with nuclear that are not factored into the cost of its electricity.
For the proliferation argument, I misunderstood your answer to be that proliferation is not a problem. However if you think we aren't actively trying to stop nuclear proliferation, you are naive.
For point #5, you said "Federal support is the only reason we have anything like this project." which I took to mean that renewable isn't viable because it isn't cost effective. I clearly showed *why* this a false comparison to make.
1 - Shipping and mining of feedstock - I presume you mean fuel... I really don't see how this is a problem at all, it creates a lot of industry and drives new technologies. It's a good thing all around. There's no way a sane person can see this as a drawback.
- Lets see. How about the children of dead miners? I suspect they might like their parents back.
- How about the cost? all that fuel mining and transport costs people money. Sure it employs people, but given the Koch Industries profits that's a lot of money a whole lot more average people would still have if the 'fuel' was free as it is with solar. Rather than concentrate the money into the oligarch's hands lets keep it in people's pockets....crazy I know and I'm a rabid liberal. With government people have a say in how money and taxes are spent, not so with big industry.
2 - Long term cost with storage of waste - You've clearly never heard of breeder reactors [wikipedia.org], or the negative radioactive waste drawbacks of things like coal [scientificamerican.com]. Combine the already-lower radioactive waste of nuclear with breeders, and you've got an extremely planet and people-friendly power source.
Wait you're defending nuclear with coal? talk about cognitive dissonance. BOTH are bad and have significant waste issues. Nuclear waste for 1 year of production requires 100s of years of storage - we still don't have a safe place to put this stuff yet. That price is not included in the utility power prices. That's not fair. Likewise with coal, the cost of emitting CO2 isn't currently included in the price. Once it is included, trust me, coal will go bye bye fast.
- that said, nuclear will be necessary in the short term (50-100 years) while we get renewable sources up to scale, that doesn't make it a 'good' solution though. Also consider that nuclear isn't viable without $10s of billions in loan guarantees from the government. That cost isn't reflected either.
3 - Proliferation - Ya, we're clearly stopping openly-hostile, fundamentalist Iran from building nuclear power plants. That's totally happening. If you call tuxnet on this, you're crazier than Ahmadinejad.
A. Q. Khan. nuff said.
5 - Solar and wind production in the US - At the APPA conference in Nashville this spring, one of the foremost investors in "renewable" energy in the country outright stated that they would have put absolutely nothing into solar/wind/geothermal if they didn't receive federal grants for it. It'd've simply've been a waste of time and money. Federal support is the only reason we have anything like this project.
To repeat, renewable sources are quite economical when the full costs of operation and disasters are included in other fuel sources. CO2 release for coal, and Fukishima for nuclear. We need government subsidies for renewable until the true costs for established industries are reflected in their prices.
Sorry, I wasn't talking about the status bar in chrome, I was saying that Firefox doesn't give you the option to 'reenable' the status bar - they completely removed it from the program entirely.
The article/advertisment states that you *can* create your own BitCoins but it just takes multiple years. So yes, as processing power increases people will be able to flood the market. Worse, corporations and botnets will be able to do this before the average person.
Doesn't have anything to do with airport size. You need orders of magnitude more people and these are highly trained skilled people. Interviewing each and every passenger multiple times takes time. It wouldn't work in such a large system.
Google "why wouldn't the israeli airport security work in the us" one example
Other factoids, Israel has 1 major airport, we have 450. Israel handles 11 million people annually. We handle 700+ million.
Canada & Mexico are neighboring countries so having people stationed there isn't a huge issue. Having a significant security team in each and every airport that flies to any city in the US isn't remotely workable.
Whether they claimed to have a bomb or not is no longer relevant.
People now fight back, i.e. Flight 93. The jig is up on the unwritten agreement that if the passengers just play along they'll be released relatively okay in Cuba or wherever.
Right now the people are rent-a-cops. The Israeli system requires actual trained professionals. And more of them than we currently have rent-a-cops. It doesn't scale.
We're making the same point:) All the post 9/11 security stuff is just about useless to stop hijackers. And the things that hijackers could get through are thwarted completely by 1. the reinforced cockpit doors and 2. the passengers who are going to beat the living snot out of them.
