"Xenolon killed those facts pretty quickly." Really?!
I stated that the artist gets 3 cents per iTune sale and that Apple got 50 cents
.
Xelolon,(spuriously?) claimed that Apple ONLY got 34 cents (NOT 50 cents). Which means Apple gets over 1100 percent more than the artists. Again Apple uses these artists to sell the iPod which makes billions for Apple (no artists = no music = no Ipod = no Apple.)
Blaming the victim - again and again and again and again!
Yes you are right.. all musicians are absolutely stupid, ignorant, jerk-offs who deserve everything they don't get.
Talking about accuracy - you might want to read up on a little history about artists and the creeps running the music industry. For example, Bob Marley, one of the kingpins in the industry did not get one red cent from the record company who sold billions of Marley's albums.
"Spurious"! Wow. Let me get my dictionary. Spurious:
"spurious |spyors| |sp(j)ris| |spjuris| |spjrs| adjective not being what it purports to be; false or fake : separating authentic and spurious claims.
(of a line of reasoning) apparently but not actually valid : this spurious reasoning results in nonsense."
"Disguise them as facts". Facts? My comments are my comments.
Where's my info coming from? I have likely read 200 to 300 articles on money and iTunes and iPods. Likely my figures came from Pogue or was it The Woz or was it Cringley - probably Cringely. Did I make them up..... no.
Talking about spurious - quoting Time as a source of reliable information......Ha Ha Ha. Get me Apple's internal financial statements... if you are serious about accuracy.
Notice... everyone knows Apple uses iTunes to sell iPods. Notice.... Apple is riding on the back of musical artists in order to sell billions and billions of dollars of Ipods - which in turn drove Apple's stock up... and the artists got absolutely zero out of those billions...So in the end Apple has made a lot, lot, lot, lot more than 50 cents per tune
Your comments about Apple are absolutely correct: "They're certainly not the kings of interoperability". I couldn't agree with you more; because, that's really what I am talking about here.
Common?! What is common - is that in the USA (and Canada too) - the Politicians (and their civil servants) are simply puppets of the Blue Chip Boys (and Girls too now). The Blue Chip Boys and Girls' (the unelected, the self selected, self appointed billionaire Elite) daily mantra is to screw the consumer - and has their Politician/Puppets produce any, all laws/regulations to make sure the consumer continues to be screwed.
You seem to favout the notion that whatever the Elite want - the Elite get - and screw everyone else
Fortunately, some European countries are several thousand years old, and have matured enough to realize that one doesn't need to constantly screw the consumer - in order for themselves not to be screwed
Interoperability doesn't exist in Apple's vocabulary - while MONOPOLY does exist in Apple's vocab in spades. And it's not about money (Apple is now worth $ 60,777,591,440 - that's 60 billion plus!).
It's not about the artists ( who get 3 cents for every tune sold on iTune, while Apple gets 50 cents for every tune sold - lets see Apple makes approximately 16 times what the artist makes - and how many hours did Apple spend writing the songs and then sitting in a studio.....).
It's all about control freaks. Apple is still NOT interoperable even when it comes to MEPG-4 video.
Apple could be turned around in a week - if and when all the "iAddicts" started complaining
Does anyone here not know that there is a back door built into XP so that Bush and the boys can(have?) access every file on your computer. Of course they also have all your key strokes and email and all the web sites you visit. And Apple hasn't done the same?
Syndicated journalist, Molli Ivins, states there is no such thing as left or right (or centrist) - that what one needs to do with any issue - is to find out who is getting SCREWED and who is doing the SCREWING.
At any given moment, anyone of any political stripe will more often then not SCREW anyone - even someone with the same political stripe - if there is enough power and money as a reward
Naturally using "left and right" spinning is used to create a smoke screen - to help hide what is actually happening - to "divide and conquer". Traditionally the British have used "divide and conquer" to SCREW people all over the world for the past several hundred years (at least)
Ever time I see (or hear) the words "left" and "right" - I cringe. At the same time - it's a useful flag to know the TV program or newspaper article or radio program is about to unload a truck load of bullshit.
