This is a joke, right? You must have no sense of how broadly Java is used in the industry. Even if Android were to surpass the iPhone in popularity, all the Android apps put together would be just a drop in the bucket next to the massive, active Java codebase in other sectors.
You're so right, I think IBM hired 2000 odd Java programmers back in the nineties, that would have been a good start. That said I really like C but I think I like Java better and still want to develop my skill in that area.
Not having a union has really worked for us I.T Professionals. Yep we've been able to negotiate higher pays and generally everyone is so much better off by not leveraging a network of people to represent our interests. Of course the corporations that pays us really do have our interests at heart, that's what they are thinking of when they lobby the government.
Of course it's because we are so much smarter and wiser than everyone else in IT that we don't need unions. None of us are brainwashed, we know unions are baaaaaaaaad.
I agree with you. Strapping a set of wheels on a rocket motor is pointless, even though the technical challenges are probably fantastic. In fact, generally speaking, breaking a record just for the sake of being in the Guinness book of records is pointless.
Serco, those guys are just everywhere. The biggest company you've never heard of.
I could understand if the technology they use to achieve the record could be reused some place else, like paving the way to faster high-speed trains for instance, but all they seem to do is apply clever design to make the body as non-lifting as possible, and use big fins to plant the thing firmly on the ground. Nothing earth-shattering, impressive though it may be.
I think this is the first time they have tried putting the jet engine on top of the rocket motor, in a car. The variances in air pressure on the uneven ground may make the research into the control systems that keep the nose on the car worthwhile.
When this started I ended up forgetting my bags often, so now I have a stash of 20+ bags lying in my car...
I have 2-5 polystyrene bags full of these bags 300-400+ - I use them for everything as many times as I can, one day here they won't be free and I can start using all the cloth bags I've bought. I think Belgium is further ahead of the curve than many western countries like my own. A proper re-usable bag here costs a few dollars.
That said, I'm not dissing the idea of a Tsunamis warning from space, just pointing out how difficult it seems to be to get international agreement on anything. For my 2 cents I'd suggest it probably is a good idea - but instead of being a visual hey look up in the sky kinda Tsunami warning, it would carry data that powered alert systems would be able to detect and issue a simple alert, Tsunami intensity and eta.
This would allow local manufacture for local languages and conditions and reduce the cost of the satellite and education required to interpret the message.
One of the most telling stories of the Indian ocean Tsunami was that at a popular tourist resort only a 8 year old girl knew what it meant when all of the water from the beach went out to sea, she yelled and screamed at people to get to high ground immediately and was credited with saving tens of lives. If people don't know what it means when they are confronted with the most imminent warning of a Tsunami when it is in their face how are they going to know what that yellow and red flashing light in the sky means?
This is a problem much more easily solved by placing miniature nuclear power plants on peoples homes to generate electricity for internal lighting. Obviously no one has considered the danger from indoor sunburn from these lamps and a rooftop nuke would be a much more reliable solution that a glorified and much more complicated, sun mirror.
What happens when it's cloudy? Such a stupid idea to use the sun for light during the day as it is *obviously* not as reliable as a rooftop nuke.
All things being equal, a dumb person and a smart person should have similar addiction risks. Perhaps here we're seeing that smarter people are less likely to become addicts, or maybe their intelligence is able to override the addictive drive.
My brother, with a degree in Physics and Telecommunications engineering, smokes like a chimney, about a pack a day. Plus he wears patches and chew the nicotine gum. He is well aware of the damage that he is doing to himself. The problem is (I can't remember the slashdot story I reference here) is that it seems to alleviate the symptoms of schizophrenia he suffers. Unfortunately for him smoking seems to be getting more and more of an anti-social practice and I doubt that help that condition.
I personally can't stand the habit, but I realise that marginalising smokers doesn't help them. Despite the fact that this appears to be based in good science I think that most smokers reaction to this news would be to light up so they can cope with the stress of the news. I would like to see smoking handled as a health issue, with incremental taxes on the products driving the prices higher and directly funding health budgets. Those who can afford it could treat the purchase of cigarettes like a good bottle of scotch and those who cannot can have them prescribed by a doctor.
