I've seen people selling many questionable things out of their cars. Planes are frequently used to smuggle illegal drugs. Hell, you can find stores selling stuff that they're not supposed to be selling in the 'right' parts of the world. Shut all those down too by removing the tools?
So you're fighting to make lock pick sets legal in all fifty states now? And you're standing in line to make all guns legal too? And I know all phallus shaped vibrators are next to receive your ringing endorsement and active protests.
Realistically, there actually are important things which should be receiving your attention, which are literally protected by the US Constitution, and yet frequently outlawed by the weak minded who seem completely incapable of understanding the US' most important document. At least music and lock picks have been "outlawed" because the vast majority of uses are, in fact, illegal.
So while I absolutely believe things like lock picks, phallic dildos, guns, and bit torrent should all be legal, at least one of those has overwhelming significance to everyone. And as a hint, its not bit torrent.
They are not ignoring a problem. The simple fact is, the anti-nuke crazies have been extremely effective at scaremongering. Its in everyone's best interest to mitigate the public anxiety about current events.
The simple fact is, nuclear isn't going anywhere. The more anti-nukers make it impossible for newer, safer reactor designs to be built, more likely this is to happen again in the future. Thusly, the anti-nuke idiot scaremongering isn't fed, the better off everyone is. Even better, it helps ensure lower energy prices and a stable energy markets.
Ignoring a problem is not the same thing as making an effort to not feed morons.
Works for lightbulbs. Dispite the popular ramblings of the internet, neither the EU nor US have actually banned incandescent bulbs - they just set efficiency standards high enough that no incandescent can achieve them.
Actually, there are incandescent bulbs which quality; at least in the US. They just happen to be more expensive so most people don't. As such, they are not as commonly found in stores now as LED and CFL.
No, that's not true. The reason why it has such high subsidies is because of the anti-nuclear crowd. If people would ignore the fucking idiots of the world, the subsidies would be ignored. Likewise, you're also ignoring the massive subsidies for most other forms or energy, with ethanol being one of the worst; with nuclear included.
Take a hard look at what those subsidies are actually subsidizing and realize that the vast, vast majority haven't always been there.
Completely agree. Regardless of the specific solution, the fact no solution was attained within hours seems to scream extreme human incompetence. Literally, something like this should have been a couple dozen phone calls and a working solution in less than 12-hours.
I heard they did get a generator to the site within 8 hours, but it had the wrong connection on it and so they couldn't power the cooling system!
No seriously! (I can't find the BBC link at the mo for it:( )
I heard that too. And then all the reports seemingly went away. Its just not likely they couldn't rig/manufacture a connector within a couple of hours. The explanation simply isn't believable - unless its need has been de-prioritized.
As I understand it, the site has several redundant diesel generators as backups.
From what I've read, they all started and failed when water reached them. That's what I'm basing my comments on.
which understandably caused them to fail to start.
Reports are, they started and ran for an hour before the tsunami reached them. Which again, is entirely the basis for my comment.
As for just hooking up any random generator flown in by helicopter, apparently that is just not possible as a) they don't deliver the right voltage/amperage of electric current and b) the equipment for transforming it from the wrong to the right stuff is sitting in an inundated basement.
That seems like a bullshit statement. You're trying to tell me there are no emergency generators available in all of Japan which are designed for the sole purpose of powering these reactors in case of an emergency? Are you seriously arguing no other reactors use these generators? Are you seriously saying the military has no convertors? No generators on trucks - as every other industrialized nation in the world does?
Yes, apparently they could and should have been better prepared.
Yes, meaning, prepared at all - as other industrialized nations are.
Also, why there was no way to jury-rig some kind of power connection directly to the pumps themselves is unclear to me.
Any industrial electrical engineer can do this. Its not technically difficult so long as you have the expertise. Seemingly you're arguing both the entire country and the military are completely without said expertise and yet they were only slightly unprepared. Ya, right.
What surprises me is that it apparently takes quite a lot of cooling -after- the control rods have come down. I'm not the only one who was under the mistaken impression that lowering them stops the reaction and after that it's pretty much over and done with and you can sit back and relax.
This explains a lot. You seemingly have no idea what you're talking about but insist on interjecting your self admitted, unlearned, view of things.
The silly thing is, nuclear fission is basically a stop-gap until we have nuclear fusion or something even better.
You do understand that in a thousand years we may still be looking at stop-gap measures. And if you bother to actually look, we are no closer to fusion today that we were a hundred years ago. Seriously, go look. The technological hurdles are extremely complex and profound. Even worse, the projects which have continuously failed to advance the state of the art continue to receive some 90% of the funding. The projects which theoretically show real promise continue to receive little or no funding. We literally have a better chance of inviting unicorns and pixies in the next hundred years than we do of powering our world with fusion.
If it still takes so much cooling to prevent things from going wrong this badly, then my view of nuclear fission as a source of power is significantly more negative than it was previously.