Designing Software For Usability-Anyone Doing It?
on
Ubuntu 6.06 Reviewed
·
· Score: 0
Been reading all the banter here about whether or not it's easy to install Ubuntu. Although I am an ancient Mac user (the SE) and although I installed Debian on an IBM iSeries laptop first time round by accident - must have been first time luck since I know 0 about....
I did try running the Live CD as well as installing Ubuntu 5.04 on both Mac and IBMs and... no go. Yup I am one of those "grandmothers" - actually a grandfather.
What amazes me - is the lack of understanding of the notion of "USABILITY" when it comes to designing almost anything in the Western World. Whether it's town planning, and public building, a car, web sites or.... software.
One would think that in the case of Ubuntu 6 - that someone who specializes in USABILITY would have been part of the team - or do none exist in the world of software? Which would not be too surprising; because, in the case of town planning there is only one specialist in planning public open space on this planet - the Dane Jan Gehl
Even though I have spent untold $1000s to buy software primarily to compress video for web uses - I am tired (growing old ) that I need to read 7000 web sites to figure out how to produce the best compressed video results. What's even worse is to hear from "compression experts" on those sites - saying that that's the way the software needs to be (to keep the "experts employed"?). On Doom9's forums two employees from Microsoft are there trying to tell readers how to get quality out of VC1. Which demonstrates how UNUSABLE Microsoft software is.
No your aren't a troll - your just being honest - truthful.
Three cheeers for you.
The Self Appointed Elite - the rich - running the USA, Canada and other countries will never give up the control on the flow of information/censorship. The web is the last bastion to conquer for these Elites. As we all know these Elites listen to every phone call - read every email, pick up every key stroke from our keyboards.
There are so many brain washed and/or paid apologists here in this forum and other places on the web - whose main role is to dumb down/censor any viewpoints that don't fit the status quo established by these Elite . Good to hear that you aren't afraid - refused to be dumbed down.
The USA Elite's puppets on the Supreme Court earned their dog biscuits today. "Sit Fido" - "gooood dog". Lets see the "score" so far:
a) La Plume is outed by Puppet #1 (Bush) - from her C.I.A. job because Hubby tells world Saddam no got the goodies to make the Big Bomb. Puppet #1 (Bush) didn't like "looking" like a liar. Plume's Hubby didn't self-censor.
b) USA Elite's puppets are now listening to all phone calls in the USA, reading all emails in the USA - will citzens start to self-censor themselves - you bet. Elites would love to find the federal employee who outed Puppet #1 (Bush) on the above - a one way CIA helicopter ride 200 foot over ocean?
All the major media New York Times et al - how does one spell self censor?
There are several problems with your logic or is it your lack of logic in your notion of trying to explain that social censorship is something different from censorship (like being partly pregnant?):
There are no "free: countries on this planet. Each and every country is run by the self appointed elite - the rich. Included in the latter are the U.S.A., Mainland China, Cuba, Iran and on and on.
The elite and their puppets (the politicians, the police, the army, schools, civil servants, citizen spies, churches etc.) ensure that the party line - the rules of the game are followed (as defined by the self appointed elite). Naturally what to believe is a big part of the control/censorship game .
Now the approach that the elite and their puppets use - to ensure that their rules are followed - is to use censorship (in order to control info and the population) - the censorship can be subtle or not so subtle.
Typically a subtle approach is used at first; but then becomes less and less subtle. For example, all newspaper editors may not issue written instructions to reporters on what and how to report (censorship) - but reporters know exactly what is expected - and self censor themselves (they have two mortgages, private schools for the kids, two country club memberships, the SUV payments etc.). Naturally the elite own the newspapers and TV networks etc. (and the internet soon? - they keep trying.)
