This article is written like an advertisement. Please help rewrite this article from a neutral point of view. For blatant advertising that would require a fundamental rewrite to become encyclopedic, use {{db-spam}} to mark for speedy deletion. (June 2011)
... they contain a significant amount of important information.
1) Lamo stated the he was a journalist and a priest, so the chat logs would be secret.
That one really jumped out at me. WTF Lamo?
I see lots of comments about what a POS Lamo is, but telling that to Manning, and sending him *hugs* [sic], THEN turning him in - while knowing Manning was on his way to discharge, had already lost some level of clearance, well that seems a hugely dishonest betrayal.
I've been reading The Mobs and the Mafia: the Illustrated History of Organized Crime by Hank Messic and Burt Goldblatt (1972, ISBN 0-88365-211-0) and was struck by a passage:
... in the three years after the [stock market] crash... those businessmen who didn't kill themselves turned by the thousands to the only men with money and credit -- the gangsters.
Sounds like an interesting book, and a believable premise, however I thought the mass suicides following the Crash of '29 turned out to be mythical.
Like the most-recent crash, not a lot of stories of Wall Streeters committing suicide. More common among lower-on-the-economic-scale folks that tend to do that.
Your quote from the book makes it sound very common, but I don't think it really was.
A (rather large) man trying to prevent looting of The Bay on Georgia Street getting swarmed and getting the snot kicked out of him for his efforts. Final frame is him motionless on the street.
That's exactly the problem - one man against the several. That way, sure, you get swarmed. But it shouldn't be one. It should be every person living in that neighborhood. Even if you just took all those who took pics - and if they ganged up together - how many is that, and how many does it take to swarm them?
He was part of a loosely-formed group of anonymous normal folks (a couple assumptions made there, but didn't appear part of a tight-knit group).
That's the problem: the rowdies are more drunk, more drugged up, more hyped up, more aggressive, more ready for violent action. Normal folks aren't prepared.
Also, it would only take a single head-stomp to meaningfully end a life. Just Not Worth It to stop some Chinese made crap from being stolen from a multi-national, well-insured corporation. No offense to any multi-national corporations reading this.
Back to your point, which I am sympathetic to, I like to hope the 2 or 3 stabbing victims are former hoodlums who fell to the knives of "normal" folks, using their own anonymity in the crowd. Alas, the stabbing victims are probably mostly innocent.
The police did the best thing they could. There is simply no good way to manage a mob of potentially tens of thousands of people.
Fully agree.
I lay a good chunk of the blame at the feet of the City of Vancouver. When the Olympics were on, crowds were carefully managed. Yes there was a lot more good will, but there was also a good deal of control.
There was also a great deal more funding during the Olympics.
In this case, the City basically let a hundred thousand people into the downtown area with no meaningful control of any kind and what happened seems almost inevitable. I would have been shocked if there hadn't been a riot, whether the Canucks won or lost.
In retrospect I agree, but I (and the police) might have been lulled into some complacency, post-Olympics. And it doesn't seem that unreasonable: 2 weeks of street parties, then this play-off run was flawless until game 7.
CBC Radio One was on and there was a surge at the live site at puck drop that left a couple reporters rattled. Some fencing was removed due to excessive climbers and to take pressure off the inside surge (or something).
Also of note, just after puck drop, Matthew Lazen-Rider of On The Coast, who was in the crowd, overheard a paramedic supervisor telling an ambulance crew that he didn't like the mood of the crowd and if there was trouble the ambulance was to get out of harms way.
And this was (reported on air) just after puck dropped...
Best line I've heard about the situation came from the Globe & Mail's comments section: "We won the riot!" (/humour)
How about we crowdsource information about the scumbag violent police who make the lives of people a living hell on a daily basis?
The police are the problem, not a bunch of sports fans rioting.
What a load of crap.
LAST time there was a riot, we had tons of footage of police committing violent crimes and I would have loved to have seen them identified and prosecuted.
THIS time, the police did NOTHING to instigate any of this.
