If only it was that easy. Can you please point to the $100B nuclear fuel reprocessing facility that exists somewhere in the US that would allow removing the neutron poisons from "spent" fuel assemblies to allow them to be loaded back into reactors and used more efficiently?
I'm pro-nuclear, but you're not doing anyone any service when you minimize real problems and pretend they aren't problems.
You are full of shit. Go lie somewhere else, or make up lies that are far harder to immediately disprove with 2 seconds of looking on Google. Literally the first link of my search.
When your nuclear plant is situated along the Columbia River, which drains about 1/4 of North America into the Pacific, you aren't likely to run out of water any time soon.
It's almost like there's an inverse correlation between water availability and operation of an industrial facility built to generate shitloads of heat for boiling water.
Ok, so the "of any kind" was inaccurate. However, having that thing hanging off your lightning port isn't exactly convenient if you were to use it for every-day storage like you can with an SD card equipped device.
Not that Google has been doing Android any favors with how Android 8 handles SD cards, but you know what I mean.
Hang on, this test Android device on my desk has told me that external storage has stopped responding again...
Blackberry owned the smartphone market, and then they whiffed on creating new products that mattered. They decided that their enterprise lock-in and retread devices would keep them going.
Then Apple and Google came along.
Now they are just another Android OEM with a bunch of lawyers.
Do you know anything about cars, at all? What is magical about a Tesla that would cause 100% of any recalled vehicle to have to go back to the Fremont factory, but any other car manufacturer could do it at a dealership service center? You know that Tesla has service centers, right? Moreover, they have on-site service vans that can take care of lots of service appointments at your convenience wherever the car is, so you don't have to go to a service center. If the recall is on a part that is easily swapped at a service center, or by their on-site service crews (does Ford have that?) then why would it have to go back to the factory?
Here's a hint: my Model 3 needed to have the turn signal stalk replaced because it wasn't auto-cancelling on a left turn. A guy in a van showed up and replaced it in my driveway in about 20 minutes. I regarded this as excellent customer service I would have never gotten from any other car manufacturer I've bought a new vehicle from in my life, including FCA, Subaru, BMW, Volkswagen, Honda, Toyota, and Jaguar Land Rover.
Except that he tweeted information made available to investors two weeks prior, and you think that somehow constitutes a violation of a court order to not tweet material information without prior board approval.
You completely whiff on the idea that it wasn't material information, which has a defined legal meaning that includes the information not being public.
implementation of mandatory procedures to oversee and pre- approve Mr. Musk’s Tesla-related written communications that reasonably
could contain information material to the company or its shareholders,
He didn't violate the agreement, because what he tweeted on 19 February was already public information released on 30 January during the investor call.
The tweet contained no "information material to the company or its shareholders" because they already had access to the information. As it turns out, "material information" has a defined meaning. Note the bit about "when it is revealed to the public" - if it's already public, then it's no longer material information.
You are wrong. You are not a lawyer. You are definitely not a securities lawyer, and neither am I. Don't act like one.
Your entire straw man argument is centered on the assumption that there actually was a violation of the agreement.
If there is no violation, then the status of being a court order is irrelevant. He tweeted information that has been publicly available since released on the Q4 analysts call that literally anybody can listen to through a web browser, right off of Tesla's investor web site.
Remember that whole "innocent until proven guilty" thing? Here's to hoping you never get summoned for jury duty - it will just be a waste of everybody's time and taxpayer dollars as you'll get bounced in voir dire for being prejudiced towards law enforcement since apparently they can do no wrong in your eyes. I would hope that current events would prove beyond a doubt that law enforcement agencies are definitely fallible, but that's just me.
The soil and seawater here on earth are radioactive too. It's all a matter of degree, and what type of radiation is being emitted. And damn, guess I can't go running around naked on Mars? There is exactly nobody that thought they would be.
You're kind of a moron.
Here's a hint: UV radiation, RF radiation, and particle radiation are not equal. And forms of particle radiation are not equal either.
When most non-business network traffic is WAN-link limited by a shitty ISP that can't even do gigabit, 95% of non-business customers don't need more than gigabit.
There's still a lot of rotating-rust drives out there that can barely saturate 100Mbps. 10GbE and higher are still the domain of the server room, so volumes are low; thus price is high.
if there's already a storage device mounted, there's very little reason to unmount if the system is locked. It's already been mounted and had a chance to do it's bad deeds if it's bad.
He's talking about the idea of not enumerating newly plugged devices if the system is locked, which is 100% in the OS ballpark. I don't want the hardware maker involved in that decision at all, or else the hardware starts doing shit the OS doesn't know about, and a patch to the OS can't fix. That's where bad security problems start (see: Intel AMT).
Apple already sells a lot of devices that cost way too much fucking money for the amount of value they deliver. This is just Huawei playing follow the leader once again.
This might actually be one of the cases where the market takes care of itself - there will be a few people that buy one of these because they simply must have the biggest shiniest thing out there, but the user experience will be terrible due to realities of the product that are outside Huawei's control - for example, how terrible Android is on tablets mostly due to very poor application support for larger displays and screen rotation.