Later on not so subtle approaches are used - like being thrown out of a C.I.A. helicopter 200 feet above the ocean. Or in China (aside from Google becoming a puppet to the elite in China) for the past 60 years at least, have used citizens spies to turn in other citizens. In short order - the person who didn't follow the censorship dictates - in put in prison, tortured, his or her organs harvested and sold for organ transplants in the U.S.A. and then shot.
Now you are just kidding yourself if you think that - what you believe - just came out of thin air. So no - the system has obviously done a great job - to ensure that the status quo counts and has to be protected. And that is obvious on Slash (hmm interest symbolism in the name/word Slash)
There is a subtle form/efforts of censorship here in these Slashdot discussion forums. How? By the scoring of comments made. Yes it's subtle but likely does dissuade some readers from reading a post that is scored zero.
It's obvious that if anyone challenges the "status quo" here - there is an instant challenge by one or more readers - or by negatively branding a comment with a zero score. At the same time those who give zero scores do not have to prove the "status quo" is true/valid and so on - which of course is a double standard.
The above applies in spades to any subject to do with so-called "religion", so-called "HIV=AIDS", so-called "Global Warming Caused By People" or UNUSABLE web pages/sites that are "glorified marginally animated magazine pages"
Unfortunately the world seems all about money and those who NEED power/control over others. And the whole notion of "ozone layer" size is another example of spinning for monetary/control purposes.
The notion of "CFCs/Hole In The Ozone" issue has as much merit as another notion "must drink 8 glasses of water a day to be healthy - and coffee and soup doesn't count" - nonsense.
The two above notions are simply that - notions! Neither has been proven to be true via the scientific method. Which is what science is all about - scientific research carried out via the scientific method.
Re: "easy". That was the $64,000 question I asking about. For someone who is an expert (like So Sue Me Jon) - could it be done? I would invest in a software venture that did it.
XFree86 was available for the Macintosh platform long before the release of Mac OS X. Various flavors existed for MkLinux, LinuxPPC, and FreeBSD for the Macintosh. Although the underlying core architecture of Mac OS X, the Darwin kernel, is FreeBSD based, no X Window server was provided.
Apple mentioned how "easy" is was to port Apple software over to Intel (or was it apple/intel?) - they said they have been doing it for 5 years. Again, I just wondering out loud how difficult/easy it would be to run OS x software on BSD? Where's Jon (So Sue Me ) when "we" need him;)
Since Apple Tiger "is" FreeBSD. How complicated is it to make Apple OS X software function on BSD?
I can buy a dual core CPU Intel 4.1 mhz computer for $500. I would love to switch to BSD running on the latter computer.
Dr. John Gofman - worked on the Atomic Bomb's Manhatten Project - and now is the one of the world's foremost experts on health/illness related to the nuclear industry:
THE TOP 10 PRONUCLEAR ARGUMENTS... ANSWERED
ARGUMENT 1: We receive more radiation sitting in our living rooms than is given off by nuclear power plants. A brick wall puts out 3.5 millirems of radiation per year but a nuclear power plant releases only 0.3 millirem in the same time period. In fact you can stand right next to a nuclear power plant and receive no radiation at all.
GOFMAN: First let me agree that certain building materials do give off enough radiation doses to deserve consideration. Let me also agree that there is a very low dose of radiation emitted at the fenceline of a nuclear power plant that is functioning normally. If this were not the case, workers couldn't park their cars nearby or even approach such utilities at all.
However, the "no dose at fenceline" statement doesn't consider the radiation people can receive from the entire nuclear power fuel cycle. We need to take into account all of the steps that make up the atomic energy process including the production of mountains of uranium tailings (unshielded piles that are continuously releasing radioactive radon)... the inventory of radioactive poisons - such as cesium 137 strontium 90 and iodine 131 - that "leak" or "puff" into the atmosphere when a power plant is not functioning normally... the quantities of radioactive wastes being moved in fallible vehicles that can (and do) leak... and the so-called burial sites which have also been shown to leak and spread their material into the environment at large.
