Tennessee being the most recent that I know of, who are attempting to pass laws to let Creationism in through the backdoor.
Ultimately, it boils down to, "who cares?" You should have involvement in their education. Kids are pretty smart about figuring things out so long as they have all the facts and its presented in a method and level relevant to their age and comprehension abilities. Ultimately, by attempting to hide creationism from them, you're actually making it more appealing (like drugs) and creating an environment where they are less likely to openly discuss their views and understanding of the subject matter.
Frankly, introducing kids to creationism is absolutely a good thing (not to mention is part of evolution's history [spontaneous creation, etc]), so long as its well balanced against evolution. Most kids won't find it very funny to hear, "God thinks you're an idiot and plays tricks and created all these things to prove you're an idiot and we fully assume you'll ignore everything you can physically prove around you in your world. Oh, and there is little to no evidence to support this theory." Versus, "Evolution is demonstratively proven. Here is the long list of cases which support evolution."
I personally believe the exact linage of human evolution is far and away unknown as the supporting evidence is almost completely lacking (changed and revised and still doesn't really agree with what is actually taught); contrary to popular teachings. In fact, the facts actually indicate the accepted linage is false; contrary to popular teaching. Evolution in general is all but fact and is extremely well supported. That, however, doesn't mean the general theory of human evolution is wrong. Humans are clearly evolving.
But my rant illustrates my point. Present the available information. While they may not completely accept popular doctrine, hook, line, and sinker, chances are they'll quickly side with evolution and have an understanding of popular options, which in turn will make it far less attractive down the road. Besides, for a lot of people, people simply don't care one way or another.
As an example, kids hear about duals of honor too, even in very glorious light (not to mention constant depictions is culture, TV, movies, etc), yet how often do you hear about kids throwing gauntlets down and dueling to the death. Knowledge is power.
And BTW, I would like to thank you for proving you are not a complete moron like most pro-pirates assert. Most pro-pirates are only interested in preaching lies and pushing their delusional propaganda. You, on the other hand, are at least willing to accept that piracy does cause economic harm to some degree.
Actually, the studies not funded by the MPAA/RIAA/BSA show that infringement helps sales
That's completely pro-piracy propaganda. Furthermore, those studies were never vetted. The only people who believe those studies are pirates and the author.
Furthermore, pirates even preach lies about that study. The study absolutely does not preach what you assert. What it says is, there CAN BE (not that there always is) a viral gain as a result of piracy. It absolutely does not even indicate that the viral gain out paces the net loss. Which means, if piracy accounts for the loss of ten sales and the viral gain increases it by one, you still have a net loss of nine. Furthermore, its entirely unclear if that one sale would have been created down the road as the result of non-pirated viral advertising; which in fact, is likely. Furthermore, that study did not address if the one sale was from actual pirates or people who simply demo before purchase. Chances are, its simply people who demo before purchase - which developers have never argued hurt sales.
So basically, its best to simply say that study is full of shit and only people with an agenda have any interest in pushing it.
I am definitely not sad to not be a Java developer.
Nor should you be.
I program in C, C++, Python, and Java, to name a few. I can in fact assert that Java is as tedious as C++ and even occasionally more so. Because of Java's robust framework and runtime environment, you can frequently create a production product faster in Java than C++, but even that has largely changed as C++ has matured and its development model is now understood. But given the option, coding in Python and speeding things in C++ typically results in development which is twice as fast as Java and performance which falls somewhere between equal to an order of magnitude faster than Java.
Basically, so long as Java isn't a company mandate, C++Python is superior to Java is every way. You get faster development plus faster performance plus the ease of debugging and run-time introspection which blows Java away.
The selling point to the enterprise is the JDK. If it was all about a better language that develops quicker they could have gone for Ruby years ago. In particular once sun brought JRuby in-house. The issue at hand is the Enterprise wants the bloatware in the J2EE SDK. Those classes and libraries represent a lot of work a developer doesn't have to figure out themselves.
Why the hell is this insightful? Its not even accurate.
The closest non-commercial competition Java has is Python. Ruby has a fraction of the user base, activity, and library/frameworks of Python. Bluntly, no one cares about Ruby except those who are largely comp-sci "rebels". Seriously, that is Ruby's core demographic. Ruby's demographic alone means it is anti-enterprise. Remember, Ruby is Python for rebels.
And despite everything Python has going for it, it can't challenge Java in the enterprise because there isn't a massive commercial backer pushing it into the enterprise. It really is that simple.