Now we get to salt that painful tablet user experience with yet another screen aspect ratio that doesn't conform to either phone sizing or current tablet sizing and you've got a wonderful device that no app maker other than Huawei will support unless they sell millions of these things (which won't happen at that price), ensuring either distorted app UI drawing or big black bars taking up all that extra screen real estate.
Due to limited sell through because of that outrageous price, there will not be incentive for app publishers to extend their apps to deal with this device properly, so it won't be a problem that goes away with new software.
If you've got the ability to control the whole stack - there's only a handful that do (Google, Apple, Samsung kind of) - then this is something that eventually could be worked around if you are willing to have slower adoption up front while most people wait for the software to catch up. Samsung will be stubborn enough to wait, and they ship enough volume to get developers on board. I don't know if Huawei will be able to do that.
All the problems of running Android on a tablet, with the addition of a line in the middle of the screen and a different screen aspect ratio for poorly behaved applications to fuck up or present big black bars that waste all that expanded screen. Great. Oh, and for only 3x the price of buying a phone plus a tablet.
You are confusing elements created in a reactor from enhancing the neutron flux and introducing various materials to capture those neutrons with natural decay products. There was a completely different process happening in these buckets than you would see in a reactor.
The U-238 decay chain doesn't have a single gamma emitter in it. It's all alpha and beta decay. And by the way, neither does U-235.
The most common emitter of gamma from nuclear decay is Cobalt-60 which is an artificially made isotope created by having a chunk of Cobalt-59 capturing a "slow" neutron - basically requiring a moderator to be used. These were steel buckets of natural uranium ore, not purified cobalt buckets filled with refined reactor grade fuel dunked in water.
If the GP poster knows nothing about this, you clearly know less than nothing, including not knowing how to google something before spouting incorrect information.
Slashdot Mirror
If only it was that easy. Can you please point to the $100B nuclear fuel reprocessing facility that exists somewhere in the US that would allow removing the neutron poisons from "spent" fuel assemblies to allow them to be loaded back into reactors and used more efficiently?
I'm pro-nuclear, but you're not doing anyone any service when you minimize real problems and pretend they aren't problems.
Nearly a fifth of it's time out of action?
How about 91.9% uptime in 2015, which by far leads the way among generation sources: https://www.power-eng.com/arti...
You are full of shit. Go lie somewhere else, or make up lies that are far harder to immediately disprove with 2 seconds of looking on Google. Literally the first link of my search.
When your nuclear plant is situated along the Columbia River, which drains about 1/4 of North America into the Pacific, you aren't likely to run out of water any time soon.
It's almost like there's an inverse correlation between water availability and operation of an industrial facility built to generate shitloads of heat for boiling water.
Ok, so the "of any kind" was inaccurate. However, having that thing hanging off your lightning port isn't exactly convenient if you were to use it for every-day storage like you can with an SD card equipped device.
Not that Google has been doing Android any favors with how Android 8 handles SD cards, but you know what I mean.
Hang on, this test Android device on my desk has told me that external storage has stopped responding again...
Those who can, do.
Those who can't, litigate.
Blackberry owned the smartphone market, and then they whiffed on creating new products that mattered. They decided that their enterprise lock-in and retread devices would keep them going.
Then Apple and Google came along.
Now they are just another Android OEM with a bunch of lawyers.
Totally false. 100% FUD.
Do you know anything about cars, at all? What is magical about a Tesla that would cause 100% of any recalled vehicle to have to go back to the Fremont factory, but any other car manufacturer could do it at a dealership service center? You know that Tesla has service centers, right? Moreover, they have on-site service vans that can take care of lots of service appointments at your convenience wherever the car is, so you don't have to go to a service center. If the recall is on a part that is easily swapped at a service center, or by their on-site service crews (does Ford have that?) then why would it have to go back to the factory?
Here's a hint: my Model 3 needed to have the turn signal stalk replaced because it wasn't auto-cancelling on a left turn. A guy in a van showed up and replaced it in my driveway in about 20 minutes. I regarded this as excellent customer service I would have never gotten from any other car manufacturer I've bought a new vehicle from in my life, including FCA, Subaru, BMW, Volkswagen, Honda, Toyota, and Jaguar Land Rover.
Why are you lying on the internet, bro?
Except that he tweeted information made available to investors two weeks prior, and you think that somehow constitutes a violation of a court order to not tweet material information without prior board approval.
You completely whiff on the idea that it wasn't material information, which has a defined legal meaning that includes the information not being public.
You are wrong.
From your own link:
implementation of mandatory procedures to oversee and pre-
approve Mr. Musk’s Tesla-related written communications that reasonably
could contain information material to the company or its shareholders,
He didn't violate the agreement, because what he tweeted on 19 February was already public information released on 30 January during the investor call.