Slashdot Mirror
Is it really that black and white, though?
More heat = more energy available, so yes it is that 'black and white'.
:)
The effects, as described here and as predicted, won't be black and white. Some places get too much rain others get less rain. The Sea level rise is going to be pretty constant across the global since water tends to self level
I don't care, can't we have both? No pat downs AND no flights from TX?
Mod points if I had'em....though it's more extortion than terrorism.
Gateway AnyKey.....god I miss that thing. I'm not pr click or no-click, but programmable rules everything.
radiation would not spread as far as long as the plant wasn't near a major current
Well except for the fact that the radiation is *hot* and the nearby water would be heated and, like, RISE. Oops.
bury the waste in a deep subduction zone in the Earth's crust.
A novel idea.
An issue that I see is that the containers of the waste need to be strong enough to resist geologic forces. Otherwise as it starts its journey down the waste is released and may come back up with the water and magma vents common to such subduction zones.
But otherwise seems somewhat feasible.
Wouldn't drilling a 'really deep' whole in a non-geologic zone work just as well? If it's 15 miles down in the middle of a plate with no seismic activity, seems a reasonable risk to me.
that's the 'Addon Bar' not the status bar.
First the came for the status bar....I said nothing. ;-P
Then they came for the URL bar....I said nothing.
Next they came for me and there was no one left to speak...
Yes, the design to allow extensions is a cardinal feature of FF - extensibility. But, how far down the road do we take it?
Are back buttons next? after all mouse gestures work just fine. How about 'refresh'? you can just back and reload the page instead. Properties? bah, install an extension if you want to actually configure the application.
If there are 2 basic units of functionality in a 'browser' they are the URL bar and the status bar. (the latter is pretty damned standard in a lot (most?) applications. Knowing the 'status' is something most people at some point want to show. I'm not saying force it to display. It previously could be easily hidden or shown. Why take the removal step? just makes no sense.
As a web developer, I cry for you.
We don't want nor need your tears. FF 4 is ugly and has moronic design decisions. No status bar? really? not hidden, completely gone. Now that the world is trained to look for the padlock for SSL connections, they remove where that item sits and expect people to understand 'Site Identity Button'.
The explanation for this is patently ridiculous, from here
When viewing a website, the Site Identity Button will display in one of three colors - gray, blue, or green. Clicking on the Site Identity Button will display security information about the website, with a matching gray, blue, or green "Passport Officer" icon. "
Seriously? they wonder why they are losing market share?
The only fallout of concern from Fukushima is political, not nuclear.
Given the cost is estimated at $300 billion dollars to rebuild the country, that is 'cost' renewable sources don't have when they fail. Nuclear cannot ever fail, and since we humans are the ones building and operating them, failures are going to happen.
And thanks for ignoring my actual arguments, by the way. That's classy of you.
Actually I did. You said no sane person could call mining and feedstock transport bad. I gave clear reasons why it *is* bad.
You said nuclear costs aren't a problem. I clearly showed that there are massive costs associated with nuclear that are not factored into the cost of its electricity.
For the proliferation argument, I misunderstood your answer to be that proliferation is not a problem. However if you think we aren't actively trying to stop nuclear proliferation, you are naive.
For point #5, you said "Federal support is the only reason we have anything like this project." which I took to mean that renewable isn't viable because it isn't cost effective. I clearly showed *why* this a false comparison to make.
But whatever you say...
1 - Shipping and mining of feedstock - I presume you mean fuel... I really don't see how this is a problem at all, it creates a lot of industry and drives new technologies. It's a good thing all around. There's no way a sane person can see this as a drawback.
- Lets see. How about the children of dead miners? I suspect they might like their parents back.
- How about the cost? all that fuel mining and transport costs people money. Sure it employs people, but given the Koch Industries profits that's a lot of money a whole lot more average people would still have if the 'fuel' was free as it is with solar. Rather than concentrate the money into the oligarch's hands lets keep it in people's pockets....crazy I know and I'm a rabid liberal. With government people have a say in how money and taxes are spent, not so with big industry.
