Chernobyl was run by a huge company that owned milions of square kilometres of land and other milions of slaves whose lifes they tought they could dispose of. That company was mainly interested in profits for the (lots of, but still in the minority) shareholders, and a second tought about security, so nobody would steal their land or slaves.
Did you read the article, or even the GP? Asking to the speculation be in fact stablished as true before you evaluate them isn't denialism. At worst it will force a delay of a few days before it is belived.
"They say there's no danger of a Chernobyl style catastrophe, but what credibility do they have?"
"These people--and quite a few nuclear proponents around here--told us all that there was "no danger" of any major leak in the days after the tsunami hit."
"Three weeks later the reactor is a molten puddle on a concrete floor, and now they're telling us we don't have to fear something else."
So, you are accusing them of saying there is no risk of major leaks since the begining, and still saying there is no risk of major leaks, after a few weeks when there have been no major leaks? Yeah, I see how they lost any credibility here.
There have been a lot of problems in TEPCO's anoucements, but you seem to not be aware of any of them. If you want to complain, choose something that is actualy wrong to complain about.
Depending on your distro and DE, and if you added laptop extensions, it will switch automaticaly to a slower powersave mode when running on bateries, and a fast power hungry mode when plugget into an outlet. There are some configurations that are independent of DE, but I haven't heard about they comming by default on any distro, and of course, both methods are completely configurable, so if you can always run on full power, or never wants the fans to turn on you can do that.
I think a few kinetic driven vehicles can't work near each other. So, ok, they could be used in autonomous vehicles, but the applications are quite limited.
In a few years I expect vision systems based on natural light to be way cheaper than they are now, and by then somebody will probably make a low power chip.
It is not that they couldn't think in mass market terms. It is that they couldn't reach a mass market. And that does make their solution overly expensive, but not more complex.
Now, about your second question, I have no idea. I hope somebody will comercialise stand-alone versions of the chips that go into those devices. For the Wii it already happened, you don't need to use a WiiMote anymore, you can simply buy the chips.
It seems we are not talking about the same Microsoft here. The company I know and don't trust will ony care about how much money it makes after they make sure nobody can use it to compete with them on any of their markets.
And yes, their API are only 'open' if you use Windows. I'm still surprised they didn't go into a court after the people that published the really open API. They are in fact doing something nice (in the 'non-bad' definition of 'nice') and unusual.
Well, the current you'll apply on a conductor is a function of the electrical field, you can't simply choose it. What you can do is restrict the time you apply that current, reducing the charge, but the device needs to transfer some charge to work.
I maintain that a powder based extinguisher is simpler, cheaper and safer.
Thanks, that is the first ok commentary I've seen. That should be the title of the article... Now I'm thinking if I should tag it.
There is no need to save the peole if you electrocute all of them while fighting the fire. Oh, and for the other posts that say you won't need to bring water, well, those people are made of water, and quite condutive. People normaly don't face kV/cm electrical fields very nicely, most of them fall out dead, and after a while start to burn.
That said, it could be that this research brings useful knowledge. How to fight fires using electricity is just not one of those.
You'd want to not use PHP if you really want to realiably put and retrieve any string from a database.
Or you can use the base64 encoding somebody posted above. Most of the times you don't need to reliably store and retrieve ANY string from a database, and then, PHP may be ok, or it may fail exactly at the strings you want...
1 - They are pushing coolant in there, it is called water. Using liquid nitrogen is just asking for another explosion.
2 - The rods must be cooler before they take them out, what is a shame if speculation is correct and reactor 3 got critical again. But there is no way to pull them hot.
3 - The rods don't get disposed of. It is evident that they should get, they could be recycled, but there is no infra-structure in place for that as people were expecting to never do recycling, and stockpile the spent fuel for ever.
4 - The place where they put used rods is at the pools near the reactors. After all those troubles to be sure that the pools are full of water, I guess they don't want to compound the problems with more rods, neither do they want to have too many rods at any place (except for the common pool) so if the worse happens somewhere, it won't have too much fuel to disperse.