The chains of habit are too weak to be felt until they are too strong to be broken.
it's not the tobacco since a lot of smart people smoke cigars. it's the extras like uranium, polonium and hundreds of other chemicals that the tobacco companies spray on cigarretes that are really bad for you
I used to joke that cigarettes had vitamin C in them...until I found out they did.
NONE of them should be unprofessional. We give them far too much power to tolerate even the appearance of bad behavior. If you are not truly "One of the City's Finest," then you need to be out of the uniform.
Speaking as a father, the bad guys in this story are the officers on the scene. How they could think it was OK to use those photos for their own sick little joke on Halloween is beyond me. How they could think they had the authority to release those photos to the public at large is beyond me. Has law enforcement become so craven in this country they don't understand what we mean by "respect for the dead?"
In one way it just demonstrates we still have a long way to go before we can expect *all* police to be professional, some are, some aren't.
neither Senna nor Ratzenberger were killed because anything related to active suspension, but a case of bad luck.
Anything that contributed to less control of the vehicle is not bad luck, it's less control of the vehicle.
F1 is today as technosavvy as always, it's only it's pointing technology to different objectives -which, while disputable if on purpouse or not, are much more aligned with mass production cars than ever.
I prepared to accept your argument but can you give me some examples where F1 developments Post 1994 are in common mass produced production cars. I want F1 to be making technology for the road, not just the track.
One of the main points of F1 is to advance car Technology (it's why disc brakes were invented) and whilst I still enjoy the racing the point of it was destroyed by the death of Ayrton Senna back in 1994.
What the wiki doesn't say (but I remember) is Senna complained that the removal of active suspension from the vehicles might get someone killed. What happened was two drivers were killed Senna and Roland Ratzenberger.
So as cool as this all is it's not as advanced as it should be. Those cars racing around out on the track had a job beyond racing to make automotive technology as advanced as it can be. I wonder how many lives off the track have been lost because F1 does not do this job anymore.
Publishing and Broadcasting Limited was the Packer company.It was formed in the 90's from 2 Packer companies Australian Consolidated Press and Channel Nine.
Yes you are right, I had a busy day and didn't have time to correct it myself. Thanks for pointing that out.
Back in the day, when Murdoch started in Australia, his commercial rival was Kerry Packer. Both of them lobbied hard to have media cross ownership laws broken down so they eventually ended up owning most of the Australian media outlets (newspapers and such like). Murdoch left Australia, where his base company Publishing and Broadcast Limited was formed after establishing a strong commercial base with Fox in the US. Murdoch is grooming his son to take over, and he seems even scarier than dad.
Meanwhile, back in Au, Packer died and his son took over who ended up selling off his Broadcast and Publishing businesses to get into Casinos.
The void left behind is utterly bland, and the media cross ownership laws left behind have just allowed companies interested in asset stripping to come in and, well, do what they do.
The only interesting media is Publicly owned, and I hope the BBC will reverse their decision to back away from internet media. It's that kind of thinking that is the future. It's probably time for these old commercial medias to die off anyway having seen what they look like when they die. The irony in all this was to watch the public broadcasters point out that some PBL papers were plagiarising peoples weblogs at the very time Murdoch was talking of paywalls. If they can't develop original content, people will see it's crap, Faux looses advertising revenue and Murdoch just put another nail in commercial media's coffin.
It will be interesting to watch this comedy play out.
Merely that it is the best option available.
You have in no way established that any of the alternatives are safer,less polluting,cheaper or more practical.
Nuclear is comparable to coal with a different set of externalities. Wall Street doesn't like nuclear because its a risky investment, investors don't like that sort of risk, solar and wind are way ahead simply because the return on investment is much better than nuclear, i.e. Solar and wind satisfies the criteria that makes an investment "economically viable" nuclear power is only "economically viable" with substantial regulatory support.
The breakdown of U.S energy research and development reported by the US DOE is roughly 60% for nuclear, 25% to fossil fuels and 15% to SUSTAINABLE energy sources. The reality is that nuclear power has very high energetic inputs to process the ore, reprocessing and enrichment that comes from fossil feuls (2*1Gw coal plants for Paducah) which haven't been replaced. They rely on heavy carbon inputs for the concrete for the reactor containment, have energetic input subsequent to the end of the operational lifespan of the reactor, have higher energetic requirements for demolision, higher energetic input for logistic management (like transfer of the "waste" outputs).