Now let's come to the claim that a nuclear power plant itself releases only 3/10 of a millirem per year. Were that radiation dose - coupled of course with other fuel cycle emissions - truly always so small I would hardly waste my time concerning myself with the hazards of nuclear power. But the proof that advocates of this energy source have no confidence whatsoever in their estimate of the plants' releases lies in their behavior with respect to the legal radiation standards.
As late as 1979, nuclear power plants were, legally, allowed to bombard the public with 170 millirems per year. When my colleague Arthur Tamplin and I proposed a tenfold reduction in that standard, the nuclear industry and pronuclear government agencies fought us tooth and nail. Now it has to be regarded as the acme of strange behavior for an industry to say, "Look, we're never going to give you more than 3/10 of a millirem per year"... and then demand that the permissible standard remain more than 500 times as high as that limit! So I would say that as long as the industry fights against reducing legal standards to a level comparable to the 3/10 millirem per year that nuclear power advocates claim is the maximum dose per plant, any member of the public can dismiss such ludicrously low estimates.
(The legal standard was changed in 1979. It now permits 25 millirems per year of ionizing radiation to be passed on to the general public, under normal operating conditions! The Catch-22 here is that if anything occurs to make the operating conditions "abnormal", a nuclear facility is permitted to release an increased - and unrestricted - quantity of radiation.)
ARGUMENT 2: People living in high altitude cities, such as Denver, receive twice as much natural radiation as do those living at low altitudes... yet the residents of such cosmically bombarded locales don't display double the average incidence of cancer.
GOFMAN: The answer to this favorite pronuclear argument is that the cosmic radiation hitting the people in Denver probably does cause an increase in the number of cancer cases per capita. (One should not expect to find twice as many cases of cancer, of course, because radiation is not the only cause of the disease.) But to statistically demonstrate such a reality, we would first have to know [
a) There is no scientific proof that we Little Ants are causing so-called climate change.
b) Is there an abmormal climate change going on - or just a normal cycle that this planet has been going through forever?
c) The people running around - shouting aloud - about how we Little Ants are causing climate change - are the same people who can't get a ninety day weather forecast right. These folks are "right" 50% of the time - like flipping a coin.
d) While these folk run around yaking about climate change - real damage to our health is happening. So instead of talking about how micro particulates from SUVs, Coal Burning Power Plants, deisel trucks, deisel trains, etc. etc are killing people - we talk about how we Little Ants will/can change the universe. Dumb and Dumber
Fortunately there are competitors coming along - the artist makes 60% of the retail online price on one new site. 7 cents - give me (and artists ) a break!
Re:Do You Have To Be A Crook To Be In Business?
on
On Apple vs Apple
·
· Score: 0
Xerox received Apple stock in exchange for showing Apple the details of its GUI.
No - Apple took Microsoft to court over "Apple's" GUI. Xerox then chimed in - No not Apple's GUI - Xerox's GUI. Apple settled out of court with Xerox!
pro consumer
Ha ha -- too bad Apple doesn't produce compliant H.264 - do iPods play compliant H.264 video? Notice no MPEG 4 (AVC) logo on Apple products.
Then there's the artist. For every tune sold on iTune web site - Apple gets 30 cents - the artist gets 7 cents. Hmmm let's see 30/7 X100 - Apple makes 428% of what the artist makes.
Do You Have To Be A Crook To Be In Business?
on
On Apple vs Apple
·
· Score: 0
Jobs obviously has an abundance of business "trade skills" - everyone else in the entertainment business seems to have their feet buried in concrete - and move at that speed. However, why Jobs keeps "stealing" is beyond me - from the original GUI on down the line - to the music business copyright of Apple. I'm sure part of the excuse is that everybody else in the entertainment industry cheats, and steals - so why not!
