...stand by my stance that additional radioactive material would not be introduced to our planet as a whole, but it may definitely be dangerous to localize so much within a small space.
Exactly my point. All elements present on/in the planet, will continue to be so. It's the artificial localization and concentration that concerns me. As well as the synthesis of certain compounds which would almost never occur in nature, at least in harmful concentrations. (So-called man-made chemicals. Incidentally, some people think that because something is "natural" or "organic", its good, or at least safe for you. Heh. Poison mushrooms are organic. Nuff said.)
As to iron oxide reacting to a magnet, this is the very basis for the operation of audio tape equipment. Also, there may well be elemental iron at the earth's core, but iron, wherever exposed to oxygen, forms iron oxide, absolutely. Elemental iron, when found in nature, has never been so exposed.
The use of depleted uranium may be found in the coming decades to be as foolish health-wise as the careless application of mercury as a decoration by the "mad hatters" of the 19th century. It is also a sobering thought that as late as the 1950's, visionaries dreamed of houses and even cars powered by nuclear energy.
On a side note, most (all, maybe?) smoke detectors use a small amount of radioactive material to operate, though not as a power source. Mine has Americium. What's to keep an industrious terrorist from ordering thousands of smoke detectors, harvesting this radioactive stuff, and making a dirty bomb?
If it were left to governments, the only computers would be bigger and heavier mainframes. It took somebody with a garage (think Apple and others), a soldering iron, and a vision to bring it to everybody else.
You see, institutions only know how to make other institutions. Individuals know how to make things for individuals.
[the uranium is] back in the earth where it came from, just maybe not the exact same spot as it's original home.
As to the landfill thing, I believe Uranium is a metal, denser than lead, is smelted from uranium ore, which contains low concentrations of uranium oxide. The pure uranium metal does not occur in nature, any more than iron does. Iron oxide (rust) but not iron.
I have heard that depleted uranium is used in armor piercing rounds by the US military. There have been some questions (and few answers) about how healthy this practice is for friendly troops.
It would seem to me that placing concentrated sources of uranium in a landfill would be distinctly unhealthy, both for those with a house built on top, and those downstream of the runoff.
Interesting thing is, radon gas is a by-product of radioactive decay, usually in granite formations. You could probably find at least a dozen uranium atoms in every ton of granite.
1) Shielding alone for the uranium, would turn the battery into a luggable, defeating the purpose of having a laptop.
2) Landfills filling up with NiCad batteries is bad enough, but Uranium?
3) People are idiots. A good percentage of them would unfoolproof the foolproof protections and cause a mini China Syndrome while trying to boot Windows.i
4) Expensive. Can you imagine how much it would cost? How much does U-235 cost per ounce?
Pro's:
1) A single charge would probably outlast the usable lifetime of the laptop, and would also probably outlast your usable lifetime.
2) Bragging rights. "How long does your laptop last? 4 hours? Hah. Mine lasts 4 centuries." OK, that really stems from 1).
I can only imagine what they'd do with a methanol cartridge
Um... confiscate it too? What else is there to imagine? I suppose they could high-five each other, have everybody over for a methanol party, go blind because they never can remember if its ethanol or methanol that's safe to drink...
Laptop manufacturers might as well dream up a laptop powered by U-235 (single charge might last 500 yrs) as far as airport acceptability is concerned.
betchya a dollar there's an admin there who reads/.
And in a few months he (or she, you goddamn PC assholes) will have a lot more time to read/. SCO has not just filed suit against IBM, they have declared war against the rest of the IT world. (Linux = Communism?!?!)
These people better start thinking towards the post-SCO world, much like the concentration camp guards started making nice towards the end of WWII.
You see, even if they win their lawsuit against IBM and everybody else, they will be a pariah in the tech community. Nobody will do business with them, and eventually they'll spend their $3 billion on operating expenses and tacos and go bankrupt.
And most of the OSS community will be saying goodbye good riddance.
