The analogy was used to describe wear. Which does happen for all things equally (more so when exposed to the elements). A car just happened to be the first thing I thought of.
Also the business case is much easier to make for taking an old plant offline when you have new cheaper plants, that require less maintenance and so reduced costs. Ones that potentially (we certainly haven't built any to know for sure what their designs will act like) have better life expectancy.
Those Original plants were designed specifically to have a expiration date. They were meant to be replaced. The original companies behind them new this. And unlike Dams which are in fixed places and can't really be moved, nuclear plants can be built just about anywhere we let them build one. I'm quite willing to let them build one within 20 miles of me and there is plenty of empty spaces for them to do it in. Sadly it now requires, local, state, and federal permissions for them... This takes years, even decades and no nuclear plant plan has survived that long in the US since the 1970's.
On the other hand we have plants that are falling apart and seriously _need_ to be taken offline, but are often critical to a state's energy needs. A New England state (I don't recall which) has a plant nearing true failure levels and yet it is renewed each year because it provides nearly 50% of the states entire energy need. If they could just build a new plant, they could force the old one offline once a replacement was ready. That should have been the case a decade ago and the old one taken offline in the very near future. But they can't build any new plants. So they old one will just eventually fail. Probably not spectacularly, well at least it probably won't fail with a boom. Instead half the state's power will go offline and possibly take down power along all the east coast as the grid tries to service the demand.
I didn't say it was an isolated incident. It is just a small part of a larger problem (continued use of outdated designs). Much safer designs have been created since the 1970's when US reactor construction ended. Ones that often get mentioned here, many that don't use water for cooling for instance... Ones with less moving parts to wear out... You know newer ones from a more mature understanding of nuclear power?
I'd love to see them keep the graphics engine, and retool the rest for use in a new game... The only thing they got right was the visual appeal. Everything else was fail even from closed beta. I was a beta tester. They didn't even bother to listen to us either. Long standing complaints from day 1 where never solved and the beta site sucked. So after a bit of time I simply stopped even testing it. It was awfully pretty though with compelling visual characters. If it wouldn't cost me just to go in, I'd love to play around with the character generator again. Maybe it's a bad sign when the funnest part of the game was the character creator?
All nuclear plants are not created equal. The far far bigger problem is continuing to use early reactor designs past their end of life! It's like a 30 year old car that has not spent those years in a garage. It needs considerable work to stay usable, often to the point of requiring it to be rebuilt. Well the same thing holds true to nuclear plants, but we just don't spend that sort of money renovating the old ones. So they start to fail. How much effort is actually required to have severe problems is rather interesting, but I for on do not expect them to simply keep working.
We should have continued building and updating designs over the last 30 or 40 years, but anti-nuclear nuts have left us all pretty damn screwed.
I don't have cable and so in the US can't see the BBC normally... but I tend to instead download and watch when I want a large amount of BBC programming... combined by a few worth Discovery pieces that still retain quality... But the best part is I get to pick what I chose to watch.
I did however watch SGU, which got fairly good for modern sci-fi in season 2... Though many series start slow and need a season 2 to ever get good...
Something always replaces what came before. Mad Max anarchy isn't exactly anarchy. What you quickly find is certain people who become 'warlords' and replace that anarchy with their own culture, laws, and economy. If it doesn't happen from within outside forces tend to force it along. Witness the recently 'freed' middle east.
Not only that, but I doubt we can implode quickly enough for your view to work. Left to it's own devices and without apocalyptic events things take considerable time to devolve.
It is drastic. I'd call the enforcement people and tip them off on what this guy is doing. He wouldn't need to be to worry about getting fired, he'd be worrying about how much jail time he's going to serve. Hospitals, Educational Institutions, and Banks have some of the strictest rules they must legally follow to ensure private and confidential data does not go AWOL.
You just don't do what he described. Period. End of story. This is not the sort of thing to be mellow about.
I really doubt all the equipment in use at the hospital can isolate data from network (probably behind some sort of user/password protection). I'm actually kinda curious now what the inherent protections are on each piece of equipment in use.