Also, do not mistake me for a fan of police in general: I'm usually extremely harsh on them. Having said that, the Vancouver Police are among the best anywhere. I give full credit to that to our current chief, Jim Chu.
Not sure if you live in Vancouver, but if you've got pic's of the police being bastards, please post them so we can identify them because we know that they're not perfect.
Next time, you should do it by going out on the streets and punching in the face every idiot who tries to set a car on fire or break a shop window. Then there won't be a need to clean the streets up next morning.
(but yeah, taking a photo first is a good idea anyway)
There was a video played on CBC TV this morning, submitted by a spectator, presented without commentary due to its shocking nature:
A (rather large) man trying to prevent looting of The Bay on Georgia Street getting swarmed and getting the snot kicked out of him for his efforts. Final frame is him motionless on the street.
I sympathize with your initial reaction, but it's definitely not a wise one. Much better to get pic's of criminal acts, then casually FOLLOW perpetrators, getting further pictures a block away when the face mask is down. Should be easy to remain unnoticed due to the crowds & number of cameras.
You've made an extremely cogent case for reading this book.
Thank you, and congratulations to David Flanagan (the book's author, who himself posts a reply to your comment) for his work.
I wish him much success...
Now I'm off to go look up the answers to the questions you've posed while I'm still motivated by the shame of not having a clue.
Maybe you could post the answers in reply to your post: someone will likely benefit from it. -- Salon Kill File: Better letter reading on Salon.com. http://salon.maow.net/
Hence I would argue that the biggest problem is not so much a "filter bubble" but more that when you hear a dissenting voice you are unlikely to believe it because you do not trust it to be right...although I suppose you could call that a self-filter bubble.
I can confirm this; it's called Confirmation Bias.
No, in Canada this is the price we pay for "culture" industries being protected and coddled from reality.
No, in Canada this is the price we pay for having mostly unrestrained multinational corporations in unusually close proximity to USian culture and practices.
I think you can find posts in this very/. story about Europeans dealing with this (i.e. it's illegal, at least in Spain). So I don't expect they sat around and said, 'See what Canada is doing?!? Let's ban it before it gets to our shores.'
I'd argue that Canadian culture has strongly benefited (and by extension so have Canadians) by SOME of the coddling, such as CanCon (Canadian Content) broadcast requirements.
Now people are going to think that Wardriving is synonymous with stealing credit card numbers, when it's just the act of finding wi-fi from a car.
I think Google has found that what you say is true.
They've faced a barrage of legal hassles for their "war-driving" whilst collecting Street View images. And it's never been shown, that I'm aware of, that they did anything remotely unethical with the data collected.
In fact, they even refused to release the collected info to governments due to "privacy reasons", if I recall correctly.
I cannot fathom how an Android device can ignore the fact that it's lease has expired, never mind respond to 2 (or more) different IP addresses at once.
A few of my servers respond to different IPs on the same NICs. Easy to set up in Linux, Mac OSX, and Windows.
Now that you mention it, it seems rather obvious. My little home server does the same, I suppose.
I guess it's still a stunning stumble that DHCP leases aren't handled properly by the Android clients.
Darn good investigative work by the Princeton team...
It seems, off the top of my head, that upon awakening, Wifi's DHCP client ought to check to see if the DHCP lease has expired. If so, get a new one, release old one.
I may have to test my setup and see if I'm getting the same problem from my Android.
I cannot fathom how an Android device can ignore the fact that it's lease has expired, never mind respond to 2 (or more) different IP addresses at once.
Now, if only a patch could be issued, then pushed out by the carriers.
Anyone know: Will the ROM modders (I'm liking Fresh Zodiac Fruit) be able to issue a fix within their custom ROMs?
I've had to reboot my WBR-2310 fairly often as my Android phone loses ability to see the router to connect to it.
I moved the DHCP server to my Linux box and it seemed to help, but have since had to reboot router occasionally.
I wonder if it's related.
Also, good work Princeton, this impressed me, from TFA:
Why Haven't Other Sites Reported This Particular Issue?
Some may wonder why only Princeton has reported this problem. Some may believe that because other sites are not reporting it, the problem must be due to a problem with Princeton's network.