I always laugh when Jobs and the rest of the entertainment elites start to cry foul when some kid does what they (the elites) do everyday of the week - stealing, screwing everything that moves financially. The one difference is that at least Jobs has some balls compared to the rest of the elites - and sometimes make things happen - although seldom in the best interests of the consumer or the artists.
Slashdot Mirror
"Xenolon killed those facts pretty quickly." Really?!
I stated that the artist gets 3 cents per iTune sale and that Apple got 50 cents
.
Xelolon,(spuriously?) claimed that Apple ONLY got 34 cents (NOT 50 cents). Which means Apple gets over 1100 percent more than the artists. Again Apple uses these artists to sell the iPod which makes billions for Apple (no artists = no music = no Ipod = no Apple.)
Blaming the victim - again and again and again and again!
Yes you are right.. all musicians are absolutely stupid, ignorant, jerk-offs who deserve everything they don't get.
Talking about accuracy - you might want to read up on a little history about artists and the creeps running the music industry. For example, Bob Marley, one of the kingpins in the industry did not get one red cent from the record company who sold billions of Marley's albums.
"Spurious"! Wow. Let me get my dictionary. Spurious:
"spurious |spyors| |sp(j)ris| |spjuris| |spjrs|
adjective not being what it purports to be; false or fake : separating authentic and spurious claims.
(of a line of reasoning) apparently but not actually valid : this spurious reasoning results in nonsense."
"Disguise them as facts". Facts? My comments are my comments.
Where's my info coming from? I have likely read 200 to 300 articles on money and iTunes and iPods. Likely my figures came from Pogue or was it The Woz or was it Cringley - probably Cringely. Did I make them up ..... no.
Talking about spurious - quoting Time as a source of reliable information......Ha Ha Ha. Get me Apple's internal financial statements... if you are serious about accuracy.
Notice ... everyone knows Apple uses iTunes to sell iPods. Notice.... Apple is riding on the back of musical artists in order to sell billions and billions of dollars of Ipods - which in turn drove Apple's stock up ... and the artists got absolutely zero out of those billions ...So in the end Apple has made a lot, lot, lot, lot more than 50 cents per tune
Your comments about Apple are absolutely correct: "They're certainly not the kings of interoperability". I couldn't agree with you more; because, that's really what I am talking about here.
Common?! What is common - is that in the USA (and Canada too) - the Politicians (and their civil servants) are simply puppets of the Blue Chip Boys (and Girls too now). The Blue Chip Boys and Girls' (the unelected, the self selected, self appointed billionaire Elite) daily mantra is to screw the consumer - and has their Politician/Puppets produce any, all laws/regulations to make sure the consumer continues to be screwed.
You seem to favout the notion that whatever the Elite want - the Elite get - and screw everyone else
Fortunately, some European countries are several thousand years old, and have matured enough to realize that one doesn't need to constantly screw the consumer - in order for themselves not to be screwed
Interoperability doesn't exist in Apple's vocabulary - while MONOPOLY does exist in Apple's vocab in spades. And it's not about money (Apple is now worth $ 60,777,591,440 - that's 60 billion plus!).
It's not about the artists ( who get 3 cents for every tune sold on iTune, while Apple gets 50 cents for every tune sold - lets see Apple makes approximately 16 times what the artist makes - and how many hours did Apple spend writing the songs and then sitting in a studio.....).
It's all about control freaks. Apple is still NOT interoperable even when it comes to MEPG-4 video.
Apple could be turned around in a week - if and when all the "iAddicts" started complaining
Score 15!!.
Does anyone here not know that there is a back door built into XP so that Bush and the boys can(have?) access every file on your computer. Of course they also have all your key strokes and email and all the web sites you visit. And Apple hasn't done the same?
Syndicated journalist, Molli Ivins, states there is no such thing as left or right (or centrist) - that what one needs to do with any issue - is to find out who is getting SCREWED and who is doing the SCREWING.