The tweet contained no "information material to the company or its shareholders" because they already had access to the information. As it turns out, "material information" has a defined meaning. Note the bit about "when it is revealed to the public" - if it's already public, then it's no longer material information.
You are wrong. You are not a lawyer. You are definitely not a securities lawyer, and neither am I. Don't act like one.
Your entire straw man argument is centered on the assumption that there actually was a violation of the agreement.
If there is no violation, then the status of being a court order is irrelevant. He tweeted information that has been publicly available since released on the Q4 analysts call that literally anybody can listen to through a web browser, right off of Tesla's investor web site.
Remember that whole "innocent until proven guilty" thing? Here's to hoping you never get summoned for jury duty - it will just be a waste of everybody's time and taxpayer dollars as you'll get bounced in voir dire for being prejudiced towards law enforcement since apparently they can do no wrong in your eyes. I would hope that current events would prove beyond a doubt that law enforcement agencies are definitely fallible, but that's just me.
The soil and seawater here on earth are radioactive too. It's all a matter of degree, and what type of radiation is being emitted. And damn, guess I can't go running around naked on Mars? There is exactly nobody that thought they would be.
You're kind of a moron.
Here's a hint: UV radiation, RF radiation, and particle radiation are not equal. And forms of particle radiation are not equal either.
Mostly because he's an idiot and doesn't understand the differences between RF radiation, UV radiation, and particle radiation.
It's hilarious that you think any iPhone ever will be able to interact with external storage of any kind.
Networking speeds have always been measured in base 10.
When most non-business network traffic is WAN-link limited by a shitty ISP that can't even do gigabit, 95% of non-business customers don't need more than gigabit.
There's still a lot of rotating-rust drives out there that can barely saturate 100Mbps. 10GbE and higher are still the domain of the server room, so volumes are low; thus price is high.
if there's already a storage device mounted, there's very little reason to unmount if the system is locked. It's already been mounted and had a chance to do it's bad deeds if it's bad.
He's talking about the idea of not enumerating newly plugged devices if the system is locked, which is 100% in the OS ballpark. I don't want the hardware maker involved in that decision at all, or else the hardware starts doing shit the OS doesn't know about, and a patch to the OS can't fix. That's where bad security problems start (see: Intel AMT).
I don't know if there were actual exploits, but FireWire absolutely had direct memory access.
You know that Blackberry sells one, right?
What are you talking about?
Apple already sells a lot of devices that cost way too much fucking money for the amount of value they deliver. This is just Huawei playing follow the leader once again.
This might actually be one of the cases where the market takes care of itself - there will be a few people that buy one of these because they simply must have the biggest shiniest thing out there, but the user experience will be terrible due to realities of the product that are outside Huawei's control - for example, how terrible Android is on tablets mostly due to very poor application support for larger displays and screen rotation.
Now we get to salt that painful tablet user experience with yet another screen aspect ratio that doesn't conform to either phone sizing or current tablet sizing and you've got a wonderful device that no app maker other than Huawei will support unless they sell millions of these things (which won't happen at that price), ensuring either distorted app UI drawing or big black bars taking up all that extra screen real estate.
Due to limited sell through because of that outrageous price, there will not be incentive for app publishers to extend their apps to deal with this device properly, so it won't be a problem that goes away with new software.
If you've got the ability to control the whole stack - there's only a handful that do (Google, Apple, Samsung kind of) - then this is something that eventually could be worked around if you are willing to have slower adoption up front while most people wait for the software to catch up. Samsung will be stubborn enough to wait, and they ship enough volume to get developers on board. I don't know if Huawei will be able to do that.
All the problems of running Android on a tablet, with the addition of a line in the middle of the screen and a different screen aspect ratio for poorly behaved applications to fuck up or present big black bars that waste all that expanded screen. Great. Oh, and for only 3x the price of buying a phone plus a tablet.
So you are saying that the only attribute that matters is the size of the particle, but not the composition of the particle?
Breathing diesel exhaust is just as healthy / unhealthy as breathing fumes from a ham? Are you fucking cracked?
You are confusing elements created in a reactor from enhancing the neutron flux and introducing various materials to capture those neutrons with natural decay products. There was a completely different process happening in these buckets than you would see in a reactor.
The U-238 decay chain doesn't have a single gamma emitter in it. It's all alpha and beta decay. And by the way, neither does U-235.
The most common emitter of gamma from nuclear decay is Cobalt-60 which is an artificially made isotope created by having a chunk of Cobalt-59 capturing a "slow" neutron - basically requiring a moderator to be used. These were steel buckets of natural uranium ore, not purified cobalt buckets filled with refined reactor grade fuel dunked in water.
If the GP poster knows nothing about this, you clearly know less than nothing, including not knowing how to google something before spouting incorrect information.
if living in your parents basement, maybe. Or in an apartment with roommates stacked like firewood.
Found the guy who has never been on the NYC subway.
Hint: it's already a smoking sewer run into the ground by incompetent management, chronic underfunding, and decades of deferred maintenance.