Princeton detected this issue because we take a very pro-active stance to monitor for certain kinds of common network problems, including this one. Our network monitoring includes comparing actual IP address usage to DHCP server lease assignments on a daily basis. This allows us to detect some devices using IP addresses not assigned for their use. This is a degree of monitoring that many sites do not perform. We also monitor our DHCP servers very closely for any problems they detect, including when they see DHCP-leased IP addresses in-use when they should not be, or when a client tries to SELECT an offer that was not made to it, or when a client tries to renew or rebind an IP address after the client's lease on that IP address has already expired.
-- Salon Kill File: required for reading Salon.com Letters section: http://salon.maow.net/
Already modded +5, so I'll add a comment: that was brilliantly illustrated.
A lot of commenters here have assumed that the folks bought their kids an iPhone, where as many of them probably downloaded a free app and let the kids play with the parents' phones, thinking the worst that could happen would be a damaged phone, where in fact they might have received a bill for in-app purchases disguised as a game play that totaled as much as a new phone, or more.
$40 / month, unlimited internet (throttled after 5 gigs), PLUS unlimited talk & text Canada-wide, PLUS USA-wide talk & text (lower 48 only?), PLUS free global SMS.
I've been on the plan for months now, with a "free" (WindTab) Huawei 8100 Android phone.
Agree with your post but responding instead of a +1 Interesting.
But this one thing, maybe not so much:
When the experts say they don't expect any more hydrogen explosions, it is because there is no Zirconium left.
1) With enough corium collecting in the drywell, immersed in salt water, is it not possible for hydrogen to be produced via thermal / chemical processes?
2) There seems to be nowhere to contain any hydrogen at the moment: pretty much everything was damaged in previous explosions.
And as such they ought to be (IANAL) liable for a fair amount, similar to how the RIAA has sought many multiples of "damages".
I encourage you to get a free initial consultation with a lawyer. Once they were called out on it and still refused to attribute their story, it should be a slam-dunk to be awarded something financial (whether or not it would be collectible) plus expenses.
Still, that's the only thing they and future infringers understand: monetary penalties.
These are factually inaccurate howlers full of cynism and stupidty.
Can you expand on that broad statement?
I'd like to add one more point, which I'd forgotten.
That is, while Page's articles may have been partially inspired by reaction to some tabloid / Fauxian scare-mongering, he's taken it 180 and is MORE sure of a harmless outcome than Tepco themselves. I mean the "authorities" often downplay the severity of major incidents (think the flow rate estimates from the BP Gulf gusher), yet the Prime Minister of Japan and even Tepco officials recognise the situation is very grave.
The Reg keeps publishing stories like, "Nothing to see here, move along. Oh look - frothing greenies don't believe us and our superior intellects.".
These are factually inaccurate howlers full of cynism and stupidty.
Can you expand on that broad statement?
I think I can (expanding on my reply to parent poster):
I thought the first was a humour piece: "Fukushima Proves Nuclear Safe: Build More Now!" This of course was posted right around the time of the first explosion on site, when everyone with eyes or ears could tell the situation was far from over.
As more explosions happened and the situation deteriorated there was no, "Oops", but instead a doubling down on stupid.
Such as pointing out that even wind power isn't perfectly safe, never mind coal. Sure, true, but Lewis Fucking Page wrote "Fukushima Proves Nuclear Safe", so when we point out that is clearly NOT true, what kind of bastard responds with "neither is wind" instead of addressing their own certainty on the safety of nukes?
Also, saying no health risks will ever happen due to Fukushima is highly disingenuous:
It is disrespectful to the guys actually facing danger in trying to keep the plants cool,
It ignores the fact that a 20, 30, 50,... km no-go zone is required for ? years to keep people safe (is there such abundant land in Japan that they won't notice a great chunk out-of-bounds?)
It ignores the future effects: for example, to BC & Alaska's future salmon runs: will Europeans buy our salmon when there are very low but detectable radiation in them?
