The answer to all of the above hysterical "what if" questions is simply you pay the early termination fee - which is the difference in price between the subsidized and retail price of the phone. Or you sign up for service with no contract using a used phone you buy off craigslist/ebay.
Note that this is of the oldest BWR design. It doesn't have the super strong concrete dome containment like most nuke plants have, instead it has a smaller steel containment vessel around the reactor, and a weaker outer containment building.
But there will always be poor people. There will always be people unable or unwilling to work for themselves. There will always be a generation of new immigrants just getting on their feet. There will always be a generation that is the first to go to college. There is no way to force social equality, unless it is by making everyone equally poor. And then we are back in the dark ages of feudalism - except instead of a king, we have an intellectual elite in government.
Why do you feel that "life begins at conception"? Do you mean living tissue, or a meaningful life? Are you basing that on theological grounds? Because you feel it has a "soul"? I'm not arguing, just asking, because it doesn't seem very logical.
When pro-lifers state "life begins at conception", what they mean is that conception is the point where half the DNA from person A combines with half the DNA of person B to become an entirely new and separate entity, which will eventually develop to be an independent organism as long as it does not perish due to natural causes (e.g. failing to latch on or otherwise develop properly) or is actively terminated.
A fertilized egg is no more alive than any bacterium. The sperm and unfertilized egg are no less "alive", though it could be said they are incomplete.
If life begins at conception, should we not force women to retrieve the majority of fertilized eggs, which do not implant and end up getting flushed down the toilet? Otherwise, we are condoning murder.
Just because death is inevitable, does not mean that murder is acceptable. For example, just because a family member has cancer and only has 1 month to live does not mean you have the right to shoot them dead to save on medical expenses. Note that this is entirely different from letting the person die by natural processes sans active medical treatment. We don't force people to pay for expensive life-extending treatments to prolong life as long as possible at any cost. But we don't allow you to prematurely intentionally end life.
There are many arguments along those lines. I have barely brushed the surface. But in brief, my opinion is that the belief that a life of any real value begins at the moment of conception is hilarious.
Who the fuck do you think you are that you get to decide which human life is of sufficient value to deserve to live?
Well to be fair, the reason why the dosage of that old shoe x-ray machine was so high was because it had to illuminate a phosphor screen to be immediately visible, like a CRT monitor. With modern digital x-ray film, such a machine could be used regularly with no consequential dose, like a dental x-ray but only to your feet (which are less susceptible to radiation damage than your head or chest). That being said, I'm still patently against these intrusive airport x-ray scans for a multitude of reasons.:p
Not if you're pointing a grenade launcher at him and everyone he knows.
How does disproportionate use of force have anything to do with it? If a man threatens you with a knife, so you pull out your gun and shoot him, that is not self defense?
Anyways this case with Israel is more like a man threatening you with a machine gun, and in "self defense" you yell some nasty insults about his mother at him. And then everyone calls you a terrorist. Oy.
Yes... remind me, which countries in the region developed nuclear weapons against the non-proliferation treaties?
The country that is surrounded by 6 hostile neighboring nations whom have all vowed to annihilate said country down to the last child, have declared war against said country multiple times in the past few decades, and if had nuclear weapons would use them on aforementioned country in a heartbeat.
When you say "bulldozing people's homes", by people you mean the family of suicide bombers whom encourage their children to carry out suicide attacks for large cash payments?
And when you say "Attacking schools with helicopter gunships when the children are outside playing" by 'outside playing', did you perchance mean to say 'playing human shield for the Hezbollah terrorists with mortars and rocket launchers'?
And when you mention"herding people into ghettos", I don't think it's very nice to bring Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan's abandonment of their citizens into this discussion, I mean we were talking about Israel right?
And the Republicans are trying to unfund any research into renewable energy.
They are trying to cut budgets across the board, because the government has no money.
Plenty of Republicans and other conservatives back things like construction of new nuclear power plants, a form of renewable energy that actually makes sense.