In comparison solar, wind, wave and geo-thermal have initial carbon inputs(today) but offset carbon while they operate, do not continue to require energetic inputs at the end of their operational lifespan and do not require additional energetic inputs for demolition. Wind, in particular, scales very well.
We call these fuel.
You've read some of my criticisms of the Nuclear Industry may be surprised to find that I actually support the development of a reactor that addresses the issue of 70,000 tons of Pu-239 (and much more U-238) currently stored in reactor sites around America, simply because it's irresponsible for our generation to foist these issue onto later generations.
One of the core reasons I support the development of such a reactor because it is capable of utilising weapons grade plutonium as fuel creating an impetus for disarmament and, hopefully, slowly defusing the asymmetrical weapons threat.
Unfortunately, because there is no geologically sound Nuclear waste dump in operation it's totally inappropriate to discuss building a new reactor facility until a proper containment facility is available. As discussed Yucca mountain is not a suitable site because it is made of pumice and geologically active evidenced by recent aftershocks of 5.6 within ten miles of a repository that is supposed to be geologically stable for at least 500000 years. The DOE's own 1982 Nuclear Waste policy Act reported that Yucca Mountain's geology is inappropriate to contain nuclear waste, and long term corrosion data on C22 (the material to contain the Pu-239 and mitigate the ingress of water - yet another Yucca problem) is just not available.
We need something made of granite. The only human made structure with the potential to last 10000 years is Mt Rushmore, so it has to be an engineering project of that scale, because the logistical problems of transferring the 70000 odd tons of Pu239 to the spent fuel containment facility are so involved that you want to get it right the first time and only do it once.
Even doing that will probably take 30 years to complete, but the
Nuclear reactors which burn nuclear waste as fuel will do nothing to resolve the problem of dealing with nuclear waste?
That's an interesting conclusion.
Did you actually bother to read the information posted? If so please describe how this technology will address transuranics, pu-239, u-235, mine tailings, waste cooling water and a plethora of other non-fissile waste left behind by the Nuclear Industry.
Are you prepared to critically evaluate the Nuclear Industry based on actual information and reason in comparison to other sources of power rather than in a vacuum?
I already have. If you can't tell from the amount of actual information I provided, I'll inform you that it is the beginning of my debate - where are your *facts*. So before you send your predicable response, I'd suggest you read my response to it before you bother wasting anymore of my time, fanboi.
Hm. I think the two examples you gave mostly substantiate my understanding of the problem with the anti-nuclear mentality.
You say of them 'No proof is possible that it is safe' whereas your approach is 'No proof is necessary that it is safe'. It appears you both are afflicted with that mentality yourselves.
"...even after they were informed of the right answer, they still didn't change their opinions..."
Ok lets test the theory on you.
This is the crux. Despite revised knowledge, there's some kind of emotional resistance to nuclear.
This article describes the state of Nuclear waste around the world. This situation is unresolved and this technology will do nothing to resolve it. Did you know this or does this "revised knowledge" you now poses allow you to continue to justify your presumptions?
You may be tempted to refer to "Yucca Mountain" so please refer to studies of the Yucca mountain hydrology that revealed that the passage cl-36 from atmospheric nuclear testing took less than 50 years in ground water through Yucca mountain and that the DOE's own 1982 Nuclear Waste policy Act reported that the Yucca Mountain's geology is "inappropriate to contain nuclear waste".
Given the scientific and Governmental sources of information I've refered to do you categorised them as "emotional resistance to nuclear", because they look a lot like real reasons to me.
The emotional resistance started as fear of catastrophe which was not undone by learning different. The fear remained regardless of knowledge change.
A "Licencee Event Report" (LER) is submitted for issues above a safety significance threshold. For example at Davis-Besse, the frequency of the replacement water filters was out of spec. It should have signaled that something is going wrong in the reactor. This is the type of event that should be signaled as a LER even if it seems insignificant. At the Davis Besse plant I believe that it led to criminal charges as management allowed the plant to operate outside of it's "Basis Design" which is a known operational characteristic of the plant. Filter replacement intervals had been defined and were known about and thus should have characterised the plant as "not operating safely". I'm not sure if the criminal charges were placed because management should have reported several LERs instead of inspectors finding a hole in the reactor head when it was shutdown.