And what you're calling "bloatware" is exactly why Java has deep roots in the enterprise. It can be everything to everyone; which is impossible for Ruby. Basically, there is absolutely nothing you said which makes sense or is the least bit reflective of reality. The fact others deemed it "insightful", is just downright scary.
Extremely likely your statement is correct. If there were false positives, Gary would likely know by now. Thus far, he's still claiming zero false positives.
Piracy has become a huge problem - especially for small developers. Contrary to the pro-piracy lies and propaganda, piracy is hurting companies of all sizes. But those especially hurt are small developers. Many times, small developers are simply pushed out of business or entirely chased away from the platform (as is common for Android).
Piracy has steadily eroded income from small developers and unfortunately have forced the creation of adware supported games. Now many people hate adware, but its proliferation is literally the response to massive theft by pirates. If you hate adware, you literally hate piracy.
If you want to stop this nonsense, start kicking every pirate you can find in the nuts really, really hard. When piracy is reduced to sane levels, the need for these types of stunts as well as adware is dramatically deduced.
Remember, if you hate adware and pirate, you are a hypocrite and absolutely are one of the reasons why we all suffer with adware.
Gary is simply bringing awareness to the scope and scale of piracy. His efforts should be applauded! And if you don't like this, the solution is extremely simple - stop stealing!
There are a number of models which are fairly well understood - contrary to pro-piracy propaganda. In fact, small indie developers are not alone. This is entirely why many games are released with strict DRM and later go to a less restrictive model some number of months down the road. At this point, its pretty well validated that pirates absolutely do harm sales, at least initially. The exact degree of harm varies wildly based on a number of variables but just the same, harm is harm.
Contrary to the idiocy of pro-pirate propaganda, companies would not spend tens or even hundreds of thousands (including an increased support burden and lost sales) of dollars to prevent piracy if there wasn't ultimately a return on the other side. Its simply business. Practices which lose hundreds of thousands of dollars, customers, and create support burdens without a return, would have long been shed. Its the simple truth of business - contrary to the pro-piracy lies and propaganda.
The fact is, piracy harms developers. For small developers, it can put them out of business - as is commonly the case. For large developers, it simply means less profit. But regardless of where it falls on the scale, harm is harm.
Gary claims a zero false positive thus far and that he expects it to remain zero. And based on comments he's made, either you're lying (extremely likely), or your install is corrupt.
Why is it some of the smartest comments are made by anonymous? At any rate, you are completely correct.
Existing chillis are already so hot, they are rarely used at full potency even in the meanest of pepper sprays. For food, once you reach a fraction of heat in widely available peppers, the ability to taste food is horribly diminished, if not completely destroyed. Its certainly not an enjoyable experience.
And? Some of the first tech demos I became aware of were done on Android over a year ago and even then, I *seriously* doubt Android was the first implementation. I strongly suspect this was first done a decade ago or more elsewhere on non-commodity hardware. Hell, the android tech demo I saw was even more interesting because they were combining a projected building with real-time video from the on board camera and aligning the rendered building with the video feed.
Really, the only thing first here is its finally possible on commodity hardware. Its just that the sensors and graphics capability, bundled together, simply didn't exist until the last five or six years.
Imagine if engineers and scientists on each side had been allowed to say to the other, "Dude, let's work together on this one."
They wouldn't have received any funding. Let's recap. Goddard basically created modern rocketry. No one would fund him. He created the then definitive works on the subject. WWII started and his work was basically ignored by the allies despite his efforts. Germany took his efforts and created the stepping stones for modern missiles, rockets, and manned flight. It was funded by war. Post WWII, Germans taken in by both the US and Russia created the manned flight programs, which in turn were funded by war or the fear of war. Remember, manned flight was an excuse to justify massive spending to create ICMBs.
So basically, "working together" almost never receives funding unless there is yet another underlying cause allowing the first to be used as a public excuse.
Hell, the US-German program was so successful and the US program was so unsuccessful, the US-German program was literally mothballed and prevented from launching so as to allow the pure-US effort a chance as well as to allow the Russian's time to actually launch Sputnik to as to create an internal overflight precedence. Once Sputnik was launched, which created much ire and fear of the US public, much to the surprise of the US Cabinet, and after repeated US failures, the German program was removed from mothballs. The US-German program was taken directly from mothballs to the launch pad, and successfully launched. The US-German program was mothballed roughly a year before Sputnik was launched into space.