And this is exactly why we have this problem in the first place. Sad but true. Newer reactor designs don't have this problem. These reactors were designed fifty years ago and built forty years ago. The problem doesn't exist in newer designs. Yet these designs exist because anti-nukers actively prevent them being built. Which means designs which typically are certified for twenty years, are still running thirty, forty, and fifty years after being built because anti-nukers making it all but impossible for them to be shutdown without a replacement. And since you can't built a replacement because of anti-nukers, we have problems like these.
In a nut shell, anti-nukers are the cause of shit like this. Literally, if you killed all anti-nukers tomorrow, the world would be a better, safer, cleaner place.
I just want to say that the entire thing saddens me, the trouble with nuclear power is that post Three mile island and chernobyl, people are to affraid to allow for newer and safer reactors to be built, yet their energy demands make it impossible to get rid of all the older outdated reactors, had public opinion on nuclear power been less scared-cattle like, we might have a much safer and greener power situation right now (ironically)
This very fact is something I've been attempting to hammer home hard here. The reality is, anti-nukers have effectively created self fulfilling prophecy by actively preventing newer, safer reactors and literally mandating certification extension. Sadly, I've either been troll moderated or seemingly, un-read and left alone.
People don't seem to understand that nuclear keeps energy prices low, dramatically reduces demand on existing energy supplies, is extremely clean, and is a primary component of base load energy. And yet, they maintain their energy demands while actively preventing newer, safer, more efficient reactors from coming on line. That in turn actively prevents older, deprecated models from going online; which creates the extremely high demand for certification extension. In the US alone, we have over sixty reactors which likely would have been depracted, phased out, and replaced with newer, safer, more efficient reactors if it were not for the environment solely created by anti-nukers. Furthermore, anti-nukers are actually increasing world-wide pollution and needless deaths.
Anti-nukers are very successful as scaremongering, but the reality is, they are the primary cause of tens of thousands of needless deaths every year and are actively pushing to ensure ever higher energy prices. Because baseload can't expand, we're forced to grow based on much more expensive peak load technologies.
There isn't an anti-nuker alive who isn't living in the middle of the woods, who doesn't deserve our loathing and disgust.
Yes, nuclear is so expensive that without them, your energy bills would almost quadruple. Articles like that tell "a" story, but not the whole story.
You need to keep in mind that nuclear offloads considerable consumption from other fossil supplies. So while nuclear is expensive, its actually the cheapest, by a lot, and keeps all other energy prices down. The real world answer is dramatically different when you actually add everything together rather than look at just the capitol costs.
There are very good reasons why base load power is nuclear and hydro and why its the cheapest power we have.
Wish people would stop parroting that. That comment is 100% propaganda and completely misleading.
"Clean coal" is clean compared to "dirty coal." That's very true. But it makes as much sense as saying you have slower growing cancer so its good..as opposed to fast growing cancer. That, of course, is dumb. Even clean coal is very bad for the environment, coal miners, and people with respiratory issues. Even clean coal sprays ash, including radiation.
Coal is literally one of the dirtiest forms of energy man has. Nuclear is the cleanest and safest forms of production energy known to mankind. Its also the cheapest and renewable despite an extremely financially hostile environment.
The real crime here is, nuclear has actively been prevented from developing into ever more safe an cost effective form of energy. And as an aside, coal is likely to be as clean as its ever going to become - which isn't saying a lot.
Every indication to do is you are factually incorrect. Either you're an idiot or a troll. The fact you posted anonymously indicates its either or more likely both. The buildings easily survived the quakes and failed from numerous hydrogen explosions as a result of failed cooling.
The lesson for the future is to include redundant diesel generators
And more importantly, don't place your backups at or below sea level; and especially not so when on the coast. And especially, especially not so when tsunamis are prevalent in your region. The absolutely obvious stupidity is jaw dropping.
I would seriously like to know why the IAEC didn't have something to say about that long before this happened. Even moreso, I'd like to know why they didn't have generators in standby for such emergencies; as is commonly done in the US. I actually thought this was an international standard. And even moreso, I'd like to know why generators were not immediately made available within the first 12-hours by the military after an emergency had been declared. Had any of this been done, there would have never been an initial emergency declared, let alone an ever growing escalation.
Everything about this smacks of massive human incompetent by the Japanese government and the utility company, which seemingly, has unyielding authority which seems to usurp that of the people and even the government.
The final word in analysis, once its actually penned, is likely to be a scathing review of incompetence at almost every level of governance and corporatism.
They had helicopters functioning. Its not like all of Japanese society ceased to function. It literally would have been trivial to have a generator, or a series of generators delivered within the first twelve hours. Hell, contrary to the popular spin, their inability to deliver the most basic of emergency services by their military strongly suggests that they were in fact, completely unprepared for any and all emergencies they are likely to face.
The real headline should read, "Stupid Americans Favor Needlessly Increased Nuclear Risks". By preventing expansion of newer, safer designs, they are mandating certification extension of older, less safe reactors. Which is actually maintaining the status quo. Thusly, any moratorium which prevents the deployment of newer, safer designs is mandating the continued operation of older, less safe designs. In essence, they are mandating a more dangerous world.