What if another leak happens, from the MOX reactor, and the prevailing wind just happens to blow it inland? Will there be a band of radiation deposited on the land that will make it some type of no-go / no-stopping / no living / no farming zone?
These are all questions that are not from scare-mongering however have been utterly glossed over on The Reg's pieces (those that I could stomach reading: gave up after about 3 of these "stories").
Also, I'm generally pro-nuke, not a "frothingGreenie" as we're bing called on those stupid stories' comment sections (which also, depressingly, get tonnes of agreeing comments on the first page, with lots more thumbs-up than thumbs-down.
Had to start reading on the last page of letters to get a more balanced view.
Why the register is engaging in this I can only guess. I presume these articles generate a lot of traffic an comments, and are thus a good idea for them to post. These are factually inaccurate howlers full of cynism and stupidty.
I guess people have to make a living somehow.
Thank you for noticing this, I've lost a lot of respect for The Reg over Lewis Pages' utterly shill-ful postings.
I thought the first was a humour piece: "Fukushima Proves Nuclear Safe: Build More Now!" This of course was posted right around the time of the first explosion on site, when everyone with eyes or ears could tell the situation was far from over.
Also, I'm generally pro-nuke, not a "frothingGreenie" as we're being called on those stupid stories' comment sections (which also, depressingly, get tonnes of agreeing comments on the first page, with lots more thumbs-up than thumbs-down.
Have to start reading on the last page of letters to get a more balanced view.
I read (& posted a comment to) the Salon.com article, and I'll rephrase it here.
At some point, there should be a point where Moore's Law collides with the "law" of diminishing returns.
As others have posted here before me, we have seen a flattening of CPU speeds for a few years, and when's the last time you heard someone say, "I want a new computer, but if I just wait 6 more months, it will be faster, better, cheaper"? Indeed, the same has applied to laptops for a fair while now.
Sure there's room for Moore's Law to rule the mobile market for a few years to come, but once you have IBM's Watson in your pocket, how much more computing power is needed?
And yes, I modded my AMD 64 so it only has 640Kb, because that's enough for anyone - harumph!
Slashdot Mirror
I have no opinion myself, but, from your link:
This article is written like an advertisement. Please help rewrite this article from a neutral point of view. For blatant advertising that would require a fundamental rewrite to become encyclopedic, use {{db-spam}} to mark for speedy deletion. (June 2011)
... they contain a significant amount of important information.
1) Lamo stated the he was a journalist and a priest, so the chat logs would be secret.
That one really jumped out at me. WTF Lamo?
I see lots of comments about what a POS Lamo is, but telling that to Manning, and sending him *hugs* [sic], THEN turning him in - while knowing Manning was on his way to discharge, had already lost some level of clearance, well that seems a hugely dishonest betrayal.
--
Salon Kill File: Better letter reading on Salon.com.
http://salonkillfile.maow.net/
This is a quote.
I've been reading The Mobs and the Mafia: the Illustrated History of Organized Crime by Hank Messic and Burt Goldblatt (1972, ISBN 0-88365-211-0) and was struck by a passage:
Sounds like an interesting book, and a believable premise, however I thought the mass suicides following the Crash of '29 turned out to be mythical.
Like the most-recent crash, not a lot of stories of Wall Streeters committing suicide. More common among lower-on-the-economic-scale folks that tend to do that.
Your quote from the book makes it sound very common, but I don't think it really was.
Ah, here's a link explaining more:
during October and November of 1929 the number of suicides was disappointingly low
A (rather large) man trying to prevent looting of The Bay on Georgia Street getting swarmed and getting the snot kicked out of him for his efforts. Final frame is him motionless on the street.
That's exactly the problem - one man against the several. That way, sure, you get swarmed. But it shouldn't be one. It should be every person living in that neighborhood. Even if you just took all those who took pics - and if they ganged up together - how many is that, and how many does it take to swarm them?
He was part of a loosely-formed group of anonymous normal folks (a couple assumptions made there, but didn't appear part of a tight-knit group).
That's the problem: the rowdies are more drunk, more drugged up, more hyped up, more aggressive, more ready for violent action. Normal folks aren't prepared.