So what you're saying is that the industry can't even create a good rating scale for its accidents.
Classic anti-nuclear idiocy. The rating does exactly what its suppose to do. The fact you're too stupid to understand the purpose of the rating doesn't validate your propaganda in the least. Contrary to your assertion, your idiocy only validates your idiocy. Your idiocy is not damning of the nuclear industry in the least nor does it remove the need for accident severity ratings so as to garner international assistance.
Using your idiocy, all rating systems have absolutely no value because they have no meaning outside of their intended scope and purpose. So your argument boils down to the richter scale having no value and enhanced fujita scales have no value. Please note, contrary to your stupidity, neither of those scales denote the scale of damage in any way. They only measure the forces involved. The scale and scope of damage is strictly dictated by the individual incident, its monetary damages, and total toll to human life. As such, this is no different - contrary to your trolling and idiotic propaganda.
Why am I not surprised that a complete fucking idiot also happens to be an anti-nuclear propagandist.
The real issue is that Americans living near a nuclear plant accident would certainly receive a higher radiation does than if he was swimming in fly ash.
More propaganda and lies! Classic bullshit, anti-nuclear scaremongering propaganda.
For your "certainly" to be true means that absolutely no one knew about the accident, things got extremely bad instantly at the nuclear plant, and everyone sat waiting to be exposed. Which means, you've translated, "maybe, a tiny percentage of a possibility; meaning extremely improbable", into "certainly". And that's just one reason why anti-nukers are idiots. They constantly push lies, misinformation, and general propaganda to create their ignorant scaremonger.
The simple fact is, when living near a nuclear plant, versus a coal plant, you will receive up to 200x LESS radiation. Not to mention, nuclear power plants don't destroy farmland unless there has been an accident. Coal plants destroy farmland as part of their normal operation. And sadly, most of that radiation exposure from coal ash is directly via ingestion via coal ash. The simple fact is, coal kills thousands, both directly and indirectly every year and that number is likely to be extremely under representative of ancillary deaths from radiation exposure via ingestion.
Not to mention, before the disaster in Japan, several articles of various farmland being destroyed by decades of waste released from coal plants were circulating and garnering public awareness.
The simple fact is, there is not such thing as safe energy and "clean coal" is 100% myth. The simple fact is, thousands die every year from coal power plants, both directly and indirectly.
I never said, nor implied that coal ash was more radioactive than spent nuclear fuel.
People who are not idiots completely understand you never said or implied such a thing. Welcome to the world of anti-nuclear lies and propaganda. NO ONE says coal ash is more radioactive than spent nuclear fuel. NO ONE. Well, no one except anti-nuclear propagandists who say it to project and fear monger, in hopes of spreading their lies and propaganda.
No, I was expanding it to the proper context. You know, the context you're purposely avoiding. The context was implying that there was a generalized propaganda campaign to say there is absolutely nothing going on so as to justify nuclear power.
The post in question is basically saying, they are tired of constant posts with much to do about nothing other than anti-nuclear propaganda.
You see, context is everything. Are you being deliberately dumb?
Except ignorant scaremongering frequently prevails over truth and reason. Not all radioactive releases are equal. The source of the radiation is as important as where its released and how it was released.
The reality is, the current rating is based on radiation at the source NOT its comparability in scope to Chernobyl. That's not to say they will never or can never be comparable, only that comparisons to Chernobyl at this point is pure idiocy and scaremongering - classic anti-nuclear propaganda.
You need to take a hard look at the list you provided. You're extremely confused. You are confusing best implementation with scientific endeavor. Implementation really has little to do with its associated research. Furthermore, naming an extremely narrow list of technologies (some of which are flatly wrong) does not in any way invalidate the simple fact, the Nazis made massive contributions to the world of science, including genetics and especially medicine.
Cheap is relative. Most of these cameras are used to avoid surgery or other invasive procedures. Remember, a lot of these types cameras are intended to be swallowed. Which means, even if the camera costs a couple thousand dollars, its cheap. I honestly doubt they are anywhere near that expensive, but my point releases, "cheap" is relative.
Slashdot Mirror
Tennessee being the most recent that I know of, who are attempting to pass laws to let Creationism in through the backdoor.
Ultimately, it boils down to, "who cares?" You should have involvement in their education. Kids are pretty smart about figuring things out so long as they have all the facts and its presented in a method and level relevant to their age and comprehension abilities. Ultimately, by attempting to hide creationism from them, you're actually making it more appealing (like drugs) and creating an environment where they are less likely to openly discuss their views and understanding of the subject matter.