In the US alone, we have over sixty reactors which would have likely long been replaced with newer, safer, more efficient designs if it were not for anti-nuke idiots. Sadly, rather than being replaced, these reactors are forced to apply for certification extension. And because of the hostile environment created by anti-nuke idiots, they are almost already granted their extension.
Its literally become real world safety versus scare mongering with intent for self fulfilling prophecy and sadly, scare mongering is winning by a wide measure.
And where's the outrage for coal and tar flats, etc.? They actually are killing thousands directly and tens of thousands indirectly with massive damages to the environment.
If we run with such stupid rhetoric, as so many ignorant stooges want to do, we are left with natural gas (which kills plenty) and other fossil fuels. I don't know about you, but $15.00-$20.00/gallon at the pump doesn't exactly excite me.
Massive damage has been done to the Gulf of Mexico. Hundreds are now sick. The environment has been damaged for likely decades to come. People are angry there, but they actively prevent safety improvements in the nuclear industry - which actively wants to replace aging reactors and to dramatically improve safety. But the segments actually killing massive numbers and damaging vast expanses are more or less ignored. This wonderfully underscores the stupidity of the masses and especially underscores the metal retardation of anti-nukers.
In the US alone, we have over sixty reactors which would have likely been replaced with new designs if it were not for anti-nukers.
Really, Android is a type of embedded system and C++ is gaining ground there.
I've also used C++ in several telcom embedded projects. Ironically, many of C++ features which have kept C++ out of these embedded projects because of memory footprint and CPU overhead are exactly why they are causing C++ to gain ground now that memory and CPU is far less of an issue. Exceptions are a superior error model.
Ugh. Java is nothing like C++, except they both use a C-like syntax.
I agree. While people love to bitch about C++, as someone who has worked a fair bit with Java I can honestly say, its pretty clear the creators of Java had little practical OO experience and created it from a purists' perspective. In the real world, no one does pure-OO. Java fails miserably at coming even close to pure-OO but they painfully make you aware it was their goal during its design.
Without fail, Java requires all the tedium of C++, and in some cases even more so, with very few of the advantages.
Then you clearly don't have experience with perl. The reason why perl is dying on the vine is exactly the problem you describe. Perl coders love to ignorantly say the code is the documentation. Never mind anyone who says such a thing is an idiot. The reality is, perl is so wonderfully cryptic, its common for the original coder to come back to his code some six month or a year later and have no clue what the code does and then must spend several minutes or hours figuring out what they hell he coded so many months ago.
Realistically, C++ is extremely comprehensible so long as you have good coders doing your coding. If you find C++ which isn't comprehensible, it typically means you had an extremely poor coder more so than a damnation of the language. Yes, you can create some incomprehensible code in C++, but generally you have to work pretty hard at it. In fact, most of the worst C++ code I've ever seen actually comes from tutorials on C++ specifically illustrating what not to do specifically because it creates incomprehensible code; frequently with side effects and/or undefined behavior. So again, if you're finding this, it means you're replacing a really poor coder more so than C++ being the problem.
Seriously, any bad coder can create bad code in any language. Hell, I've seen really bad code in python even, and I can assure you, you have to work really hard to have incomprehensible code in python. And the vast majority of this code was from newb coders. That doesn't mean python is a bad language. Rather, it means the coders were unfit for the job.
C++ has never had "speed and reliability". Nobody can realistically write a C++ program of substantial size that doesn't have serious errors.
Reality says you're full of shit. I've personally worked on a project which was C++. Three small teams created over 450k lines of code with roughly 100k of that being unit tests. Integration was less than 30-days. We identified two leaks. Both turned out to be in the platform's OS and standard library. And to be absolutely clear, these results are hardly unique.
And C++ code only runs fast if you invest a shitload of time trying to get rid of all the high-overhead crap that its standard libraries do.
Again, reality says you're absolutely full of shit.
When you're entire point of posting is to either prove to the world you're an idiot or worse, simply desire to troll, just don't post as it makes the world a better place.
Or for the projects where having to manage every allocation and deletion is tedious and gets in the way of actually implementing a program.
The problem with that statement is, there has long been various pointer implementations which make that level of tedium completely unneeded. If you've been having to do this for the last decade, you've been doing it completely wrong. It also likely means your C++ book collection is pretty sparse.
Yes, memory management is an important aspect to C++ coding. But anyone who has bothered to make even a tiny effort to learn C++ coding best practices over the last decade and half has long since learned various smart pointers dramatically reduce the burden and flat out prevent numerous common (and frequently the worst) memory leaks and dangling pointer issues.
Really, GC for C++ opens the door for programmers who've never had to manage much memory (example, Java and other dynamic languages). And it allows some to not worry about such details where performance is simply not an issue. But for those who use C++ for performance reasons, GC is likely not of significant interest. Of course, hybrid approaches are now possible where it makes sense to do so.