Also, it would only take a single head-stomp to meaningfully end a life. Just Not Worth It to stop some Chinese made crap from being stolen from a multi-national, well-insured corporation. No offense to any multi-national corporations reading this.
Back to your point, which I am sympathetic to, I like to hope the 2 or 3 stabbing victims are former hoodlums who fell to the knives of "normal" folks, using their own anonymity in the crowd. Alas, the stabbing victims are probably mostly innocent.
The police did the best thing they could. There is simply no good way to manage a mob of potentially tens of thousands of people.
Fully agree.
I lay a good chunk of the blame at the feet of the City of Vancouver. When the Olympics were on, crowds were carefully managed. Yes there was a lot more good will, but there was also a good deal of control.
There was also a great deal more funding during the Olympics.
In this case, the City basically let a hundred thousand people into the downtown area with no meaningful control of any kind and what happened seems almost inevitable. I would have been shocked if there hadn't been a riot, whether the Canucks won or lost.
In retrospect I agree, but I (and the police) might have been lulled into some complacency, post-Olympics. And it doesn't seem that unreasonable: 2 weeks of street parties, then this play-off run was flawless until game 7.
CBC Radio One was on and there was a surge at the live site at puck drop that left a couple reporters rattled. Some fencing was removed due to excessive climbers and to take pressure off the inside surge (or something).
Also of note, just after puck drop, Matthew Lazen-Rider of On The Coast, who was in the crowd, overheard a paramedic supervisor telling an ambulance crew that he didn't like the mood of the crowd and if there was trouble the ambulance was to get out of harms way.
And this was (reported on air) just after puck dropped...
Best line I've heard about the situation came from the Globe & Mail's comments section: "We won the riot!" (/humour)
Props to the rioters!
How about we crowdsource information about the scumbag violent police who make the lives of people a living hell on a daily basis?
The police are the problem, not a bunch of sports fans rioting.
What a load of crap.
LAST time there was a riot, we had tons of footage of police committing violent crimes and I would have loved to have seen them identified and prosecuted.
THIS time, the police did NOTHING to instigate any of this.
Also, do not mistake me for a fan of police in general: I'm usually extremely harsh on them. Having said that, the Vancouver Police are among the best anywhere. I give full credit to that to our current chief, Jim Chu.
Not sure if you live in Vancouver, but if you've got pic's of the police being bastards, please post them so we can identify them because we know that they're not perfect.
But I suspect you're not located in Vancouver.
Next time, you should do it by going out on the streets and punching in the face every idiot who tries to set a car on fire or break a shop window. Then there won't be a need to clean the streets up next morning.
(but yeah, taking a photo first is a good idea anyway)
There was a video played on CBC TV this morning, submitted by a spectator, presented without commentary due to its shocking nature:
A (rather large) man trying to prevent looting of The Bay on Georgia Street getting swarmed and getting the snot kicked out of him for his efforts. Final frame is him motionless on the street.
I sympathize with your initial reaction, but it's definitely not a wise one. Much better to get pic's of criminal acts, then casually FOLLOW perpetrators, getting further pictures a block away when the face mask is down. Should be easy to remain unnoticed due to the crowds & number of cameras.
You've made an extremely cogent case for reading this book.
Thank you, and congratulations to David Flanagan (the book's author, who himself posts a reply to your comment) for his work.
I wish him much success...
Now I'm off to go look up the answers to the questions you've posed while I'm still motivated by the shame of not having a clue.
Maybe you could post the answers in reply to your post: someone will likely benefit from it.
--
Salon Kill File: Better letter reading on Salon.com.
http://salon.maow.net/
Hence I would argue that the biggest problem is not so much a "filter bubble" but more that when you hear a dissenting voice you are unlikely to believe it because you do not trust it to be right...although I suppose you could call that a self-filter bubble.
I can confirm this; it's called Confirmation Bias.
No, in Canada this is the price we pay for "culture" industries being protected and coddled from reality.
No, in Canada this is the price we pay for having mostly unrestrained multinational corporations in unusually close proximity to USian culture and practices.