At any given moment, anyone of any political stripe will more often then not SCREW anyone - even someone with the same political stripe - if there is enough power and money as a reward
Naturally using "left and right" spinning is used to create a smoke screen - to help hide what is actually happening - to "divide and conquer". Traditionally the British have used "divide and conquer" to SCREW people all over the world for the past several hundred years (at least)
Ever time I see (or hear) the words "left" and "right" - I cringe. At the same time - it's a useful flag to know the TV program or newspaper article or radio program is about to unload a truck load of bullshit.
Been reading all the banter here about whether or not it's easy to install Ubuntu. Although I am an ancient Mac user (the SE) and although I installed Debian on an IBM iSeries laptop first time round by accident - must have been first time luck since I know 0 about ....
I did try running the Live CD as well as installing Ubuntu 5.04 on both Mac and IBMs and... no go. Yup I am one of those "grandmothers" - actually a grandfather.
What amazes me - is the lack of understanding of the notion of "USABILITY" when it comes to designing almost anything in the Western World. Whether it's town planning, and public building, a car, web sites or .... software.
One would think that in the case of Ubuntu 6 - that someone who specializes in USABILITY would have been part of the team - or do none exist in the world of software? Which would not be too surprising; because, in the case of town planning there is only one specialist in planning public open space on this planet - the Dane Jan Gehl
Even though I have spent untold $1000s to buy software primarily to compress video for web uses - I am tired (growing old ) that I need to read 7000 web sites to figure out how to produce the best compressed video results. What's even worse is to hear from "compression experts" on those sites - saying that that's the way the software needs to be (to keep the "experts employed"?). On Doom9's forums two employees from Microsoft are there trying to tell readers how to get quality out of VC1. Which demonstrates how UNUSABLE Microsoft software is.
Why didn't iThink of iChimp and iPuppet. How iTelligent!
No your aren't a troll - your just being honest - truthful.
Three cheeers for you.
The Self Appointed Elite - the rich - running the USA, Canada and other countries will never give up the control on the flow of information/censorship. The web is the last bastion to conquer for these Elites. As we all know these Elites listen to every phone call - read every email, pick up every key stroke from our keyboards.
There are so many brain washed and/or paid apologists here in this forum and other places on the web - whose main role is to dumb down/censor any viewpoints that don't fit the status quo established by these Elite . Good to hear that you aren't afraid - refused to be dumbed down.
The USA Elite's puppets on the Supreme Court earned their dog biscuits today. "Sit Fido" - "gooood dog". Lets see the "score" so far:
a) La Plume is outed by Puppet #1 (Bush) - from her C.I.A. job because Hubby tells world Saddam no got the goodies to make the Big Bomb. Puppet #1 (Bush) didn't like "looking" like a liar. Plume's Hubby didn't self-censor.
b) USA Elite's puppets are now listening to all phone calls in the USA, reading all emails in the USA - will citzens start to self-censor themselves - you bet. Elites would love to find the federal employee who outed Puppet #1 (Bush) on the above - a one way CIA helicopter ride 200 foot over ocean?
All the major media New York Times et al - how does one spell self censor?
There are several problems with your logic or is it your lack of logic in your notion of trying to explain that social censorship is something different from censorship (like being partly pregnant?):
There are no "free: countries on this planet. Each and every country is run by the self appointed elite - the rich. Included in the latter are the U.S.A., Mainland China, Cuba, Iran and on and on.
The elite and their puppets (the politicians, the police, the army, schools, civil servants, citizen spies, churches etc.) ensure that the party line - the rules of the game are followed (as defined by the self appointed elite). Naturally what to believe is a big part of the control/censorship game .
Now the approach that the elite and their puppets use - to ensure that their rules are followed - is to use censorship (in order to control info and the population) - the censorship can be subtle or not so subtle.