Wind energy makes little sense at the moment (all we will end up with is more dead windmill fields such as the ones in California and Hawaii). Solar panels are starting to make sense but why do they need government help to make it happen? People are already starting to buy things like solar shingles of their own accord.
Nuclear power plants are not renewable. Uranium will eventually run out just like oil. Granted, with breeder technology it might last a few centuries, but after Chernobyl I'm a bit wary about claims of safe fission reactors.
No, uranium will not eventually run out just like oil. We have enough uranium to supply our energy needs for 10,000 - 100,000 years. Not even counting reserves - I'm just talking about the leftover depleted uranium already processed and sitting around unused at enrichment plants. Yes, using fast breeder technology. Yes, it was in fact Democrats whom cancelled breeder, reprocessing, and fast reactor research.
As an interesting tidbit, for the amount of money Obama spent of the stimulus package, we could have built ~300 new nuclear reactors and converted the country to 90% nuclear power. Save the coal and natural gas for transportation, we'd have enough to last 1000 years and total energy independence forever.
Amazing how efficient liberals are at wasting money, eh?:)
By that same logic, though, you can flush most of Einsteins work too. We do not posses, nor are we likely to posses in our lifetimes barring alien intervention, the technology to directly test and observe either the General or Special theories of relativity. The math works, its elegant, and is therefore the best explanation people can come up with. String theory tries to tie the quantum aspects together with the space time and forces described by AE. Its only as credible as the information that its based on.
What? Both special and general relativity have been proven over and over again. Special relativity is used on a daily basis for a variety of applications such as GPS, particle accelerators, atomic clocks, etc etc. General relativity has made correct predictions about the orbit of mercury, and gravitational lensing has been directly observed around the sun and distant galaxies. Gravity waves have not yet been directly observed but there is indirect evidence for their existence in the measurements of falling binary stars.
Broken Window Fallacy. If we didn't have to pay a groundskeeper to clean up your litter, we could spend the money on something that produces wealth (e.g. teachers, new roads, etc).
You're right that there is no free market. The solution is not to take away even more freedom to fix the problems caused by government intervention in the first place. One more chain will not set you free.
Harleys have a market that is entirely separate from the rest of the motorcycle market. There are generally no reasons to explain why someone who bought a Harley did so. They just do it because they think HD is "the real thing". It's hilarious to hear a group of them talk about how they much they spent on a big, slow, unreliable bike. The purchases all rest on "the tradition", "the feel", "the prestige", etc... nothing with any basis in reality.
Now, you'll hear them retort today about how reliability is much better than it used to be, and it has gotten better, but it's still nowhere near that of basically any other brand. They are intentionally using an antiquated engine design with 1950s tech and marketing like anything more advanced "ain't shit". I mean, they are still air cooled for goodness sake...
HD is the greatest case of drone marketing in world history. They have a militant user base willing to pay a premium price for a product that is inferior in every quantifiable way. Not only this, but they spend trillions on cheap chinese trinkets just because they carry the logo.
It's not like the premium clothing outlets where the product is better, but not in proportion to the price. It's even greater than that.
Sounds exactly like Bose's corporate strategy as well. Make a crappy cheap product marked up 10,000% and fool people into buying it based on brand name recognition.
Denying reality? Why not ask the democrats, whom had effective filibuster control of both houses of congress since 2000 and full control since 2006. You know that the republicans actively tried to prevent the collapse several times in 2004 and 2006 yet were blocked by democrats, right?
"Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are not in a crisis situation. The more people in my judgment exaggerate the threat of safety and soundness, the more people conjure up the possibility of serious financial losses to the treasury, which I do not see. I think we see entities that are fundamentally sound financially and withstand some of the disaster scenarios. Even if there were a problem, the federal government does not bail them out. But the more pressure there is, the less we see in terms of affordable housing."
nuclear plants don't make plutonium. a vanishingly small number of reactor types can make useful (for weapons) plutonium, but those tend to be not so efficient for generating power.
most of the dangerous reactor designs of the past have been designed deliberately to avoid making anything useful. that's the main reason there's so much waste. it was the safest, most efficient design possible with crippling regulations in mind. re-evaluating those regulations with modern designs in mind is essential for nuclear to become safer and far more efficient (think 98% less waste, and what's left is short-lived rather than long-lived fission products).