5 - Besides, the safest place to have a fuel rod is inside the reactor (unless it got critical). Everywhere else it would be easier to spread.
They quite surely did put that "failout" on their threat matrix. NIMBY guarantees that. Also, calling attention for those consequences is misleading at best, the entire area was destroyed by the same phenomena that created the problems at the reactors. The economic consequences of the nuclear problems will be a nuisance near the consequences of the earthquake and tsunami.
By the way, ok, you may go back after a coal plant explodes, but do that after some arsenic, chromium, mercury, or lead contamination at your own risk. Those happen all the time, and society is wiling to let it continue. Also, if you really want to make that argument, compare the area lost to rising sea levels and the area lost to nuclear accidents at equilibrium (you can extrapolate past safety, and postulate whatever amount of generated power you want, just make sure to use the same level for coal). I don't know how they compare, but if you want to make that argument, you'd better know.
I still think that you can make a shielded control box, put it inside a truck or a boat, away from the radioactivity source, and control a robot in there by wires or low bandwith radio. On this specific case you'd need a camera, that is a problem, but you can make a camera that works for a few hours there just by shielding it in lots of glass. Make it low resolution, and send the signals back by cable instead of processing localy.
Bipolar transistos didn't vanish from the Earth's surface. There aren't of the shelf components you can plug toghether now, for this accident, but it would be a nice and not-that-expensive addition for dealing with the next one.
Not for contingency planning, at least the NYT implies it was created to easy sensor calibrating. What I understand from their diclaimer is that its inteded use is to tell something like: "We expect you very sensitive sensors here to go out, but that is not a nuclear weapon somewhere, it is because of Japan".
Slashdot Mirror
Chernobyl was run by a huge company that owned milions of square kilometres of land and other milions of slaves whose lifes they tought they could dispose of. That company was mainly interested in profits for the (lots of, but still in the minority) shareholders, and a second tought about security, so nobody would steal their land or slaves.
Like what? There is no power source as safe or less poluting than nuclear. At least on historic record.
Did you read the article, or even the GP? Asking to the speculation be in fact stablished as true before you evaluate them isn't denialism. At worst it will force a delay of a few days before it is belived.
So, you are accusing them of saying there is no risk of major leaks since the begining, and still saying there is no risk of major leaks, after a few weeks when there have been no major leaks? Yeah, I see how they lost any credibility here.
There have been a lot of problems in TEPCO's anoucements, but you seem to not be aware of any of them. If you want to complain, choose something that is actualy wrong to complain about.
Depending on your distro and DE, and if you added laptop extensions, it will switch automaticaly to a slower powersave mode when running on bateries, and a fast power hungry mode when plugget into an outlet. There are some configurations that are independent of DE, but I haven't heard about they comming by default on any distro, and of course, both methods are completely configurable, so if you can always run on full power, or never wants the fans to turn on you can do that.
Of course, the disaster that takes out satelites would be a different one, like a solar flail, or some man made jamming.
I think a few kinetic driven vehicles can't work near each other. So, ok, they could be used in autonomous vehicles, but the applications are quite limited.
In a few years I expect vision systems based on natural light to be way cheaper than they are now, and by then somebody will probably make a low power chip.
It is not that they couldn't think in mass market terms. It is that they couldn't reach a mass market. And that does make their solution overly expensive, but not more complex.
Now, about your second question, I have no idea. I hope somebody will comercialise stand-alone versions of the chips that go into those devices. For the Wii it already happened, you don't need to use a WiiMote anymore, you can simply buy the chips.
It seems we are not talking about the same Microsoft here. The company I know and don't trust will ony care about how much money it makes after they make sure nobody can use it to compete with them on any of their markets.
And yes, their API are only 'open' if you use Windows. I'm still surprised they didn't go into a court after the people that published the really open API. They are in fact doing something nice (in the 'non-bad' definition of 'nice') and unusual.
Well, the current you'll apply on a conductor is a function of the electrical field, you can't simply choose it. What you can do is restrict the time you apply that current, reducing the charge, but the device needs to transfer some charge to work.