Whilst this issue was resolved, it shouldn't have even occurred. There are questions regarding the operational safety of Vermont Yankee and Palo Verde so it's a current issue.
Nothing has changed this knowledge. So now that your knowledge has changed and you know Nuclear Industry near misses are not uncommon. These facts illustrate that "emotional resistance started as fear of catastrophe" can be "actual caution based on a continued analysis of operational procedure" even if most people don't have the expertise to analyse them.
Do you poses that expertise? Has your "lack of concern" been maintained now that your knowledge has changed?
Emotions don't necessarily respond to logic/information. (Which you see in every online debate.)
A Nuclear industry panel (Westinghouse, General Electric, Bechtel, Sargent & Lundy,
The anti-nuclear group will always come up with something to deter nuclear plants from taking off.
I guess that's "anti-nuclear' but in terms of Responsible Nuclear Advocacy the question of interest is how the process handles Transuranics, which I believe is what plutonium-239 is, and Uranium-238 both of which we have in abundance. I don't think it's an unreasonable premise to want to have these materials handled properly. Besides with a better containment plan and materials technologies wouldn't it be better to utilise the energy from these materials?
I think that claim in the summary that the process will reduce "atomic waste by up to 99 percent!" is disingenuous as I saw nothing in the article detailing how it the process deals with lower level waste, like mine tailings and cooling water, which we have in greater abundance. These are infrastructure issues un-handled by the Nuclear Industry and I don't think it's unreasonable to want a solution to these issues.
Several people have suggested using this approach - but it will not work. The data has to be made 7 bit safe so the pipe has to include uuencode and uudecode. So if your commands are modified thus
Transmit;
tar cf -/home | uuencode >/dev/serialdevice0
Receive;
cat/dev/ttyS0 | uudecode | tar xpf -
to unpack the data it should be ok. "tar" is not 7 bit safe so it will *not* prepare the data for transport over a serial link. However if you are going to do this you will more than likely have to use the stty command as so
stty line characteristics >/dev/tty1A
to set the serial characteristics of the line for the serial link to work properly. SCO nomenclature for serial ports were/dev/tty1A for COM1 and tty2A for COM2 with a modem or the/dev/tty1a (/dev/tty2a) for a serial cable without a modem. Using the uppercase variant (from memory - so check) was hardware flow control over serial. I'd only use hardware handshaking to move this amount of data as it will have a hard time keeping up on a system this old and XON/XOFF just won't cut it. The weakest link is the old system.
However tar is not a good candidate for moving this amount of data on a system this old because as soon as the transmission drops out *for any reason* you won't know where from in the archive you were. If you want to use this method to transfer the data consider creating a file list on the XENIX box first and using
cpio
. If the transfer fails for some reason then you can delete the file list up to the point where the transfer failed and then continue, with tar you will have to start again.
Some have suggested using UUCP and really this is the best option as it will manage the transfer of the files and checksum each one to ensure the receipt but it is understandable why you wouldn't set up UUCP as it is a bit of pain, but worth it when complete.
Brings back memories of supporting SCO systems - good luck
Slashdot Mirror
You're so right, I think IBM hired 2000 odd Java programmers back in the nineties, that would have been a good start. That said I really like C but I think I like Java better and still want to develop my skill in that area.
and use it to boil the water out of the sub - hey presto it raises itself to the surface. Those sub reators are uber-reliable it probably still works.
Not having a union has really worked for us I.T Professionals. Yep we've been able to negotiate higher pays and generally everyone is so much better off by not leveraging a network of people to represent our interests. Of course the corporations that pays us really do have our interests at heart, that's what they are thinking of when they lobby the government.
How can any of this be happening to us.
Of course it's because we are so much smarter and wiser than everyone else in IT that we don't need unions. None of us are brainwashed, we know unions are baaaaaaaaad.
baaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
Serco, those guys are just everywhere. The biggest company you've never heard of.
I think this is the first time they have tried putting the jet engine on top of the rocket motor, in a car. The variances in air pressure on the uneven ground may make the research into the control systems that keep the nose on the car worthwhile.