Let's say that your site needs a boost in traffic. Just cook up a fake letter from some non-existent lawyer, saying cease-and-desist, then leak said letter to/. to get the effect we all know and love.
BAM! Your ISP staggers for half a day or so, but you'll probably enjoy residual traffic as a result of the exposure...
More and more, I associate the *AA with the Mafia. Their real source of power is intimidation, usually through carefully chosen lawsuits against financially unprepared defendants. (First Amendment? Not if it goes against *AA interests! *AA uber alles!! Sieg heil!)
Oh, and strategically placed "campaign contributions".
If that bit about "visiting the dentist" is accurate, I hope he gets his teeth knocked out in some unfortunate freak accident with a ballpeen hammer.
In Providence, its the only way to get out into traffic, by first pulling out into the mass median. Sometimes you see smokies parked there, looking for speeders.
...made it standard procedure (in states where radar detectors are/were illegal) for the police officer, upon discovering the illegal device, to destroy it on the spot, usually by stomping it to bits.
Well, I seem to recall they stopped this practice, since a judge somewhere determined that this was depriving the defendant of "due process."
So-- how could the use of computer-destroying technology be legally sanctioned? There is no due process. Sure, the technology could be used, but officially, the perpetrator would be subject to fines, legal damages, and/or jail time, just like any other virus-writing script-kiddie.
Orrin Hatch is really just advocating vigilanteism, which is an abandonment of the whole legal system. What's next? Should I start waving a pistol at everybody who cuts me off, or torching the car of that guy down the street who plays his stereo too loud?
Let's take it one step further. Let's have it so that we not only destroy the music pirate's computer, but we overload his power supply, cause a fire, and burn down his house, and hopefully all his neighbors' houses, too, since they probably were in on it as well...
Yeah, and I used to take a pocket knife with a 2 inch blade on planes (before 9/11) all the time. And nary a glance from the guards.
And get this, on one commuter flight into DC, we passed directly over the Pentagon going into the airport.
By the by, didn't that "shoe bomber" use a lighter to try to light his shoes? I remember there was a much closer look at peoples' shoes after that, but I don't know if there was anybody looking at lighters...
Don't they screen for flammable containers, especially under pressure?
On a related note (gee-wizz tech that has drawbacks), those new PDA's and cell phones with builtin cameras: you can't take those into secure or otherwise classified facilities. Something to think about if your travels take you thither.
I wonder if anybody (they probably have) has figured out how big a Pentium-class CPU would be if it were made from discrete transistors like you'd find at Radio Shack.
As for the monkey thing, I heard (who knows if it's true) that if you place some peanuts, or other such treat, into a small jar with an opening just big enough for the monkey's hand, he will grasp more peanuts than he can pull out at once.
And he won't let go.
Trap the monkey's hand-- trap the monkey.
Moral of the story (since it sounds suspiciously like a parable): the monkey's own greed is as effective as any steel sprung trap. Or put another way, in 99.9% of human history, we've gotten along just fine with live performances, and never missed DVD's, CD's, LP's, and the occassional wax cylinder.
I don't really suggest we give all this up, but if it came to a choice between human liberty and a quasi-governmental RIAA/MPAA tyranny stomping on our First Amendment rights, I'd be one of the first to push them face down in the mudhole.
...it's about importing a 3rd world standard of living
Bingo! How do you compete with $1/day? Put up a lean-to in the woods, frequent the dumpsters behind grocery stores, and collect soda pop bottles. Learn to live like Eric Rudolph.
Oh, but wait! If enough people in this country are doing that, who's going to have the money for these company's products? The executives? But the executives are paid out of the company's profits-- what profits?
So the companies complain about the sluggish economy, lay off its employees in Bangladesh (or wherever), and go shopping for a country willing to work for 25 cents a day, or maybe just for food and shelter (hmm, slavery anyone? Perhaps not technically...)
And so on...
What am I missing here, or maybe I shouldn't have slept through Econ 101?