The problem isn't really PHP. The problem is, PHP has become the VB of the web which has significant allure to a very specific user profile. Sure, some can truly explore its power but most have no idea what they are doing. Sadly, a lot of these same people who are wondering about in the dark are contributing to many popular PHP projects and frameworks. This is why PHP is synonymous with poor security and easy exploits.
Add to the fact many developers later jump ship to other languages and other frameworks and discover better performance with more powerful frameworks, typically with far, far fewer security issues, it raises the question of why anyone is bothering with PHP and their frameworks.
This is a fact which I've specifically address roughly a half dozen times now. The simple fact is, they don't tell people because anti-nukers are to blame. Yes, you read that right! We have reactors which should have been retired because fucking idiot anit-nukers have created such a hostile anti-nuke environment, they are constantly forced to make due with what they have while attempting to minimize any propaganda potential created by even the smallest of mistake.
If you want someone to blame, you can squarely blame at least 90% of all these problems on fucking idiot anti-nukers.
If it were not for anti-nukers, reactors would be replaced with newer, safer designs, rather than the constant sad truth of certification extension. It looked like all that was starting to end and the world would have been better for it, but sadly, a nuclear accident occurred because of poor planning and auditing by the Japanese rather than it being an indictment of nuclear power. The problem is, most people are too dumb to understand the difference. Worse, idiotic anti-nukers are going to leverage this for all the propaganda they can muster.
Basically, anti-nuke idiots have literally created a world of self-fulfilling prophecy. Since we all live in that world, where idiots are shaping our energy safety, well, you get exactly what you expect - idiotic results. If you killed all anti-nukers tomorrow, the world would literally be a better place.
I can't tell you how many nuclear engineers I've spoken with who are constantly annoyed at their inability to improve things specifically because anti-nukers have created such a hostile environment, getting anything done, even when it improves safety, quickly becomes too expensive, too time consuming, and too heavy of a burden to mitigate the process.
So literally, the line has been drawn. You can be anti-nuke and be part of the problem, or you can be intelligent and work to make things better. Nuclear is not going anywhere. That's the reality. Even if things get dramatically worse, its still the cleanest, safest energy mankind has. Period. Because of this, you can help maintain your anti-nuke position and help kill people, or you can work with the nuclear industry and make things better, cleaner, safer, and lower waste.
Its extremely ironic that those who honestly believe being anti-nuke makes the world safer, when in fact, they needlessly increase the dangers to everyone.
So you're saying you're willing to take a massive pay cut to support your position? If you're not, well tough luck. Surely you're not hypocritical.
Sadly, that's generally what happens, people don't have a problem stealing from someone else, but as soon as its their money, suddenly its a travesty. We both know you're of this type in spades. This is exactly why pirates come off sounding like complete idiots. They absolutely do not want to practice what they preach. Its really all about your need to steal and the artist can go fuck themselves.
Pure delusion. Do you honestly believe the idiocy in your post or are you just trolling?
Try selling some LoTR fanfiction, that will help you figure it out.
And how does preventing someone from ripping off their works harm society? Seriously, what was the harm? You insisted culture suffered. How does second rate literature, which no one would have read, harm society?
I'm so tired of the pixie dust fantasies people like you project. Its pathetically sad.
Ugg the cave wall painter
Typically these were made as a record of historical events. Art for art is exceedingly rare in cave paintings. Not surprised in the lease you were completely clueless here.
to Da Vinci who had a business plan for each of his works
Thank you for proving you are a complete fucking idiot. So by your own example, you're willing to personally pay for artistic creations, likely in the millions each? Of course not, because that would mean you're not a lair and/or a hypocrite.
They can't find a way to make enough cash before they die? Well either they have a very odd, diamond-encrusted definition of "enough" or you can cry me a freakin' river for the panda bears of capitalism.*
So you're willing to take a massive pay cut. Awesome. But wait, we both know you're a lair and a delusional hypocrite, so you have absolutely no intention of doing what you insist others must do. What a selfish, delusional, idiot you are.
Actually you do have recourse. They just assumed you would roll over - and you did. Not to mention, the source of who is billing you is pretty important. If its an overseas company, they likely can't do anything about it. If its in a more industrialized nation, and especially if its US based, they almost always can do something about it. Its simply a matter of pushing it through and having something to support your position.
Its 30-90 days, which is EXTREMELY reasonable, before your specific donation is actually spent for the specific cause. That's not to say organizations like the Red Cross haven't already spent money and made resources available before then. In fact, it is extremely unlikely they have spent considerable resources within the first two weeks. Generally, within a week and especially after the first two weeks, considerable resources have already been made available. Its just that those resources were made available for previous donations; typically from other causes.
Slashdot Mirror
I've seen people selling many questionable things out of their cars. Planes are frequently used to smuggle illegal drugs. Hell, you can find stores selling stuff that they're not supposed to be selling in the 'right' parts of the world. Shut all those down too by removing the tools?
