Yes, but the stats show the opposite result - far more people die on urban streets (like those neighbourhood residential 30mph zones) and country roads than on motorways, despite the seriousness of high speed impacts on motorways.
Motorways are the safest road you can drive on, but like flying, if it goes wrong the implications can be severe.
Damn good idea; currently the standard driving test does not include three lane highways, which apart from directly outside schools is the site of the most terrible incidents involving cars and fatalities, and it's mainly down to people who don't know what the fuck they're doing on fast roads.
Actually, that's almost exactly the opposite of what the statistics say. There are comparatively very few fatalities on motorways compared to almost every other road type, with A roads and unclassified country roads being by far the worst (A roads 9 times worse than motorway, for example) - both of these road types are covered on the practical driving test.
Motorways are some of the safest roads in the whole of the UK, despite the high speeds involved. There should definitely be a compulsory section of the driving test that deals with them, however.
Driving a car is not a right, it's a privilege. If you can't follow the rules, or feel that your "freedoms" are being infringed because you can't behave dangerously just because you want to then you need to grow up.
I take it you think seatbelt laws are an infringement of your freedom too?
Again, don't believe everything you hear from Fox News.
Universal Healthcare works very well - a fact that the vested interests that have a financial stake in keeping the US system the way it is have taken great pains to hide.
Alternatively the Supreme Court simply hands the election to the loser, or the voting machine manufacturer (who also make ATMs that can track money very accurately) produces machines that mysteriously can't seem to work a simple incremental counter...
Or lots of those machines are sent to rich, predominantly white districts while fewer are sent to poorer, disadvantaged areas. Just to double check they they can't vote you post flyers in that area deliberately giving the wrong polling day...
If only it was so easy to get the government we deserve.
You might want to read up on how these systems work because dismissing them out of hand through some poorly thought out guesswork, and I assume, Fox News talking points.
You assume that because you want it to be true, not because anything your parent poster said indicated it. Disagreement with you does not imply brainwashing by some third-party boogeyman.
No, I agree - I am fine with people disagreeing with my position, but this ground is well trodden, and the points the original commenter raised were classic Fox News/right wing/anti-socialised care talking points - the ones with the vested interest to spread disinformation.
Put it this way, those erroneous assumptions are not coming from research or personal experience, although I will concede that he may have heard them second hand and didn't question the veracity. His statements are not backed by evidence, however, which is why I disagreed with him.
I'm not sure what sort of "clarification" can be added to a story that has so many (to be kind, 'embellishments') to it.
I've spent the rest of the time in an argument over my "average" science knowledge for throwing in a little hyperbole in my initial incredulity at the source story being taken as my sum knowledge of radiation. I was obviously unaware of the requirement to post credentials and sit a written exam first.
I welcome some "clarification". This cooling water from the machine room - was it pooled on the floor? How was it active enough to give him a 3 month sick leave? What was his exposure time? If the primary circuit was leaking this badly, why wasn't the room full of steam? Why wasn't the plant detecting the leak? Why was there an "unknown" room that had part of the primary circuit running through it? What was his dosimeter reading?
However, it seems you've fundamentally misunderstood the way universal healthcare works - the very act of pooling everything together is what reduces the cost. This is not some theory - you can see it in action in every developed nation on earth, except the USA (and the "recent events" in Europe have nothing to do with healthcare and everything to do with certain members of the EU deciding things like "taxes" were optional).
The USA spends more than twice the GDP per capita on healthcare than any other country.
Those surgeries like your mum had, among many others also take place in countries with universal healthcare and they don't cost the patients $500,000. That figure is largely artificial anyway - US costs are enormously inflated due to the way the system is run.
Pooling the resources to reduce the cost is not a new idea, but it is a very effective one.
You might want to read up on how these systems work because dismissing them out of hand through some poorly thought out guesswork, and I assume, Fox News talking points.
Right, so where does that state that the only way to get radiation poisoning is being exposed to core material?
That suggests a possible explanation for the very unlikely story (using hyperbole as a device - it's a common tool, often used in examples). It says nothing about what I think causes radiation poisoning definitively.