Frankly, introducing kids to creationism is absolutely a good thing (not to mention is part of evolution's history [spontaneous creation, etc]), so long as its well balanced against evolution. Most kids won't find it very funny to hear, "God thinks you're an idiot and plays tricks and created all these things to prove you're an idiot and we fully assume you'll ignore everything you can physically prove around you in your world. Oh, and there is little to no evidence to support this theory." Versus, "Evolution is demonstratively proven. Here is the long list of cases which support evolution."
I personally believe the exact linage of human evolution is far and away unknown as the supporting evidence is almost completely lacking (changed and revised and still doesn't really agree with what is actually taught); contrary to popular teachings. In fact, the facts actually indicate the accepted linage is false; contrary to popular teaching. Evolution in general is all but fact and is extremely well supported. That, however, doesn't mean the general theory of human evolution is wrong. Humans are clearly evolving.
But my rant illustrates my point. Present the available information. While they may not completely accept popular doctrine, hook, line, and sinker, chances are they'll quickly side with evolution and have an understanding of popular options, which in turn will make it far less attractive down the road. Besides, for a lot of people, people simply don't care one way or another.
As an example, kids hear about duals of honor too, even in very glorious light (not to mention constant depictions is culture, TV, movies, etc), yet how often do you hear about kids throwing gauntlets down and dueling to the death. Knowledge is power.
Just because it runs on the JVM doesn't mean its fast. For example, Jython runs roughly 4x slower than cpython.
As for the rest, if you're going to use Java services, you may as well continue to use java services and actually have a supported platform.
frakking??? Fuck off.
And BTW, I would like to thank you for proving you are not a complete moron like most pro-pirates assert. Most pro-pirates are only interested in preaching lies and pushing their delusional propaganda. You, on the other hand, are at least willing to accept that piracy does cause economic harm to some degree.
Actually, the studies not funded by the MPAA/RIAA/BSA show that infringement helps sales
That's completely pro-piracy propaganda. Furthermore, those studies were never vetted. The only people who believe those studies are pirates and the author.
Furthermore, pirates even preach lies about that study. The study absolutely does not preach what you assert. What it says is, there CAN BE (not that there always is) a viral gain as a result of piracy. It absolutely does not even indicate that the viral gain out paces the net loss. Which means, if piracy accounts for the loss of ten sales and the viral gain increases it by one, you still have a net loss of nine. Furthermore, its entirely unclear if that one sale would have been created down the road as the result of non-pirated viral advertising; which in fact, is likely. Furthermore, that study did not address if the one sale was from actual pirates or people who simply demo before purchase. Chances are, its simply people who demo before purchase - which developers have never argued hurt sales.
So basically, its best to simply say that study is full of shit and only people with an agenda have any interest in pushing it.
I am definitely not sad to not be a Java developer.
Nor should you be.
I program in C, C++, Python, and Java, to name a few. I can in fact assert that Java is as tedious as C++ and even occasionally more so. Because of Java's robust framework and runtime environment, you can frequently create a production product faster in Java than C++, but even that has largely changed as C++ has matured and its development model is now understood. But given the option, coding in Python and speeding things in C++ typically results in development which is twice as fast as Java and performance which falls somewhere between equal to an order of magnitude faster than Java.
Basically, so long as Java isn't a company mandate, C++Python is superior to Java is every way. You get faster development plus faster performance plus the ease of debugging and run-time introspection which blows Java away.
You beat me to it. So glad you clarified that. Aside from minor nits and this key correction, largely everything else he said is stop on.
The selling point to the enterprise is the JDK. If it was all about a better language that develops quicker they could have gone for Ruby years ago. In particular once sun brought JRuby in-house. The issue at hand is the Enterprise wants the bloatware in the J2EE SDK. Those classes and libraries represent a lot of work a developer doesn't have to figure out themselves.
Why the hell is this insightful? Its not even accurate.
The closest non-commercial competition Java has is Python. Ruby has a fraction of the user base, activity, and library/frameworks of Python. Bluntly, no one cares about Ruby except those who are largely comp-sci "rebels". Seriously, that is Ruby's core demographic. Ruby's demographic alone means it is anti-enterprise. Remember, Ruby is Python for rebels.
And despite everything Python has going for it, it can't challenge Java in the enterprise because there isn't a massive commercial backer pushing it into the enterprise. It really is that simple.