So you're fighting to make lock pick sets legal in all fifty states now? And you're standing in line to make all guns legal too? And I know all phallus shaped vibrators are next to receive your ringing endorsement and active protests.
Realistically, there actually are important things which should be receiving your attention, which are literally protected by the US Constitution, and yet frequently outlawed by the weak minded who seem completely incapable of understanding the US' most important document. At least music and lock picks have been "outlawed" because the vast majority of uses are, in fact, illegal.
So while I absolutely believe things like lock picks, phallic dildos, guns, and bit torrent should all be legal, at least one of those has overwhelming significance to everyone. And as a hint, its not bit torrent.
They are not ignoring a problem. The simple fact is, the anti-nuke crazies have been extremely effective at scaremongering. Its in everyone's best interest to mitigate the public anxiety about current events.
The simple fact is, nuclear isn't going anywhere. The more anti-nukers make it impossible for newer, safer reactor designs to be built, more likely this is to happen again in the future. Thusly, the anti-nuke idiot scaremongering isn't fed, the better off everyone is. Even better, it helps ensure lower energy prices and a stable energy markets.
Ignoring a problem is not the same thing as making an effort to not feed morons.
Works for lightbulbs. Dispite the popular ramblings of the internet, neither the EU nor US have actually banned incandescent bulbs - they just set efficiency standards high enough that no incandescent can achieve them.
Actually, there are incandescent bulbs which quality; at least in the US. They just happen to be more expensive so most people don't. As such, they are not as commonly found in stores now as LED and CFL.
No, that's not true. The reason why it has such high subsidies is because of the anti-nuclear crowd. If people would ignore the fucking idiots of the world, the subsidies would be ignored. Likewise, you're also ignoring the massive subsidies for most other forms or energy, with ethanol being one of the worst; with nuclear included.
Take a hard look at what those subsidies are actually subsidizing and realize that the vast, vast majority haven't always been there.
the JVM implementations have explored groundbreaking improvements in garbage collection performance, multithreading, IPC techniques and so on.
Okay, I'll give you gc, but multi-threading and IPC? I do Java and I'm completely unaware of anything they innovated here.
Really, Java's claim to fame is hot JITing and GC'ing. Outside of those, I'm not aware of anything Java innovated.
Completely agree. Regardless of the specific solution, the fact no solution was attained within hours seems to scream extreme human incompetence. Literally, something like this should have been a couple dozen phone calls and a working solution in less than 12-hours.
I heard they did get a generator to the site within 8 hours, but it had the wrong connection on it and so they couldn't power the cooling system!
No seriously! (I can't find the BBC link at the mo for it :( )
I heard that too. And then all the reports seemingly went away. Its just not likely they couldn't rig/manufacture a connector within a couple of hours. The explanation simply isn't believable - unless its need has been de-prioritized.
As I understand it, the site has several redundant diesel generators as backups.
From what I've read, they all started and failed when water reached them. That's what I'm basing my comments on.
which understandably caused them to fail to start.
Reports are, they started and ran for an hour before the tsunami reached them. Which again, is entirely the basis for my comment.
As for just hooking up any random generator flown in by helicopter, apparently that is just not possible as a) they don't deliver the right voltage/amperage of electric current and b) the equipment for transforming it from the wrong to the right stuff is sitting in an inundated basement.
That seems like a bullshit statement. You're trying to tell me there are no emergency generators available in all of Japan which are designed for the sole purpose of powering these reactors in case of an emergency? Are you seriously arguing no other reactors use these generators? Are you seriously saying the military has no convertors? No generators on trucks - as every other industrialized nation in the world does?
Yes, apparently they could and should have been better prepared.
Yes, meaning, prepared at all - as other industrialized nations are.
Also, why there was no way to jury-rig some kind of power connection directly to the pumps themselves is unclear to me.
Any industrial electrical engineer can do this. Its not technically difficult so long as you have the expertise. Seemingly you're arguing both the entire country and the military are completely without said expertise and yet they were only slightly unprepared. Ya, right.
What surprises me is that it apparently takes quite a lot of cooling -after- the control rods have come down. I'm not the only one who was under the mistaken impression that lowering them stops the reaction and after that it's pretty much over and done with and you can sit back and relax.
This explains a lot. You seemingly have no idea what you're talking about but insist on interjecting your self admitted, unlearned, view of things.
The silly thing is, nuclear fission is basically a stop-gap until we have nuclear fusion or something even better.
You do understand that in a thousand years we may still be looking at stop-gap measures. And if you bother to actually look, we are no closer to fusion today that we were a hundred years ago. Seriously, go look. The technological hurdles are extremely complex and profound. Even worse, the projects which have continuously failed to advance the state of the art continue to receive some 90% of the funding. The projects which theoretically show real promise continue to receive little or no funding. We literally have a better chance of inviting unicorns and pixies in the next hundred years than we do of powering our world with fusion.
If it still takes so much cooling to prevent things from going wrong this badly, then my view of nuclear fission as a source of power is significantly more negative than it was previously.