Typically a subtle approach is used at first; but then becomes less and less subtle. For example, all newspaper editors may not issue written instructions to reporters on what and how to report (censorship) - but reporters know exactly what is expected - and self censor themselves (they have two mortgages, private schools for the kids, two country club memberships, the SUV payments etc.). Naturally the elite own the newspapers and TV networks etc. (and the internet soon? - they keep trying.)
Later on not so subtle approaches are used - like being thrown out of a C.I.A. helicopter 200 feet above the ocean. Or in China (aside from Google becoming a puppet to the elite in China) for the past 60 years at least, have used citizens spies to turn in other citizens. In short order - the person who didn't follow the censorship dictates - in put in prison, tortured, his or her organs harvested and sold for organ transplants in the U.S.A. and then shot.
Now you are just kidding yourself if you think that - what you believe - just came out of thin air. So no - the system has obviously done a great job - to ensure that the status quo counts and has to be protected. And that is obvious on Slash (hmm interest symbolism in the name/word Slash)
There is a subtle form/efforts of censorship here in these Slashdot discussion forums. How? By the scoring of comments made. Yes it's subtle but likely does dissuade some readers from reading a post that is scored zero.
It's obvious that if anyone challenges the "status quo" here - there is an instant challenge by one or more readers - or by negatively branding a comment with a zero score. At the same time those who give zero scores do not have to prove the "status quo" is true/valid and so on - which of course is a double standard.
The above applies in spades to any subject to do with so-called "religion", so-called "HIV=AIDS", so-called "Global Warming Caused By People" or UNUSABLE web pages/sites that are "glorified marginally animated magazine pages"
Unfortunately the world seems all about money and those who NEED power/control over others. And the whole notion of "ozone layer" size is another example of spinning for monetary/control purposes.
The notion of "CFCs/Hole In The Ozone" issue has as much merit as another notion "must drink 8 glasses of water a day to be healthy - and coffee and soup doesn't count" - nonsense.
The two above notions are simply that - notions! Neither has been proven to be true via the scientific method. Which is what science is all about - scientific research carried out via the scientific method.
Re: "easy". That was the $64,000 question I asking about. For someone who is an expert (like So Sue Me Jon) - could it be done? I would invest in a software venture that did it.
from the O'Reilly Mac Dev centre:
Since Apple Tiger "is" FreeBSD. How complicated is it to make Apple OS X software function on BSD? I can buy a dual core CPU Intel 4.1 mhz computer for $500. I would love to switch to BSD running on the latter computer.
Dr. John Gofman - worked on the Atomic Bomb's Manhatten Project - and now is the one of the world's foremost experts on health/illness related to the nuclear industry: THE TOP 10 PRONUCLEAR ARGUMENTS ... ANSWERED
ARGUMENT 1: We receive more radiation sitting in our living rooms than is given off by nuclear power plants. A brick wall puts out 3.5 millirems of radiation per year but a nuclear power plant releases only 0.3 millirem in the same time period. In fact you can stand right next to a nuclear power plant and receive no radiation at all.
GOFMAN: First let me agree that certain building materials do give off enough radiation doses to deserve consideration. Let me also agree that there is a very low dose of radiation emitted at the fenceline of a nuclear power plant that is functioning normally. If this were not the case, workers couldn't park their cars nearby or even approach such utilities at all.
However, the "no dose at fenceline" statement doesn't consider the radiation people can receive from the entire nuclear power fuel cycle. We need to take into account all of the steps that make up the atomic energy process including the production of mountains of uranium tailings (unshielded piles that are continuously releasing radioactive radon) ... the inventory of radioactive poisons - such as cesium 137 strontium 90 and iodine 131 - that "leak" or "puff" into the atmosphere when a power plant is not functioning normally ... the quantities of radioactive wastes being moved in fallible vehicles that can (and do) leak ... and the so-called burial sites which have also been shown to leak and spread their material into the environment at large.