I think you can find posts in this very /. story about Europeans dealing with this (i.e. it's illegal, at least in Spain). So I don't expect they sat around and said, 'See what Canada is doing?!? Let's ban it before it gets to our shores.'
I'd argue that Canadian culture has strongly benefited (and by extension so have Canadians) by SOME of the coddling, such as CanCon (Canadian Content) broadcast requirements.
Just my Cdn$0.02 worth...
Now people are going to think that Wardriving is synonymous with stealing credit card numbers, when it's just the act of finding wi-fi from a car.
I think Google has found that what you say is true.
They've faced a barrage of legal hassles for their "war-driving" whilst collecting Street View images. And it's never been shown, that I'm aware of, that they did anything remotely unethical with the data collected.
In fact, they even refused to release the collected info to governments due to "privacy reasons", if I recall correctly.
I cannot fathom how an Android device can ignore the fact that it's lease has expired, never mind respond to 2 (or more) different IP addresses at once.
A few of my servers respond to different IPs on the same NICs. Easy to set up in Linux, Mac OSX, and Windows.
Now that you mention it, it seems rather obvious. My little home server does the same, I suppose.
I guess it's still a stunning stumble that DHCP leases aren't handled properly by the Android clients.
Darn good investigative work by the Princeton team...
It seems, off the top of my head, that upon awakening, Wifi's DHCP client ought to check to see if the DHCP lease has expired. If so, get a new one, release old one.
I may have to test my setup and see if I'm getting the same problem from my Android.
I cannot fathom how an Android device can ignore the fact that it's lease has expired, never mind respond to 2 (or more) different IP addresses at once.
Now, if only a patch could be issued, then pushed out by the carriers.
Anyone know: Will the ROM modders (I'm liking Fresh Zodiac Fruit) be able to issue a fix within their custom ROMs?
I've had to reboot my WBR-2310 fairly often as my Android phone loses ability to see the router to connect to it.
I moved the DHCP server to my Linux box and it seemed to help, but have since had to reboot router occasionally.
I wonder if it's related.
Also, good work Princeton, this impressed me, from TFA:
--
Salon Kill File: required for reading Salon.com Letters section:
http://salon.maow.net/
Already modded +5, so I'll add a comment: that was brilliantly illustrated.
A lot of commenters here have assumed that the folks bought their kids an iPhone, where as many of them probably downloaded a free app and let the kids play with the parents' phones, thinking the worst that could happen would be a damaged phone, where in fact they might have received a bill for in-app purchases disguised as a game play that totaled as much as a new phone, or more.
Anyway, very clever: kudos.
Canada:
TELUS: $50/gb
Rogers: $30/gb
Let me add what I have, with Wind Mobile:
$40 / month, unlimited internet (throttled after 5 gigs), PLUS unlimited talk & text Canada-wide, PLUS USA-wide talk & text (lower 48 only?), PLUS free global SMS.
I've been on the plan for months now, with a "free" (WindTab) Huawei 8100 Android phone.
Could not ask for a better deal.
Not affiliated, just a happy customer.
Agree with your post but responding instead of a +1 Interesting.
But this one thing, maybe not so much:
1) With enough corium collecting in the drywell, immersed in salt water, is it not possible for hydrogen to be produced via thermal / chemical processes?
2) There seems to be nowhere to contain any hydrogen at the moment: pretty much everything was damaged in previous explosions.
Worse, I think: TEPCO isn't telling anyone very much because they don't know themselves what is going on inside those buildings with any precision.
It's also National Cleavage Day. How are you celebrating?
Why, I'm a gonna get me some...
There, does this make my butt look fat?
And as such they ought to be (IANAL) liable for a fair amount, similar to how the RIAA has sought many multiples of "damages".
I encourage you to get a free initial consultation with a lawyer. Once they were called out on it and still refused to attribute their story, it should be a slam-dunk to be awarded something financial (whether or not it would be collectible) plus expenses.
Still, that's the only thing they and future infringers understand: monetary penalties.
My 2 worth...