And this is exactly why we have this problem in the first place. Sad but true. Newer reactor designs don't have this problem. These reactors were designed fifty years ago and built forty years ago. The problem doesn't exist in newer designs. Yet these designs exist because anti-nukers actively prevent them being built. Which means designs which typically are certified for twenty years, are still running thirty, forty, and fifty years after being built because anti-nukers making it all but impossible for them to be shutdown without a replacement. And since you can't built a replacement because of anti-nukers, we have problems like these.
In a nut shell, anti-nukers are the cause of shit like this. Literally, if you killed all anti-nukers tomorrow, the world would be a better, safer, cleaner place.
Thanks for your most excellent response.
I just want to say that the entire thing saddens me, the trouble with nuclear power is that post Three mile island and chernobyl, people are to affraid to allow for newer and safer reactors to be built, yet their energy demands make it impossible to get rid of all the older outdated reactors, had public opinion on nuclear power been less scared-cattle like, we might have a much safer and greener power situation right now (ironically)
This very fact is something I've been attempting to hammer home hard here. The reality is, anti-nukers have effectively created self fulfilling prophecy by actively preventing newer, safer reactors and literally mandating certification extension. Sadly, I've either been troll moderated or seemingly, un-read and left alone.
People don't seem to understand that nuclear keeps energy prices low, dramatically reduces demand on existing energy supplies, is extremely clean, and is a primary component of base load energy. And yet, they maintain their energy demands while actively preventing newer, safer, more efficient reactors from coming on line. That in turn actively prevents older, deprecated models from going online; which creates the extremely high demand for certification extension. In the US alone, we have over sixty reactors which likely would have been depracted, phased out, and replaced with newer, safer, more efficient reactors if it were not for the environment solely created by anti-nukers. Furthermore, anti-nukers are actually increasing world-wide pollution and needless deaths.
Anti-nukers are very successful as scaremongering, but the reality is, they are the primary cause of tens of thousands of needless deaths every year and are actively pushing to ensure ever higher energy prices. Because baseload can't expand, we're forced to grow based on much more expensive peak load technologies.
There isn't an anti-nuker alive who isn't living in the middle of the woods, who doesn't deserve our loathing and disgust.
Yes, nuclear is so expensive that without them, your energy bills would almost quadruple. Articles like that tell "a" story, but not the whole story.
You need to keep in mind that nuclear offloads considerable consumption from other fossil supplies. So while nuclear is expensive, its actually the cheapest, by a lot, and keeps all other energy prices down. The real world answer is dramatically different when you actually add everything together rather than look at just the capitol costs.
There are very good reasons why base load power is nuclear and hydro and why its the cheapest power we have.
Modern coal power plants are quite clean.
Wish people would stop parroting that. That comment is 100% propaganda and completely misleading.
"Clean coal" is clean compared to "dirty coal." That's very true. But it makes as much sense as saying you have slower growing cancer so its good..as opposed to fast growing cancer. That, of course, is dumb. Even clean coal is very bad for the environment, coal miners, and people with respiratory issues. Even clean coal sprays ash, including radiation.
Coal is literally one of the dirtiest forms of energy man has. Nuclear is the cleanest and safest forms of production energy known to mankind. Its also the cheapest and renewable despite an extremely financially hostile environment.
The real crime here is, nuclear has actively been prevented from developing into ever more safe an cost effective form of energy. And as an aside, coal is likely to be as clean as its ever going to become - which isn't saying a lot.
The containment did not withstand 9.0 earthquake.
Every indication to do is you are factually incorrect. Either you're an idiot or a troll. The fact you posted anonymously indicates its either or more likely both. The buildings easily survived the quakes and failed from numerous hydrogen explosions as a result of failed cooling.
The lesson for the future is to include redundant diesel generators
And more importantly, don't place your backups at or below sea level; and especially not so when on the coast. And especially, especially not so when tsunamis are prevalent in your region. The absolutely obvious stupidity is jaw dropping.
I would seriously like to know why the IAEC didn't have something to say about that long before this happened. Even moreso, I'd like to know why they didn't have generators in standby for such emergencies; as is commonly done in the US. I actually thought this was an international standard. And even moreso, I'd like to know why generators were not immediately made available within the first 12-hours by the military after an emergency had been declared. Had any of this been done, there would have never been an initial emergency declared, let alone an ever growing escalation.
Everything about this smacks of massive human incompetent by the Japanese government and the utility company, which seemingly, has unyielding authority which seems to usurp that of the people and even the government.
The final word in analysis, once its actually penned, is likely to be a scathing review of incompetence at almost every level of governance and corporatism.
They had helicopters functioning. Its not like all of Japanese society ceased to function. It literally would have been trivial to have a generator, or a series of generators delivered within the first twelve hours. Hell, contrary to the popular spin, their inability to deliver the most basic of emergency services by their military strongly suggests that they were in fact, completely unprepared for any and all emergencies they are likely to face.