Unlike the good guys who want to do away with evil and the bad guys who want to do away with good.
The bad guys don't want to do away with good, they're just looking for unlimited power and control over good (much like the RIAA). That, and cheap labor for their smelters.
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly my point. All elements present on/in the planet, will continue to be so. It's the artificial localization and concentration that concerns me. As well as the synthesis of certain compounds which would almost never occur in nature, at least in harmful concentrations. (So-called man-made chemicals. Incidentally, some people think that because something is "natural" or "organic", its good, or at least safe for you. Heh. Poison mushrooms are organic. Nuff said.)
As to iron oxide reacting to a magnet, this is the very basis for the operation of audio tape equipment. Also, there may well be elemental iron at the earth's core, but iron, wherever exposed to oxygen, forms iron oxide, absolutely. Elemental iron, when found in nature, has never been so exposed.
The use of depleted uranium may be found in the coming decades to be as foolish health-wise as the careless application of mercury as a decoration by the "mad hatters" of the 19th century. It is also a sobering thought that as late as the 1950's, visionaries dreamed of houses and even cars powered by nuclear energy.
On a side note, most (all, maybe?) smoke detectors use a small amount of radioactive material to operate, though not as a power source. Mine has Americium. What's to keep an industrious terrorist from ordering thousands of smoke detectors, harvesting this radioactive stuff, and making a dirty bomb?
You see, institutions only know how to make other institutions. Individuals know how to make things for individuals.
As to the landfill thing, I believe Uranium is a metal, denser than lead, is smelted from uranium ore, which contains low concentrations of uranium oxide. The pure uranium metal does not occur in nature, any more than iron does. Iron oxide (rust) but not iron.
I have heard that depleted uranium is used in armor piercing rounds by the US military. There have been some questions (and few answers) about how healthy this practice is for friendly troops.
It would seem to me that placing concentrated sources of uranium in a landfill would be distinctly unhealthy, both for those with a house built on top, and those downstream of the runoff.
Interesting thing is, radon gas is a by-product of radioactive decay, usually in granite formations. You could probably find at least a dozen uranium atoms in every ton of granite.
Con's:
1) Shielding alone for the uranium, would turn the battery into a luggable, defeating the purpose of having a laptop.
2) Landfills filling up with NiCad batteries is bad enough, but Uranium?
3) People are idiots. A good percentage of them would unfoolproof the foolproof protections and cause a mini China Syndrome while trying to boot Windows.i
4) Expensive. Can you imagine how much it would cost? How much does U-235 cost per ounce?
Pro's:
1) A single charge would probably outlast the usable lifetime of the laptop, and would also probably outlast your usable lifetime.
2) Bragging rights. "How long does your laptop last? 4 hours? Hah. Mine lasts 4 centuries." OK, that really stems from 1).
Um... confiscate it too? What else is there to imagine? I suppose they could high-five each other, have everybody over for a methanol party, go blind because they never can remember if its ethanol or methanol that's safe to drink...
Laptop manufacturers might as well dream up a laptop powered by U-235 (single charge might last 500 yrs) as far as airport acceptability is concerned.
And in a few months he (or she, you goddamn PC assholes) will have a lot more time to read /. SCO has not just filed suit against IBM, they have declared war against the rest of the IT world. (Linux = Communism?!?!)
These people better start thinking towards the post-SCO world, much like the concentration camp guards started making nice towards the end of WWII.
You see, even if they win their lawsuit against IBM and everybody else, they will be a pariah in the tech community. Nobody will do business with them, and eventually they'll spend their $3 billion on operating expenses and tacos and go bankrupt.
And most of the OSS community will be saying goodbye good riddance.
BAM! Your ISP staggers for half a day or so, but you'll probably enjoy residual traffic as a result of the exposure...
Not saying that's the case here, but what if...
Perhaps this has happened already?
Oh, and strategically placed "campaign contributions".