Now let's come to the claim that a nuclear power plant itself releases only 3/10 of a millirem per year. Were that radiation dose - coupled of course with other fuel cycle emissions - truly always so small I would hardly waste my time concerning myself with the hazards of nuclear power. But the proof that advocates of this energy source have no confidence whatsoever in their estimate of the plants' releases lies in their behavior with respect to the legal radiation standards.
As late as 1979, nuclear power plants were, legally, allowed to bombard the public with 170 millirems per year. When my colleague Arthur Tamplin and I proposed a tenfold reduction in that standard, the nuclear industry and pronuclear government agencies fought us tooth and nail. Now it has to be regarded as the acme of strange behavior for an industry to say, "Look, we're never going to give you more than 3/10 of a millirem per year" ... and then demand that the permissible standard remain more than 500 times as high as that limit! So I would say that as long as the industry fights against reducing legal standards to a level comparable to the 3/10 millirem per year that nuclear power advocates claim is the maximum dose per plant, any member of the public can dismiss such ludicrously low estimates.
(The legal standard was changed in 1979. It now permits 25 millirems per year of ionizing radiation to be passed on to the general public, under normal operating conditions! The Catch-22 here is that if anything occurs to make the operating conditions "abnormal", a nuclear facility is permitted to release an increased - and unrestricted - quantity of radiation.)
ARGUMENT 2: People living in high altitude cities, such as Denver, receive twice as much natural radiation as do those living at low altitudes ... yet the residents of such cosmically bombarded locales don't display double the average incidence of cancer.
GOFMAN: The answer to this favorite pronuclear argument is that the cosmic radiation hitting the people in Denver probably does cause an increase in the number of cancer cases per capita. (One should not expect to find twice as many cases of cancer, of course, because radiation is not the only cause of the disease.) But to statistically demonstrate such a reality, we would first have to know [
The old saying "bullshit baffles brains" is what this is all about.
The religious nutcases (The Taliban of America) still trying to bullshit their way into control of the America.
But the Judge, a Republican appointed by Bush, in the Dover case - ruled:
Creationism is I.D.
How many tons of bullshit do you guys have stored away? You'll need it for the next election in the USA.
Imagine people who believe/preach about babies being conceived without intercourse.
Imagine people who believe/preach about all babies born are evil.
Imagine people who believe/preach about people coming back from the dead - zombies that is
Imagine people who believe/preach about the earth only being 5000 years old
Can you imagine the above people deciding what scientific and what's not
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
id isn't creationism - ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haha ha ha ha ha ha ha
a) There is no scientific proof that we Little Ants are causing so-called climate change.
b) Is there an abmormal climate change going on - or just a normal cycle that this planet has been going through forever?
c) The people running around - shouting aloud - about how we Little Ants are causing climate change - are the same people who can't get a ninety day weather forecast right. These folks are "right" 50% of the time - like flipping a coin.
d) While these folk run around yaking about climate change - real damage to our health is happening. So instead of talking about how micro particulates from SUVs, Coal Burning Power Plants, deisel trucks, deisel trains, etc. etc are killing people - we talk about how we Little Ants will/can change the universe. Dumb and Dumber
Fortunately there are competitors coming along - the artist makes 60% of the retail online price on one new site. 7 cents - give me (and artists ) a break!
Jobs obviously has an abundance of business "trade skills" - everyone else in the entertainment business seems to have their feet buried in concrete - and move at that speed. However, why Jobs keeps "stealing" is beyond me - from the original GUI on down the line - to the music business copyright of Apple. I'm sure part of the excuse is that everybody else in the entertainment industry cheats, and steals - so why not!
I always laugh when Jobs and the rest of the entertainment elites start to cry foul when some kid does what they (the elites) do everyday of the week - stealing, screwing everything that moves financially. The one difference is that at least Jobs has some balls compared to the rest of the elites - and sometimes make things happen - although seldom in the best interests of the consumer or the artists.