Just sayin.
I have 2-5 polystyrene bags full of these bags 300-400+ - I use them for everything as many times as I can, one day here they won't be free and I can start using all the cloth bags I've bought. I think Belgium is further ahead of the curve than many western countries like my own. A proper re-usable bag here costs a few dollars.
That said, I'm not dissing the idea of a Tsunamis warning from space, just pointing out how difficult it seems to be to get international agreement on anything. For my 2 cents I'd suggest it probably is a good idea - but instead of being a visual hey look up in the sky kinda Tsunami warning, it would carry data that powered alert systems would be able to detect and issue a simple alert, Tsunami intensity and eta.
This would allow local manufacture for local languages and conditions and reduce the cost of the satellite and education required to interpret the message.
One of the most telling stories of the Indian ocean Tsunami was that at a popular tourist resort only a 8 year old girl knew what it meant when all of the water from the beach went out to sea, she yelled and screamed at people to get to high ground immediately and was credited with saving tens of lives. If people don't know what it means when they are confronted with the most imminent warning of a Tsunami when it is in their face how are they going to know what that yellow and red flashing light in the sky means?
This is a problem much more easily solved by placing miniature nuclear power plants on peoples homes to generate electricity for internal lighting. Obviously no one has considered the danger from indoor sunburn from these lamps and a rooftop nuke would be a much more reliable solution that a glorified and much more complicated, sun mirror.
What happens when it's cloudy? Such a stupid idea to use the sun for light during the day as it is *obviously* not as reliable as a rooftop nuke.
My brother, with a degree in Physics and Telecommunications engineering, smokes like a chimney, about a pack a day. Plus he wears patches and chew the nicotine gum. He is well aware of the damage that he is doing to himself. The problem is (I can't remember the slashdot story I reference here) is that it seems to alleviate the symptoms of schizophrenia he suffers. Unfortunately for him smoking seems to be getting more and more of an anti-social practice and I doubt that help that condition.
I personally can't stand the habit, but I realise that marginalising smokers doesn't help them. Despite the fact that this appears to be based in good science I think that most smokers reaction to this news would be to light up so they can cope with the stress of the news. I would like to see smoking handled as a health issue, with incremental taxes on the products driving the prices higher and directly funding health budgets. Those who can afford it could treat the purchase of cigarettes like a good bottle of scotch and those who cannot can have them prescribed by a doctor.
The chains of habit are too weak to be felt until they are too strong to be broken.
I used to joke that cigarettes had vitamin C in them...until I found out they did.
I saw the same thing, looked like a great way of getting sunlight into parts of the home that it was difficult to.
50 years after the world stops using plastic shopping bags, this idea will become feasible.
So true.
In one way it just demonstrates we still have a long way to go before we can expect *all* police to be professional, some are, some aren't.
legalities and ethical issues aside...
when, the fuck, are people going to learn to use encryption for important stuff. I mean, seriously, it's not *that* hard.
Anything that contributed to less control of the vehicle is not bad luck, it's less control of the vehicle.
I prepared to accept your argument but can you give me some examples where F1 developments Post 1994 are in common mass produced production cars. I want F1 to be making technology for the road, not just the track.
What the wiki doesn't say (but I remember) is Senna complained that the removal of active suspension from the vehicles might get someone killed. What happened was two drivers were killed Senna and Roland Ratzenberger.
So as cool as this all is it's not as advanced as it should be. Those cars racing around out on the track had a job beyond racing to make automotive technology as advanced as it can be. I wonder how many lives off the track have been lost because F1 does not do this job anymore.
Yes you are right, I had a busy day and didn't have time to correct it myself. Thanks for pointing that out.
Media consolidation is certainly a scary thing.
Back in the day, when Murdoch started in Australia, his commercial rival was Kerry Packer. Both of them lobbied hard to have media cross ownership laws broken down so they eventually ended up owning most of the Australian media outlets (newspapers and such like). Murdoch left Australia, where his base company Publishing and Broadcast Limited was formed after establishing a strong commercial base with Fox in the US. Murdoch is grooming his son to take over, and he seems even scarier than dad.