This is incorrect. Regular light-water reactors indeed do create a significant amount of reactor-grade (i.e. not weapons grade) plutonium. The breeder ratio for a typical LWR is around 0.6. A substantial portion of the fission energy generated comes from plutonium created in the core.
LWR's were not specifically designed to avoid making plutonium, they were designed to make the most economically efficient use of low or naturally enriched uranium. The reason why there is a relatively large volume of spent fuel is because reprocessing was outright banned by the government. France uses the same LWR reactor designs as the U.S. but reprocesses their waste into a much smaller volume.
Portland residents will vote Nov. 2 on a proposal to give legal residents who are not U.S. citizens the right to vote in local elections
I'd just like to point out that one of the core founding ideas of your nation was "no taxation without representation".
I'm pretty sure that context only applies to citizens. I don't think the original Boston Tea Partiers intention was to give the British soldiers the right to vote to raise the taxes of the colonists...which is precisely what you are proposing.
Not going to happen in the US. Licensing costs are too expensive to justify anything but the 1600 MWe behemoths using standard fuel cycles with proven technology.
I don't know how many lobbyists Westinghouse has, but I do have an idea of how many engineers they have working to satisfy the NRC's licensing requirements for their own designs. Likewise with Mitsubishi and General Electric.
Slashdot Mirror
The answer to all of the above hysterical "what if" questions is simply you pay the early termination fee - which is the difference in price between the subsidized and retail price of the phone. Or you sign up for service with no contract using a used phone you buy off craigslist/ebay.
Note that this is of the oldest BWR design. It doesn't have the super strong concrete dome containment like most nuke plants have, instead it has a smaller steel containment vessel around the reactor, and a weaker outer containment building.
But there will always be poor people. There will always be people unable or unwilling to work for themselves. There will always be a generation of new immigrants just getting on their feet. There will always be a generation that is the first to go to college. There is no way to force social equality, unless it is by making everyone equally poor. And then we are back in the dark ages of feudalism - except instead of a king, we have an intellectual elite in government.
When pro-lifers state "life begins at conception", what they mean is that conception is the point where half the DNA from person A combines with half the DNA of person B to become an entirely new and separate entity, which will eventually develop to be an independent organism as long as it does not perish due to natural causes (e.g. failing to latch on or otherwise develop properly) or is actively terminated.
Just because death is inevitable, does not mean that murder is acceptable. For example, just because a family member has cancer and only has 1 month to live does not mean you have the right to shoot them dead to save on medical expenses. Note that this is entirely different from letting the person die by natural processes sans active medical treatment. We don't force people to pay for expensive life-extending treatments to prolong life as long as possible at any cost. But we don't allow you to prematurely intentionally end life.
Who the fuck do you think you are that you get to decide which human life is of sufficient value to deserve to live?
Well to be fair, the reason why the dosage of that old shoe x-ray machine was so high was because it had to illuminate a phosphor screen to be immediately visible, like a CRT monitor. With modern digital x-ray film, such a machine could be used regularly with no consequential dose, like a dental x-ray but only to your feet (which are less susceptible to radiation damage than your head or chest). That being said, I'm still patently against these intrusive airport x-ray scans for a multitude of reasons. :p
Not if you're pointing a grenade launcher at him and everyone he knows.
How does disproportionate use of force have anything to do with it? If a man threatens you with a knife, so you pull out your gun and shoot him, that is not self defense?
Anyways this case with Israel is more like a man threatening you with a machine gun, and in "self defense" you yell some nasty insults about his mother at him. And then everyone calls you a terrorist. Oy.