Of course, if he'd have said "Guess that's why my teenagers wanted Android phones" he would have been modded up to +5 insightful and lauded with praise.
Because he said something even slightly positive about Apple, even in an obtuse and indirect manner, he's "a moron" with "nothing to say or contribute".
Please quote it carefully. You'll note the subject of my comments relates to a specific incident, oh you may also want a dictionary to look up the word "hyperbole".
I can wait.
I'm leaving out the whole part about the room containing a part of the primary loop and supposedly being "unknown".
We'll also leave out any discussion about the nature of the radiation in question, the distance from the source, the clothes or any other sort of gear the guy was wearing and the time he was exposed for. None of those things are important.
Yes, those are some of the parts you need to anneal, so you wouldn't want to remove those.
The fuel rods, however, can be taken out. You can even take them out while the reactor is running (on other rods) with the RBMK design.
And yes, carbon. Presumably you were going for some sort of "boom! gotcha! carbon is flammable!", but that's beside the point - under normal operating conditions it has the potential to burst into flames if exposed to oxygen. It's why it's sealed inside the reactor vessel.
Graphite can be switched between alpha and beta forms (changing the lattice) by heating to over 1500 K or something like that. This is done without it burning. Annealing it is not an issue as long as you don't expose it to oxygen.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, but the stats show the opposite result - far more people die on urban streets (like those neighbourhood residential 30mph zones) and country roads than on motorways, despite the seriousness of high speed impacts on motorways.
Motorways are the safest road you can drive on, but like flying, if it goes wrong the implications can be severe.
Damn good idea; currently the standard driving test does not include three lane highways, which apart from directly outside schools is the site of the most terrible incidents involving cars and fatalities, and it's mainly down to people who don't know what the fuck they're doing on fast roads.
Actually, that's almost exactly the opposite of what the statistics say. There are comparatively very few fatalities on motorways compared to almost every other road type, with A roads and unclassified country roads being by far the worst (A roads 9 times worse than motorway, for example) - both of these road types are covered on the practical driving test.
Motorways are some of the safest roads in the whole of the UK, despite the high speeds involved. There should definitely be a compulsory section of the driving test that deals with them, however.
Here's the 2009 data - you can go to graphics and "sort by road type" for my citations here.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/uk/2009/crash/8414354.stm
Can't tell if trolling....
Errr... it's already illegal... I'm not sure what...? Can't tell if trolling or just stupid...
I can see why you didn't log in.
Clearly yes based on some of the commenters on /.
It is apparently an unacceptably curbing of people's freedom to ban cellphones while driving!
Sometimes I'm baffled by people on this site. If this were a different forum I might post a Jackie Chan photo here.
Driving a car is not a right, it's a privilege. If you can't follow the rules, or feel that your "freedoms" are being infringed because you can't behave dangerously just because you want to then you need to grow up.
I take it you think seatbelt laws are an infringement of your freedom too?
What's the enforcement on those bans like? In fact, the document you linked mentions that as a serious issue in the discussion section.
It makes no difference if people ignore the ban.
So will I.
Again, don't believe everything you hear from Fox News.
Universal Healthcare works very well - a fact that the vested interests that have a financial stake in keeping the US system the way it is have taken great pains to hide.
By nonsense you mean "reality".
You forgot to log in.
Knowing the way the banks work it will just sum all that data together and assume it's the same person.
Any contradictions will just be considered to be you lying to the bank.
When challenged the response will be "well, why don't you have a verified account? What have you got to hide?"
Well, that's the theory.
Alternatively the Supreme Court simply hands the election to the loser, or the voting machine manufacturer (who also make ATMs that can track money very accurately) produces machines that mysteriously can't seem to work a simple incremental counter...
Or lots of those machines are sent to rich, predominantly white districts while fewer are sent to poorer, disadvantaged areas. Just to double check they they can't vote you post flyers in that area deliberately giving the wrong polling day...
If only it was so easy to get the government we deserve.
Different AC here.
You assume that because you want it to be true, not because anything your parent poster said indicated it. Disagreement with you does not imply brainwashing by some third-party boogeyman.