Meanwhile, back in Au, Packer died and his son took over who ended up selling off his Broadcast and Publishing businesses to get into Casinos.
The void left behind is utterly bland, and the media cross ownership laws left behind have just allowed companies interested in asset stripping to come in and, well, do what they do.
The only interesting media is Publicly owned, and I hope the BBC will reverse their decision to back away from internet media. It's that kind of thinking that is the future. It's probably time for these old commercial medias to die off anyway having seen what they look like when they die. The irony in all this was to watch the public broadcasters point out that some PBL papers were plagiarising peoples weblogs at the very time Murdoch was talking of paywalls. If they can't develop original content, people will see it's crap, Faux looses advertising revenue and Murdoch just put another nail in commercial media's coffin.
It will be interesting to watch this comedy play out.
Maybe they are the world's knight in shining armor come to save the world from censorship and DRM and stop government from spying and stuff.
Hey come on, it might happen.
Dammit, broken link, this is the paper.
Ok, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Read this paper from two scientists from the nuclear industry who have specialisation on energy system analysis and made their study based on U.S Department of Energy standards for measuring energy use in heavy industry
Nuclear is comparable to coal with a different set of externalities. Wall Street doesn't like nuclear because its a risky investment, investors don't like that sort of risk, solar and wind are way ahead simply because the return on investment is much better than nuclear, i.e. Solar and wind satisfies the criteria that makes an investment "economically viable" nuclear power is only "economically viable" with substantial regulatory support.
The breakdown of U.S energy research and development reported by the US DOE is roughly 60% for nuclear, 25% to fossil fuels and 15% to SUSTAINABLE energy sources. The reality is that nuclear power has very high energetic inputs to process the ore, reprocessing and enrichment that comes from fossil feuls (2*1Gw coal plants for Paducah) which haven't been replaced. They rely on heavy carbon inputs for the concrete for the reactor containment, have energetic input subsequent to the end of the operational lifespan of the reactor, have higher energetic requirements for demolision, higher energetic input for logistic management (like transfer of the "waste" outputs).
In comparison solar, wind, wave and geo-thermal have initial carbon inputs(today) but offset carbon while they operate, do not continue to require energetic inputs at the end of their operational lifespan and do not require additional energetic inputs for demolition. Wind, in particular, scales very well.
You've read some of my criticisms of the Nuclear Industry may be surprised to find that I actually support the development of a reactor that addresses the issue of 70,000 tons of Pu-239 (and much more U-238) currently stored in reactor sites around America, simply because it's irresponsible for our generation to foist these issue onto later generations.
One of the core reasons I support the development of such a reactor because it is capable of utilising weapons grade plutonium as fuel creating an impetus for disarmament and, hopefully, slowly defusing the asymmetrical weapons threat.
Unfortunately, because there is no geologically sound Nuclear waste dump in operation it's totally inappropriate to discuss building a new reactor facility until a proper containment facility is available. As discussed Yucca mountain is not a suitable site because it is made of pumice and geologically active evidenced by recent aftershocks of 5.6 within ten miles of a repository that is supposed to be geologically stable for at least 500000 years. The DOE's own 1982 Nuclear Waste policy Act reported that Yucca Mountain's geology is inappropriate to contain nuclear waste, and long term corrosion data on C22 (the material to contain the Pu-239 and mitigate the ingress of water - yet another Yucca problem) is just not available.
We need something made of granite. The only human made structure with the potential to last 10000 years is Mt Rushmore, so it has to be an engineering project of that scale, because the logistical problems of transferring the 70000 odd tons of Pu239 to the spent fuel containment facility are so involved that you want to get it right the first time and only do it once.
Even doing that will probably take 30 years to complete, but the
Did you actually bother to read the information posted? If so please describe how this technology will address transuranics, pu-239, u-235, mine tailings, waste cooling water and a plethora of other non-fissile waste left behind by the Nuclear Industry.
I already have. If you can't tell from the amount of actual information I provided, I'll inform you that it is the beginning of my debate - where are your *facts*. So before you send your predicable response, I'd suggest you read my response to it before you bother wasting anymore of my time, fanboi.
How else am I going to bug my bosses office?