Yes... remind me, which countries in the region developed nuclear weapons against the non-proliferation treaties?
The country that is surrounded by 6 hostile neighboring nations whom have all vowed to annihilate said country down to the last child, have declared war against said country multiple times in the past few decades, and if had nuclear weapons would use them on aforementioned country in a heartbeat.
When you say "bulldozing people's homes", by people you mean the family of suicide bombers whom encourage their children to carry out suicide attacks for large cash payments?
And when you say "Attacking schools with helicopter gunships when the children are outside playing" by 'outside playing', did you perchance mean to say 'playing human shield for the Hezbollah terrorists with mortars and rocket launchers'?
And when you mention"herding people into ghettos", I don't think it's very nice to bring Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan's abandonment of their citizens into this discussion, I mean we were talking about Israel right?
And the Republicans are trying to unfund any research into renewable energy.
They are trying to cut budgets across the board, because the government has no money.
Plenty of Republicans and other conservatives back things like construction of new nuclear power plants, a form of renewable energy that actually makes sense.
Wind energy makes little sense at the moment (all we will end up with is more dead windmill fields such as the ones in California and Hawaii). Solar panels are starting to make sense but why do they need government help to make it happen? People are already starting to buy things like solar shingles of their own accord.
Nuclear power plants are not renewable. Uranium will eventually run out just like oil. Granted, with breeder technology it might last a few centuries, but after Chernobyl I'm a bit wary about claims of safe fission reactors.
No, uranium will not eventually run out just like oil. We have enough uranium to supply our energy needs for 10,000 - 100,000 years. Not even counting reserves - I'm just talking about the leftover depleted uranium already processed and sitting around unused at enrichment plants. Yes, using fast breeder technology. Yes, it was in fact Democrats whom cancelled breeder, reprocessing, and fast reactor research.
As an interesting tidbit, for the amount of money Obama spent of the stimulus package, we could have built ~300 new nuclear reactors and converted the country to 90% nuclear power. Save the coal and natural gas for transportation, we'd have enough to last 1000 years and total energy independence forever.
Amazing how efficient liberals are at wasting money, eh? :)
By that same logic, though, you can flush most of Einsteins work too. We do not posses, nor are we likely to posses in our lifetimes barring alien intervention, the technology to directly test and observe either the General or Special theories of relativity. The math works, its elegant, and is therefore the best explanation people can come up with. String theory tries to tie the quantum aspects together with the space time and forces described by AE. Its only as credible as the information that its based on.
What? Both special and general relativity have been proven over and over again. Special relativity is used on a daily basis for a variety of applications such as GPS, particle accelerators, atomic clocks, etc etc. General relativity has made correct predictions about the orbit of mercury, and gravitational lensing has been directly observed around the sun and distant galaxies. Gravity waves have not yet been directly observed but there is indirect evidence for their existence in the measurements of falling binary stars.
Broken Window Fallacy. If we didn't have to pay a groundskeeper to clean up your litter, we could spend the money on something that produces wealth (e.g. teachers, new roads, etc).
You're right that there is no free market. The solution is not to take away even more freedom to fix the problems caused by government intervention in the first place. One more chain will not set you free.
Harleys have a market that is entirely separate from the rest of the motorcycle market. There are generally no reasons to explain why someone who bought a Harley did so. They just do it because they think HD is "the real thing". It's hilarious to hear a group of them talk about how they much they spent on a big, slow, unreliable bike. The purchases all rest on "the tradition", "the feel", "the prestige", etc... nothing with any basis in reality.
Now, you'll hear them retort today about how reliability is much better than it used to be, and it has gotten better, but it's still nowhere near that of basically any other brand. They are intentionally using an antiquated engine design with 1950s tech and marketing like anything more advanced "ain't shit". I mean, they are still air cooled for goodness sake...
HD is the greatest case of drone marketing in world history. They have a militant user base willing to pay a premium price for a product that is inferior in every quantifiable way. Not only this, but they spend trillions on cheap chinese trinkets just because they carry the logo.