No, I agree - I am fine with people disagreeing with my position, but this ground is well trodden, and the points the original commenter raised were classic Fox News/right wing/anti-socialised care talking points - the ones with the vested interest to spread disinformation.
Put it this way, those erroneous assumptions are not coming from research or personal experience, although I will concede that he may have heard them second hand and didn't question the veracity. His statements are not backed by evidence, however, which is why I disagreed with him.
So do I, and I have a choice of doctors.
Don't believe everything Fox News tells you.
I'm not sure what sort of "clarification" can be added to a story that has so many (to be kind, 'embellishments') to it.
I've spent the rest of the time in an argument over my "average" science knowledge for throwing in a little hyperbole in my initial incredulity at the source story being taken as my sum knowledge of radiation. I was obviously unaware of the requirement to post credentials and sit a written exam first.
I welcome some "clarification". This cooling water from the machine room - was it pooled on the floor? How was it active enough to give him a 3 month sick leave? What was his exposure time? If the primary circuit was leaking this badly, why wasn't the room full of steam? Why wasn't the plant detecting the leak? Why was there an "unknown" room that had part of the primary circuit running through it? What was his dosimeter reading?
Relax cupcake, it was a joke.
However, it seems you've fundamentally misunderstood the way universal healthcare works - the very act of pooling everything together is what reduces the cost. This is not some theory - you can see it in action in every developed nation on earth, except the USA (and the "recent events" in Europe have nothing to do with healthcare and everything to do with certain members of the EU deciding things like "taxes" were optional).
The USA spends more than twice the GDP per capita on healthcare than any other country.
Those surgeries like your mum had, among many others also take place in countries with universal healthcare and they don't cost the patients $500,000. That figure is largely artificial anyway - US costs are enormously inflated due to the way the system is run.
Pooling the resources to reduce the cost is not a new idea, but it is a very effective one.
You might want to read up on how these systems work because dismissing them out of hand through some poorly thought out guesswork, and I assume, Fox News talking points.
Right, so where does that state that the only way to get radiation poisoning is being exposed to core material?
That suggests a possible explanation for the very unlikely story (using hyperbole as a device - it's a common tool, often used in examples). It says nothing about what I think causes radiation poisoning definitively.
They did try - they sent you a text message, but it went to the wrong person.
Of course, if he'd have said "Guess that's why my teenagers wanted Android phones" he would have been modded up to +5 insightful and lauded with praise.
Because he said something even slightly positive about Apple, even in an obtuse and indirect manner, he's "a moron" with "nothing to say or contribute".
*you're
Where did I say that?
Please quote it carefully. You'll note the subject of my comments relates to a specific incident, oh you may also want a dictionary to look up the word "hyperbole".
I can wait.
I'm leaving out the whole part about the room containing a part of the primary loop and supposedly being "unknown".
We'll also leave out any discussion about the nature of the radiation in question, the distance from the source, the clothes or any other sort of gear the guy was wearing and the time he was exposed for. None of those things are important.
I take it the dictionary was too expensive?
Ah, a country without Universal Healthcare. How quaint!
Yes, those are some of the parts you need to anneal, so you wouldn't want to remove those.
The fuel rods, however, can be taken out. You can even take them out while the reactor is running (on other rods) with the RBMK design.
And yes, carbon. Presumably you were going for some sort of "boom! gotcha! carbon is flammable!", but that's beside the point - under normal operating conditions it has the potential to burst into flames if exposed to oxygen. It's why it's sealed inside the reactor vessel.
Graphite can be switched between alpha and beta forms (changing the lattice) by heating to over 1500 K or something like that. This is done without it burning. Annealing it is not an issue as long as you don't expose it to oxygen.
What was your point?
To put this in context for you, I'm a chemist. So I'd hope that I was "above average level" in science, since it's what I do professionally.
Hope you never need an MRI again or anything else requiring a radiolabelled contrast agent.
It's also going to be a shame that we'll have to get by without (cheap) smoke detectors too.
Oh well, if it's for the good of humanity!