You say of them 'No proof is possible that it is safe' whereas your approach is 'No proof is necessary that it is safe'. It appears you both are afflicted with that mentality yourselves.
Ok lets test the theory on you.
This article describes the state of Nuclear waste around the world. This situation is unresolved and this technology will do nothing to resolve it. Did you know this or does this "revised knowledge" you now poses allow you to continue to justify your presumptions?
You may be tempted to refer to "Yucca Mountain" so please refer to studies of the Yucca mountain hydrology that revealed that the passage cl-36 from atmospheric nuclear testing took less than 50 years in ground water through Yucca mountain and that the DOE's own 1982 Nuclear Waste policy Act reported that the Yucca Mountain's geology is "inappropriate to contain nuclear waste". Given the scientific and Governmental sources of information I've refered to do you categorised them as "emotional resistance to nuclear", because they look a lot like real reasons to me.
A "Licencee Event Report" (LER) is submitted for issues above a safety significance threshold. For example at Davis-Besse, the frequency of the replacement water filters was out of spec. It should have signaled that something is going wrong in the reactor. This is the type of event that should be signaled as a LER even if it seems insignificant. At the Davis Besse plant I believe that it led to criminal charges as management allowed the plant to operate outside of it's "Basis Design" which is a known operational characteristic of the plant. Filter replacement intervals had been defined and were known about and thus should have characterised the plant as "not operating safely". I'm not sure if the criminal charges were placed because management should have reported several LERs instead of inspectors finding a hole in the reactor head when it was shutdown.
Whilst this issue was resolved, it shouldn't have even occurred. There are questions regarding the operational safety of Vermont Yankee and Palo Verde so it's a current issue.
Nothing has changed this knowledge. So now that your knowledge has changed and you know Nuclear Industry near misses are not uncommon. These facts illustrate that "emotional resistance started as fear of catastrophe" can be "actual caution based on a continued analysis of operational procedure" even if most people don't have the expertise to analyse them.
Do you poses that expertise? Has your "lack of concern" been maintained now that your knowledge has changed?
A Nuclear industry panel (Westinghouse, General Electric, Bechtel, Sargent & Lundy,
I guess that's "anti-nuclear' but in terms of Responsible Nuclear Advocacy the question of interest is how the process handles Transuranics, which I believe is what plutonium-239 is, and Uranium-238 both of which we have in abundance. I don't think it's an unreasonable premise to want to have these materials handled properly. Besides with a better containment plan and materials technologies wouldn't it be better to utilise the energy from these materials?
I think that claim in the summary that the process will reduce "atomic waste by up to 99 percent!" is disingenuous as I saw nothing in the article detailing how it the process deals with lower level waste, like mine tailings and cooling water, which we have in greater abundance. These are infrastructure issues un-handled by the Nuclear Industry and I don't think it's unreasonable to want a solution to these issues.
Several people have suggested using this approach - but it will not work. The data has to be made 7 bit safe so the pipe has to include uuencode and uudecode. So if your commands are modified thus
Transmit;
Receive;
to unpack the data it should be ok. "tar" is not 7 bit safe so it will *not* prepare the data for transport over a serial link. However if you are going to do this you will more than likely have to use the stty command as so
to set the serial characteristics of the line for the serial link to work properly. SCO nomenclature for serial ports were /dev/tty1A for COM1 and tty2A for COM2 with a modem or the /dev/tty1a (/dev/tty2a) for a serial cable without a modem. Using the uppercase variant (from memory - so check) was hardware flow control over serial. I'd only use hardware handshaking to move this amount of data as it will have a hard time keeping up on a system this old and XON/XOFF just won't cut it. The weakest link is the old system.
However tar is not a good candidate for moving this amount of data on a system this old because as soon as the transmission drops out *for any reason* you won't know where from in the archive you were. If you want to use this method to transfer the data consider creating a file list on the XENIX box first and using
. If the transfer fails for some reason then you can delete the file list up to the point where the transfer failed and then continue, with tar you will have to start again.
Some have suggested using UUCP and really this is the best option as it will manage the transfer of the files and checksum each one to ensure the receipt but it is understandable why you wouldn't set up UUCP as it is a bit of pain, but worth it when complete.
Brings back memories of supporting SCO systems - good luck