The real headline should read, "Stupid Americans Favor Needlessly Increased Nuclear Risks". By preventing expansion of newer, safer designs, they are mandating certification extension of older, less safe reactors. Which is actually maintaining the status quo. Thusly, any moratorium which prevents the deployment of newer, safer designs is mandating the continued operation of older, less safe designs. In essence, they are mandating a more dangerous world.
In the US alone, we have over sixty reactors which would have likely long been replaced with newer, safer, more efficient designs if it were not for anti-nuke idiots. Sadly, rather than being replaced, these reactors are forced to apply for certification extension. And because of the hostile environment created by anti-nuke idiots, they are almost already granted their extension.
Its literally become real world safety versus scare mongering with intent for self fulfilling prophecy and sadly, scare mongering is winning by a wide measure.
And where's the outrage for coal and tar flats, etc.? They actually are killing thousands directly and tens of thousands indirectly with massive damages to the environment.
If we run with such stupid rhetoric, as so many ignorant stooges want to do, we are left with natural gas (which kills plenty) and other fossil fuels. I don't know about you, but $15.00-$20.00/gallon at the pump doesn't exactly excite me.
Massive damage has been done to the Gulf of Mexico. Hundreds are now sick. The environment has been damaged for likely decades to come. People are angry there, but they actively prevent safety improvements in the nuclear industry - which actively wants to replace aging reactors and to dramatically improve safety. But the segments actually killing massive numbers and damaging vast expanses are more or less ignored. This wonderfully underscores the stupidity of the masses and especially underscores the metal retardation of anti-nukers.
In the US alone, we have over sixty reactors which would have likely been replaced with new designs if it were not for anti-nukers.
Really, Android is a type of embedded system and C++ is gaining ground there.
I've also used C++ in several telcom embedded projects. Ironically, many of C++ features which have kept C++ out of these embedded projects because of memory footprint and CPU overhead are exactly why they are causing C++ to gain ground now that memory and CPU is far less of an issue. Exceptions are a superior error model.
Ugh. Java is nothing like C++, except they both use a C-like syntax.
I agree. While people love to bitch about C++, as someone who has worked a fair bit with Java I can honestly say, its pretty clear the creators of Java had little practical OO experience and created it from a purists' perspective. In the real world, no one does pure-OO. Java fails miserably at coming even close to pure-OO but they painfully make you aware it was their goal during its design.
Without fail, Java requires all the tedium of C++, and in some cases even more so, with very few of the advantages.
Then you clearly don't have experience with perl. The reason why perl is dying on the vine is exactly the problem you describe. Perl coders love to ignorantly say the code is the documentation. Never mind anyone who says such a thing is an idiot. The reality is, perl is so wonderfully cryptic, its common for the original coder to come back to his code some six month or a year later and have no clue what the code does and then must spend several minutes or hours figuring out what they hell he coded so many months ago.
Realistically, C++ is extremely comprehensible so long as you have good coders doing your coding. If you find C++ which isn't comprehensible, it typically means you had an extremely poor coder more so than a damnation of the language. Yes, you can create some incomprehensible code in C++, but generally you have to work pretty hard at it. In fact, most of the worst C++ code I've ever seen actually comes from tutorials on C++ specifically illustrating what not to do specifically because it creates incomprehensible code; frequently with side effects and/or undefined behavior. So again, if you're finding this, it means you're replacing a really poor coder more so than C++ being the problem.
Seriously, any bad coder can create bad code in any language. Hell, I've seen really bad code in python even, and I can assure you, you have to work really hard to have incomprehensible code in python. And the vast majority of this code was from newb coders. That doesn't mean python is a bad language. Rather, it means the coders were unfit for the job.
C++ has never had "speed and reliability". Nobody can realistically write a C++ program of substantial size that doesn't have serious errors.
Reality says you're full of shit. I've personally worked on a project which was C++. Three small teams created over 450k lines of code with roughly 100k of that being unit tests. Integration was less than 30-days. We identified two leaks. Both turned out to be in the platform's OS and standard library. And to be absolutely clear, these results are hardly unique.
And C++ code only runs fast if you invest a shitload of time trying to get rid of all the high-overhead crap that its standard libraries do.
Again, reality says you're absolutely full of shit.
When you're entire point of posting is to either prove to the world you're an idiot or worse, simply desire to troll, just don't post as it makes the world a better place.
Or for the projects where having to manage every allocation and deletion is tedious and gets in the way of actually implementing a program.
The problem with that statement is, there has long been various pointer implementations which make that level of tedium completely unneeded. If you've been having to do this for the last decade, you've been doing it completely wrong. It also likely means your C++ book collection is pretty sparse.
Yes, memory management is an important aspect to C++ coding. But anyone who has bothered to make even a tiny effort to learn C++ coding best practices over the last decade and half has long since learned various smart pointers dramatically reduce the burden and flat out prevent numerous common (and frequently the worst) memory leaks and dangling pointer issues.