And what you're calling "bloatware" is exactly why Java has deep roots in the enterprise. It can be everything to everyone; which is impossible for Ruby. Basically, there is absolutely nothing you said which makes sense or is the least bit reflective of reality. The fact others deemed it "insightful", is just downright scary.
Extremely likely your statement is correct. If there were false positives, Gary would likely know by now. Thus far, he's still claiming zero false positives.
Seriously what is the point of this?
Piracy has become a huge problem - especially for small developers. Contrary to the pro-piracy lies and propaganda, piracy is hurting companies of all sizes. But those especially hurt are small developers. Many times, small developers are simply pushed out of business or entirely chased away from the platform (as is common for Android).
Piracy has steadily eroded income from small developers and unfortunately have forced the creation of adware supported games. Now many people hate adware, but its proliferation is literally the response to massive theft by pirates. If you hate adware, you literally hate piracy.
If you want to stop this nonsense, start kicking every pirate you can find in the nuts really, really hard. When piracy is reduced to sane levels, the need for these types of stunts as well as adware is dramatically deduced.
Remember, if you hate adware and pirate, you are a hypocrite and absolutely are one of the reasons why we all suffer with adware.
Gary is simply bringing awareness to the scope and scale of piracy. His efforts should be applauded! And if you don't like this, the solution is extremely simple - stop stealing!
There are a number of models which are fairly well understood - contrary to pro-piracy propaganda. In fact, small indie developers are not alone. This is entirely why many games are released with strict DRM and later go to a less restrictive model some number of months down the road. At this point, its pretty well validated that pirates absolutely do harm sales, at least initially. The exact degree of harm varies wildly based on a number of variables but just the same, harm is harm.
Contrary to the idiocy of pro-pirate propaganda, companies would not spend tens or even hundreds of thousands (including an increased support burden and lost sales) of dollars to prevent piracy if there wasn't ultimately a return on the other side. Its simply business. Practices which lose hundreds of thousands of dollars, customers, and create support burdens without a return, would have long been shed. Its the simple truth of business - contrary to the pro-piracy lies and propaganda.
The fact is, piracy harms developers. For small developers, it can put them out of business - as is commonly the case. For large developers, it simply means less profit. But regardless of where it falls on the scale, harm is harm.
Gary claims a zero false positive thus far and that he expects it to remain zero. And based on comments he's made, either you're lying (extremely likely), or your install is corrupt.
So what's the point?
Why is it some of the smartest comments are made by anonymous? At any rate, you are completely correct.
Existing chillis are already so hot, they are rarely used at full potency even in the meanest of pepper sprays. For food, once you reach a fraction of heat in widely available peppers, the ability to taste food is horribly diminished, if not completely destroyed. Its certainly not an enjoyable experience.
People need hotter chillis like they need a larger hole in their head.
And? Some of the first tech demos I became aware of were done on Android over a year ago and even then, I *seriously* doubt Android was the first implementation. I strongly suspect this was first done a decade ago or more elsewhere on non-commodity hardware. Hell, the android tech demo I saw was even more interesting because they were combining a projected building with real-time video from the on board camera and aligning the rendered building with the video feed.
Really, the only thing first here is its finally possible on commodity hardware. Its just that the sensors and graphics capability, bundled together, simply didn't exist until the last five or six years.
*yawn*
Imagine if engineers and scientists on each side had been allowed to say to the other, "Dude, let's work together on this one."
They wouldn't have received any funding. Let's recap. Goddard basically created modern rocketry. No one would fund him. He created the then definitive works on the subject. WWII started and his work was basically ignored by the allies despite his efforts. Germany took his efforts and created the stepping stones for modern missiles, rockets, and manned flight. It was funded by war. Post WWII, Germans taken in by both the US and Russia created the manned flight programs, which in turn were funded by war or the fear of war. Remember, manned flight was an excuse to justify massive spending to create ICMBs.
So basically, "working together" almost never receives funding unless there is yet another underlying cause allowing the first to be used as a public excuse.
Hell, the US-German program was so successful and the US program was so unsuccessful, the US-German program was literally mothballed and prevented from launching so as to allow the pure-US effort a chance as well as to allow the Russian's time to actually launch Sputnik to as to create an internal overflight precedence. Once Sputnik was launched, which created much ire and fear of the US public, much to the surprise of the US Cabinet, and after repeated US failures, the German program was removed from mothballs. The US-German program was taken directly from mothballs to the launch pad, and successfully launched. The US-German program was mothballed roughly a year before Sputnik was launched into space.