2 - Long term cost with storage of waste - You've clearly never heard of breeder reactors [wikipedia.org], or the negative radioactive waste drawbacks of things like coal [scientificamerican.com]. Combine the already-lower radioactive waste of nuclear with breeders, and you've got an extremely planet and people-friendly power source.
Wait you're defending nuclear with coal? talk about cognitive dissonance. BOTH are bad and have significant waste issues. Nuclear waste for 1 year of production requires 100s of years of storage - we still don't have a safe place to put this stuff yet. That price is not included in the utility power prices. That's not fair. Likewise with coal, the cost of emitting CO2 isn't currently included in the price. Once it is included, trust me, coal will go bye bye fast.
- that said, nuclear will be necessary in the short term (50-100 years) while we get renewable sources up to scale, that doesn't make it a 'good' solution though. Also consider that nuclear isn't viable without $10s of billions in loan guarantees from the government. That cost isn't reflected either.
3 - Proliferation - Ya, we're clearly stopping openly-hostile, fundamentalist Iran from building nuclear power plants. That's totally happening. If you call tuxnet on this, you're crazier than Ahmadinejad.
A. Q. Khan. nuff said.
5 - Solar and wind production in the US - At the APPA conference in Nashville this spring, one of the foremost investors in "renewable" energy in the country outright stated that they would have put absolutely nothing into solar/wind/geothermal if they didn't receive federal grants for it. It'd've simply've been a waste of time and money. Federal support is the only reason we have anything like this project.
To repeat, renewable sources are quite economical when the full costs of operation and disasters are included in other fuel sources. CO2 release for coal, and Fukishima for nuclear. We need government subsidies for renewable until the true costs for established industries are reflected in their prices.
There is some truth in this assertion at the technical level, meanwhile, as a consumer device, it is not a computer.
How does it's intended use have any bearing on what it *actually* is?
This is why Firefox 4 wins completely. It's extremely extensible.
Indeed, but something so basic as the Status Bar seems a bit much to expect an Add-On to have to implement. What's next, the back button?
Sorry, I wasn't talking about the status bar in chrome, I was saying that Firefox doesn't give you the option to 'reenable' the status bar - they completely removed it from the program entirely.
Guess I could have been more clear.
And that's why it's configurable.
And why Firefox 4 fails utterly. They literally did remove the 'status bar'. Not an ability to hide it, it's gone.
At least one case where Google isn't forcing the change down on people...what a concept.
I can see /. in 50 years...
"Back in *my* day, I had to use dial-up, both ways to get to school sonny"
Amazon came of age in the internet era. Sony is a has been from the past era of 'we own you and do what we want'.
The article/advertisment states that you *can* create your own BitCoins but it just takes multiple years. So yes, as processing power increases people will be able to flood the market. Worse, corporations and botnets will be able to do this before the average person.
Again, a bomb is significantly less harmful than a hijacked plane. The odds that the hijacker actually has a bomb are pretty low to begin with.
Doesn't have anything to do with airport size. You need orders of magnitude more people and these are highly trained skilled people. Interviewing each and every passenger multiple times takes time. It wouldn't work in such a large system.
Google "why wouldn't the israeli airport security work in the us" one example
Other factoids, Israel has 1 major airport, we have 450. Israel handles 11 million people annually. We handle 700+ million.
Canada & Mexico are neighboring countries so having people stationed there isn't a huge issue. Having a significant security team in each and every airport that flies to any city in the US isn't remotely workable.
Whether they claimed to have a bomb or not is no longer relevant.
People now fight back, i.e. Flight 93. The jig is up on the unwritten agreement that if the passengers just play along they'll be released relatively okay in Cuba or wherever.
Right now the people are rent-a-cops. The Israeli system requires actual trained professionals. And more of them than we currently have rent-a-cops. It doesn't scale.
We're making the same point :) All the post 9/11 security stuff is just about useless to stop hijackers. And the things that hijackers could get through are thwarted completely by 1. the reinforced cockpit doors and 2. the passengers who are going to beat the living snot out of them.
There were bombs in WTC too, timed to blow when the firefighters got there and started trawling the rubble.
BS. Sources or it's just wild conspiracy theories. And do make sure you explicitly find the bombs related to 9/11 not the WTC bombing....