Really, GC for C++ opens the door for programmers who've never had to manage much memory (example, Java and other dynamic languages). And it allows some to not worry about such details where performance is simply not an issue. But for those who use C++ for performance reasons, GC is likely not of significant interest. Of course, hybrid approaches are now possible where it makes sense to do so.
The problem isn't really PHP. The problem is, PHP has become the VB of the web which has significant allure to a very specific user profile. Sure, some can truly explore its power but most have no idea what they are doing. Sadly, a lot of these same people who are wondering about in the dark are contributing to many popular PHP projects and frameworks. This is why PHP is synonymous with poor security and easy exploits.
Add to the fact many developers later jump ship to other languages and other frameworks and discover better performance with more powerful frameworks, typically with far, far fewer security issues, it raises the question of why anyone is bothering with PHP and their frameworks.
This is a fact which I've specifically address roughly a half dozen times now. The simple fact is, they don't tell people because anti-nukers are to blame. Yes, you read that right! We have reactors which should have been retired because fucking idiot anit-nukers have created such a hostile anti-nuke environment, they are constantly forced to make due with what they have while attempting to minimize any propaganda potential created by even the smallest of mistake.
If you want someone to blame, you can squarely blame at least 90% of all these problems on fucking idiot anti-nukers.
If it were not for anti-nukers, reactors would be replaced with newer, safer designs, rather than the constant sad truth of certification extension. It looked like all that was starting to end and the world would have been better for it, but sadly, a nuclear accident occurred because of poor planning and auditing by the Japanese rather than it being an indictment of nuclear power. The problem is, most people are too dumb to understand the difference. Worse, idiotic anti-nukers are going to leverage this for all the propaganda they can muster.
Basically, anti-nuke idiots have literally created a world of self-fulfilling prophecy. Since we all live in that world, where idiots are shaping our energy safety, well, you get exactly what you expect - idiotic results. If you killed all anti-nukers tomorrow, the world would literally be a better place.
I can't tell you how many nuclear engineers I've spoken with who are constantly annoyed at their inability to improve things specifically because anti-nukers have created such a hostile environment, getting anything done, even when it improves safety, quickly becomes too expensive, too time consuming, and too heavy of a burden to mitigate the process.
So literally, the line has been drawn. You can be anti-nuke and be part of the problem, or you can be intelligent and work to make things better. Nuclear is not going anywhere. That's the reality. Even if things get dramatically worse, its still the cleanest, safest energy mankind has. Period. Because of this, you can help maintain your anti-nuke position and help kill people, or you can work with the nuclear industry and make things better, cleaner, safer, and lower waste.
Its extremely ironic that those who honestly believe being anti-nuke makes the world safer, when in fact, they needlessly increase the dangers to everyone.
So you're saying you're willing to take a massive pay cut to support your position? If you're not, well tough luck. Surely you're not hypocritical.
Sadly, that's generally what happens, people don't have a problem stealing from someone else, but as soon as its their money, suddenly its a travesty. We both know you're of this type in spades. This is exactly why pirates come off sounding like complete idiots. They absolutely do not want to practice what they preach. Its really all about your need to steal and the artist can go fuck themselves.
People like you are really total pieces of shit.
Pure delusion. Do you honestly believe the idiocy in your post or are you just trolling?
Try selling some LoTR fanfiction, that will help you figure it out.
And how does preventing someone from ripping off their works harm society? Seriously, what was the harm? You insisted culture suffered. How does second rate literature, which no one would have read, harm society?
I'm so tired of the pixie dust fantasies people like you project. Its pathetically sad.
Ugg the cave wall painter
Typically these were made as a record of historical events. Art for art is exceedingly rare in cave paintings. Not surprised in the lease you were completely clueless here.
to Da Vinci who had a business plan for each of his works
Thank you for proving you are a complete fucking idiot. So by your own example, you're willing to personally pay for artistic creations, likely in the millions each? Of course not, because that would mean you're not a lair and/or a hypocrite.
They can't find a way to make enough cash before they die? Well either they have a very odd, diamond-encrusted definition of "enough" or you can cry me a freakin' river for the panda bears of capitalism.*
So you're willing to take a massive pay cut. Awesome. But wait, we both know you're a lair and a delusional hypocrite, so you have absolutely no intention of doing what you insist others must do. What a selfish, delusional, idiot you are.
Actually you do have recourse. They just assumed you would roll over - and you did. Not to mention, the source of who is billing you is pretty important. If its an overseas company, they likely can't do anything about it. If its in a more industrialized nation, and especially if its US based, they almost always can do something about it. Its simply a matter of pushing it through and having something to support your position.
That's completely wrong. Period.
Its 30-90 days, which is EXTREMELY reasonable, before your specific donation is actually spent for the specific cause. That's not to say organizations like the Red Cross haven't already spent money and made resources available before then. In fact, it is extremely unlikely they have spent considerable resources within the first two weeks. Generally, within a week and especially after the first two weeks, considerable resources have already been made available. Its just that those resources were made available for previous donations; typically from other causes.