These are factually inaccurate howlers full of cynism and stupidty.
Can you expand on that broad statement?
I'd like to add one more point, which I'd forgotten.
That is, while Page's articles may have been partially inspired by reaction to some tabloid / Fauxian scare-mongering, he's taken it 180 and is MORE sure of a harmless outcome than Tepco themselves. I mean the "authorities" often downplay the severity of major incidents (think the flow rate estimates from the BP Gulf gusher), yet the Prime Minister of Japan and even Tepco officials recognise the situation is very grave.
The Reg keeps publishing stories like, "Nothing to see here, move along. Oh look - frothing greenies don't believe us and our superior intellects.".
These are factually inaccurate howlers full of cynism and stupidty.
Can you expand on that broad statement?
I think I can (expanding on my reply to parent poster):
I thought the first was a humour piece: "Fukushima Proves Nuclear Safe: Build More Now!" This of course was posted right around the time of the first explosion on site, when everyone with eyes or ears could tell the situation was far from over.
As more explosions happened and the situation deteriorated there was no, "Oops", but instead a doubling down on stupid.
Such as pointing out that even wind power isn't perfectly safe, never mind coal. Sure, true, but Lewis Fucking Page wrote "Fukushima Proves Nuclear Safe", so when we point out that is clearly NOT true, what kind of bastard responds with "neither is wind" instead of addressing their own certainty on the safety of nukes?
Also, saying no health risks will ever happen due to Fukushima is highly disingenuous:
It is disrespectful to the guys actually facing danger in trying to keep the plants cool,
It ignores the fact that a 20, 30, 50, ... km no-go zone is required for ? years to keep people safe (is there such abundant land in Japan that they won't notice a great chunk out-of-bounds?)
It ignores the future effects: for example, to BC & Alaska's future salmon runs: will Europeans buy our salmon when there are very low but detectable radiation in them?
What if another leak happens, from the MOX reactor, and the prevailing wind just happens to blow it inland? Will there be a band of radiation deposited on the land that will make it some type of no-go / no-stopping / no living / no farming zone?
These are all questions that are not from scare-mongering however have been utterly glossed over on The Reg's pieces (those that I could stomach reading: gave up after about 3 of these "stories").
Also, I'm generally pro-nuke, not a "frothingGreenie" as we're bing called on those stupid stories' comment sections (which also, depressingly, get tonnes of agreeing comments on the first page, with lots more thumbs-up than thumbs-down.
Had to start reading on the last page of letters to get a more balanced view.
Why the register is engaging in this I can only guess. I presume these articles generate a lot of traffic an comments, and are thus a good idea for them to post. These are factually inaccurate howlers full of cynism and stupidty.
I guess people have to make a living somehow.
Thank you for noticing this, I've lost a lot of respect for The Reg over Lewis Pages' utterly shill-ful postings.
I thought the first was a humour piece: "Fukushima Proves Nuclear Safe: Build More Now!" This of course was posted right around the time of the first explosion on site, when everyone with eyes or ears could tell the situation was far from over.
Also, I'm generally pro-nuke, not a "frothingGreenie" as we're being called on those stupid stories' comment sections (which also, depressingly, get tonnes of agreeing comments on the first page, with lots more thumbs-up than thumbs-down.
Have to start reading on the last page of letters to get a more balanced view.
I read (& posted a comment to) the Salon.com article, and I'll rephrase it here.
At some point, there should be a point where Moore's Law collides with the "law" of diminishing returns.
As others have posted here before me, we have seen a flattening of CPU speeds for a few years, and when's the last time you heard someone say, "I want a new computer, but if I just wait 6 more months, it will be faster, better, cheaper"? Indeed, the same has applied to laptops for a fair while now.
Sure there's room for Moore's Law to rule the mobile market for a few years to come, but once you have IBM's Watson in your pocket, how much more computing power is needed?
And yes, I modded my AMD 64 so it only has 640Kb, because that's enough for anyone - harumph!
--
Salon Kill File: Better letter reading on Salon.com.
http://salon.maow.net/
https://salon.maow.net/