Not to mention, there is absolutely nothing new or novel presented in the video.
Why is it you say, "do some maths" and then you completely don't do the "maths".
Yet another reason why people are tired of the anti-nuclear propaganda idiocy and lies.
So what you're saying is that the industry can't even create a good rating scale for its accidents.
Classic anti-nuclear idiocy. The rating does exactly what its suppose to do. The fact you're too stupid to understand the purpose of the rating doesn't validate your propaganda in the least. Contrary to your assertion, your idiocy only validates your idiocy. Your idiocy is not damning of the nuclear industry in the least nor does it remove the need for accident severity ratings so as to garner international assistance.
Using your idiocy, all rating systems have absolutely no value because they have no meaning outside of their intended scope and purpose. So your argument boils down to the richter scale having no value and enhanced fujita scales have no value. Please note, contrary to your stupidity, neither of those scales denote the scale of damage in any way. They only measure the forces involved. The scale and scope of damage is strictly dictated by the individual incident, its monetary damages, and total toll to human life. As such, this is no different - contrary to your trolling and idiotic propaganda.
Why am I not surprised that a complete fucking idiot also happens to be an anti-nuclear propagandist.
The real issue is that Americans living near a nuclear plant accident would certainly receive a higher radiation does than if he was swimming in fly ash.
More propaganda and lies! Classic bullshit, anti-nuclear scaremongering propaganda.
For your "certainly" to be true means that absolutely no one knew about the accident, things got extremely bad instantly at the nuclear plant, and everyone sat waiting to be exposed. Which means, you've translated, "maybe, a tiny percentage of a possibility; meaning extremely improbable", into "certainly". And that's just one reason why anti-nukers are idiots. They constantly push lies, misinformation, and general propaganda to create their ignorant scaremonger.
The simple fact is, when living near a nuclear plant, versus a coal plant, you will receive up to 200x LESS radiation. Not to mention, nuclear power plants don't destroy farmland unless there has been an accident. Coal plants destroy farmland as part of their normal operation. And sadly, most of that radiation exposure from coal ash is directly via ingestion via coal ash. The simple fact is, coal kills thousands, both directly and indirectly every year and that number is likely to be extremely under representative of ancillary deaths from radiation exposure via ingestion.
Not to mention, before the disaster in Japan, several articles of various farmland being destroyed by decades of waste released from coal plants were circulating and garnering public awareness.
The simple fact is, there is not such thing as safe energy and "clean coal" is 100% myth. The simple fact is, thousands die every year from coal power plants, both directly and indirectly.
I never said, nor implied that coal ash was more radioactive than spent nuclear fuel.
People who are not idiots completely understand you never said or implied such a thing. Welcome to the world of anti-nuclear lies and propaganda. NO ONE says coal ash is more radioactive than spent nuclear fuel. NO ONE. Well, no one except anti-nuclear propagandists who say it to project and fear monger, in hopes of spreading their lies and propaganda.
No, I was expanding it to the proper context. You know, the context you're purposely avoiding. The context was implying that there was a generalized propaganda campaign to say there is absolutely nothing going on so as to justify nuclear power.
The post in question is basically saying, they are tired of constant posts with much to do about nothing other than anti-nuclear propaganda.
You see, context is everything. Are you being deliberately dumb?
Except ignorant scaremongering frequently prevails over truth and reason. Not all radioactive releases are equal. The source of the radiation is as important as where its released and how it was released.
The reality is, the current rating is based on radiation at the source NOT its comparability in scope to Chernobyl. That's not to say they will never or can never be comparable, only that comparisons to Chernobyl at this point is pure idiocy and scaremongering - classic anti-nuclear propaganda.
You need to take a hard look at the list you provided. You're extremely confused. You are confusing best implementation with scientific endeavor. Implementation really has little to do with its associated research. Furthermore, naming an extremely narrow list of technologies (some of which are flatly wrong) does not in any way invalidate the simple fact, the Nazis made massive contributions to the world of science, including genetics and especially medicine.
Cheap is relative. Most of these cameras are used to avoid surgery or other invasive procedures. Remember, a lot of these types cameras are intended to be swallowed. Which means, even if the camera costs a couple thousand dollars, its cheap. I honestly doubt they are anywhere near that expensive, but my point releases, "cheap" is relative.