If that bit about "visiting the dentist" is accurate, I hope he gets his teeth knocked out in some unfortunate freak accident with a ballpeen hammer.
That's in the window of a music store in Warwick, RI. Sounds desperate to me...
Reporter: "Senator, did you know you have Javascript on your webserver?"
Hatch: "Really? I'll talk to my web monkey. He said he scans it for viruses every day. Must be new..."
In Providence, its the only way to get out into traffic, by first pulling out into the mass median. Sometimes you see smokies parked there, looking for speeders.
Well, I seem to recall they stopped this practice, since a judge somewhere determined that this was depriving the defendant of "due process."
So-- how could the use of computer-destroying technology be legally sanctioned? There is no due process. Sure, the technology could be used, but officially, the perpetrator would be subject to fines, legal damages, and/or jail time, just like any other virus-writing script-kiddie.
Orrin Hatch is really just advocating vigilanteism, which is an abandonment of the whole legal system. What's next? Should I start waving a pistol at everybody who cuts me off, or torching the car of that guy down the street who plays his stereo too loud?
Let's take it one step further. Let's have it so that we not only destroy the music pirate's computer, but we overload his power supply, cause a fire, and burn down his house, and hopefully all his neighbors' houses, too, since they probably were in on it as well...
Try tying her to an anchor, now that i'd like to see...
You know when the shiat will hit the fan? When 95% of the people affected by the DMCA, know about the DMCA, and really really grok it.
For so many people, it is just not on their radar screens.
Anybody know of any good polls that show what the US's DMCA awareness is?
(Calling Dr. Howard, Dr. Fine, Dr. Howard...)
You heard it here first. Poindexter and TIA is the Ministry of Silly Walks.
(And I'm supposed to feel better because they changed "total" to "terrorist"? That's just insulting to everyone's intelligence... grrr.)
And get this, on one commuter flight into DC, we passed directly over the Pentagon going into the airport.
By the by, didn't that "shoe bomber" use a lighter to try to light his shoes? I remember there was a much closer look at peoples' shoes after that, but I don't know if there was anybody looking at lighters...
Oh, how times have changed...
On a related note (gee-wizz tech that has drawbacks), those new PDA's and cell phones with builtin cameras: you can't take those into secure or otherwise classified facilities. Something to think about if your travels take you thither.
And powering it (!). That's a lot of 9 volts.
On a project like this, I always roll my own electrons, none of that store-bought stuff.
And he won't let go.
Trap the monkey's hand-- trap the monkey.
Moral of the story (since it sounds suspiciously like a parable): the monkey's own greed is as effective as any steel sprung trap. Or put another way, in 99.9% of human history, we've gotten along just fine with live performances, and never missed DVD's, CD's, LP's, and the occassional wax cylinder.
I don't really suggest we give all this up, but if it came to a choice between human liberty and a quasi-governmental RIAA/MPAA tyranny stomping on our First Amendment rights, I'd be one of the first to push them face down in the mudhole.
Consider this: do the Amish care about the RIAA?
Our possessions and desires imprison us as much as we will let them.
You can trap a monkey very easily with a jar and some peanuts...
So, RIAA can influence us as long as our desire to possess and experience recorded sounds outweighs our desire to strip them of their powers.
Bingo! How do you compete with $1/day? Put up a lean-to in the woods, frequent the dumpsters behind grocery stores, and collect soda pop bottles. Learn to live like Eric Rudolph.
Oh, but wait! If enough people in this country are doing that, who's going to have the money for these company's products? The executives? But the executives are paid out of the company's profits-- what profits?
So the companies complain about the sluggish economy, lay off its employees in Bangladesh (or wherever), and go shopping for a country willing to work for 25 cents a day, or maybe just for food and shelter (hmm, slavery anyone? Perhaps not technically...)
And so on...
What am I missing here, or maybe I shouldn't have slept through Econ 101?
The bad guys don't want to do away with good, they're just looking for unlimited power and control over good (much like the RIAA).
That, and cheap labor for their smelters.