I maintain that a powder based extinguisher is simpler, cheaper and safer.
Well, electrocuting everybody won't be any better. Just remember, several kV/cm is way stronger than a normal lightining.
Thanks, that is the first ok commentary I've seen. That should be the title of the article... Now I'm thinking if I should tag it.
There is no need to save the peole if you electrocute all of them while fighting the fire. Oh, and for the other posts that say you won't need to bring water, well, those people are made of water, and quite condutive. People normaly don't face kV/cm electrical fields very nicely, most of them fall out dead, and after a while start to burn.
That said, it could be that this research brings useful knowledge. How to fight fires using electricity is just not one of those.
Absolutely so. How your spy planes work makes no difference when the enemy is broadcasting its position loudly, so everybody notices.
Well, this never happened when they weren't owned by Oracle, and hadn't their site rewriten by Oracle's experts.
Ok, I run a little bit out of the script there, but the original didn't have the proper gravity.
I'd guess that anyone that wasn't convinced by the takeover is a lost case anyway.
Yes, because people within a company never, ever go out of their way to get some money.
We should be sane people, and expect companies to act in a way that is less lucrative, not more.
You'd want to not use PHP if you really want to realiably put and retrieve any string from a database.
Or you can use the base64 encoding somebody posted above. Most of the times you don't need to reliably store and retrieve ANY string from a database, and then, PHP may be ok, or it may fail exactly at the strings you want...
Specialy so after they got bought by Oracle. But, ironicaly, I don't remember any such news from before that.
1 - They are pushing coolant in there, it is called water. Using liquid nitrogen is just asking for another explosion.
2 - The rods must be cooler before they take them out, what is a shame if speculation is correct and reactor 3 got critical again. But there is no way to pull them hot.
3 - The rods don't get disposed of. It is evident that they should get, they could be recycled, but there is no infra-structure in place for that as people were expecting to never do recycling, and stockpile the spent fuel for ever.
4 - The place where they put used rods is at the pools near the reactors. After all those troubles to be sure that the pools are full of water, I guess they don't want to compound the problems with more rods, neither do they want to have too many rods at any place (except for the common pool) so if the worse happens somewhere, it won't have too much fuel to disperse.
5 - Besides, the safest place to have a fuel rod is inside the reactor (unless it got critical). Everywhere else it would be easier to spread.
There, fixed it for you. Who do you want to scare with best case (unicorns likely) statistics?
They quite surely did put that "failout" on their threat matrix. NIMBY guarantees that. Also, calling attention for those consequences is misleading at best, the entire area was destroyed by the same phenomena that created the problems at the reactors. The economic consequences of the nuclear problems will be a nuisance near the consequences of the earthquake and tsunami.
By the way, ok, you may go back after a coal plant explodes, but do that after some arsenic, chromium, mercury, or lead contamination at your own risk. Those happen all the time, and society is wiling to let it continue. Also, if you really want to make that argument, compare the area lost to rising sea levels and the area lost to nuclear accidents at equilibrium (you can extrapolate past safety, and postulate whatever amount of generated power you want, just make sure to use the same level for coal). I don't know how they compare, but if you want to make that argument, you'd better know.
With the least viable amount of protection.
Cheaper and safer. Well, at least everybody tought it was safer.
I still think that you can make a shielded control box, put it inside a truck or a boat, away from the radioactivity source, and control a robot in there by wires or low bandwith radio. On this specific case you'd need a camera, that is a problem, but you can make a camera that works for a few hours there just by shielding it in lots of glass. Make it low resolution, and send the signals back by cable instead of processing localy.
Bipolar transistos didn't vanish from the Earth's surface. There aren't of the shelf components you can plug toghether now, for this accident, but it would be a nice and not-that-expensive addition for dealing with the next one.
Not for contingency planning, at least the NYT implies it was created to easy sensor calibrating. What I understand from their diclaimer is that its inteded use is to tell something like: "We expect you very sensitive sensors here to go out, but that is not a nuclear weapon somewhere, it is because of Japan".