It's not like the premium clothing outlets where the product is better, but not in proportion to the price. It's even greater than that.
Sounds exactly like Bose's corporate strategy as well. Make a crappy cheap product marked up 10,000% and fool people into buying it based on brand name recognition.
I am just waiting for the Office Space CGI remake...
Screw CGI, I want a remake of Office Space in Legos.
Denying reality? Why not ask the democrats, whom had effective filibuster control of both houses of congress since 2000 and full control since 2006. You know that the republicans actively tried to prevent the collapse several times in 2004 and 2006 yet were blocked by democrats, right?
Or, more specifically, ask (D) Barney Frank,:
"Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are not in a crisis situation. The more people in my judgment exaggerate the threat of safety and soundness, the more people conjure up the possibility of serious financial losses to the treasury, which I do not see. I think we see entities that are fundamentally sound financially and withstand some of the disaster scenarios. Even if there were a problem, the federal government does not bail them out. But the more pressure there is, the less we see in terms of affordable housing."
Correct, the most common antiseptic chemical used in soap and hand sanitizers is Benzalkonium chloride.
nuclear plants don't make plutonium. a vanishingly small number of reactor types can make useful (for weapons) plutonium, but those tend to be not so efficient for generating power.
most of the dangerous reactor designs of the past have been designed deliberately to avoid making anything useful. that's the main reason there's so much waste. it was the safest, most efficient design possible with crippling regulations in mind. re-evaluating those regulations with modern designs in mind is essential for nuclear to become safer and far more efficient (think 98% less waste, and what's left is short-lived rather than long-lived fission products).
This is incorrect. Regular light-water reactors indeed do create a significant amount of reactor-grade (i.e. not weapons grade) plutonium. The breeder ratio for a typical LWR is around 0.6. A substantial portion of the fission energy generated comes from plutonium created in the core.
LWR's were not specifically designed to avoid making plutonium, they were designed to make the most economically efficient use of low or naturally enriched uranium. The reason why there is a relatively large volume of spent fuel is because reprocessing was outright banned by the government. France uses the same LWR reactor designs as the U.S. but reprocesses their waste into a much smaller volume.
Hell, kids used to bring guns and ammunition to school for the high school rifle team and no one thought anything of it back then ( 1960's?)
Portland residents will vote Nov. 2 on a proposal to give legal residents who are not U.S. citizens the right to vote in local elections
I'd just like to point out that one of the core founding ideas of your nation was "no taxation without representation".
I'm pretty sure that context only applies to citizens. I don't think the original Boston Tea Partiers intention was to give the British soldiers the right to vote to raise the taxes of the colonists...which is precisely what you are proposing.
No wireless. Less space than a TI. Lame.
Clinton re-instated the ban, and cut off all funding to breeder reactor/IFR research.
30 GW! /Doc Brown
That is 10 times the thermal power of the largest reactors in operation today. Quite an engineering challenge!
Not going to happen in the US. Licensing costs are too expensive to justify anything but the 1600 MWe behemoths using standard fuel cycles with proven technology.
I don't know how many lobbyists Westinghouse has, but I do have an idea of how many engineers they have working to satisfy the NRC's licensing requirements for their own designs. Likewise with Mitsubishi and General Electric.
National Debt % of GDP
1972: 34.5% -
1976: 34.0% |
1980: 32.5% |_ Democrats in charge of spending.
1984: 40.0% |
1988: 51.0% |
1992: 64.9% -
1996: 66.6% |
2000: 57.0% |- Republicans in charge of spending.
2004: 62.2% |
2008: 69.2% -
2009: 86.1% |- Democrats in charge of spending.
2010: 98.1% -
Yes, can we please go back to before Pelosi took office, and make sure she never wields the gavel again? Thanks.
Calculations here: http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/rocket.html
Basically, to just send a probe that flies by without stopping, it is remotely plausible (you would need 60 kg of antimatter for every kg of payload).