On the other hand, allowing this is just asking for something worse. Given a box on a medical network and one outside port I can do all sorts of stuff, including remote access to then let me hammer on their inner network for holes. No one has perfect security, the best we get is 'really good' security. Given enough time and effort I can crack 'really good' security. I'm hardly alone in that. So this type of box is just asking for a headache.
I was the admin for a educational network and similar HIPPA-style rules are enforced. A rogue box is a huge no no. Sadly CEO level management tended to ignore the law and just want certain things 'done'. As the highest level IT person I had to do my best to stay safe and do what the CEO wanted. The fact that I'm no longer there should imply I failed to keep the CEO happy (the legal actions wouldn't touch me, I made sure I had records).
If they get welfare. Plenty of poor people don't actually get on or even qualify for state or federal aid. You do realize that right?
There are also much different dynamics in the US. I mentioned some of them like phones in my post before. Things like electricity and water are considered basic necessities and in lots of ways you can't have a house or apartment that doesn't at least have access to both. We also require certain things of buildings. Even a shack has to meet certain standards for the area it's built, so of course it will be better than many places in the world. It will also cost more to have. Which is why the gap between homelessness and basic poverty is so large in the US.
Again our culture, laws, and economy require both a higher standard of living and cost more to have and maintain. We can't simply 'give up' those three things and just 'live on less'. That is not how it works.
rich... yes we are just so rich... with our homeless and our poverty ridden cities... The conditions we would have to live in to compare wage to wage to China or India are not possible with the cost of living in this country. Well not possible and eat daily or have a roof over your head (both tend toward being prerequisites to having a job in the US). 30 or 40 years ago, you may have been able to have a room at the local WMCA in a big city like NYC and hold down a job. Those days are long gone, you need a phone at the least to have a job. Usually a permanent address (not a PO box) is also required. Taking a bath every morning and 'smelling nice' are also important to getting an HR person to hire you. Looking the way that person or even that business wants is key to. It is very hard to keep a tailored suit looking nice and live in a homeless shelter.
Our society is just damn well built wrong to ever hope to compete. Yet you somehow think it is. I don't think you've ever tried to live on a very low income in the US.
I can tell you as a Pennsylvanian that we have little to nothing in common with Californians, and just about everyone here would agree with that. Which is ironic as Californians are the traditional gatekeepers of media culture. I've never been to the EU, but I doubt you've ever lived in the US. I find things strange just going into New York, a state less than 50 miles from where I live. I lived in Ohio for almost 4 years and always found many things odd there the whole time. I doubt that feeling is any different from someone from Belgium visiting France or the Netherlands.
It can just as easily be PA. As a network admin in that state I made considerably less (about half) what I could in NYC or Cali. On the other hand cost of living is somewhat better here than either of those places...
Many people could no longer continue to buy... not and have a roof over their heads or food on the table... Yet it's a catch 22, not having money to buy gas means you likely will lose your job and so loose your shelter and food anyway...
I haven't run anything other than an Ati card in a decade in my desktops at home. I have rarely than ever had a crash caused by a video driver.
I haven't had any big issues with Nvidia cards at work either.
Well in windows at least... I've had tons of problems with both in linux. I think the powers behind linux seriously need to look into how the companies handle video drivers so both can stop crapping all over linux.
However your view "call me when you're drivers can run something other than this years Call of Duty game & WoW" is way off the mark as I don't run either and still have no issues. I think far more people aren't having driver issues, but hardware issues that may not even be specific to the video cards.
I built a new desktop recently and it was the first time I'd seen a BSOD in like 2 years.. Though it was a bad motherboard, a RMA later and no BSODS once more... Out of all things in a PC video cards tend to cause some of the fewest BSODS anymore. I have seen a card get hot causing driver restarts though. My poor old 3XXX series Radeon was put out to pasture because it's tolerance was failing.
While not the highest end card you can buy... I have run both of those benchmarks on a 6950 (flashed to be a 6970) and those don't even stress it. That was with a old Athlon 64 x2 6500+ cpu system with DDR2 memory.
As much as I hate their methods (namely wanting hefty money to even be able to do simple things like saving results), futuremark does a much better job of constantly updating to stress each generation of cards.
Though I'm not the parent poster you replied to, I can tell you where I live cost of living is double in my local big city as it is 20 miles out. So I'd need to make twice as much to live there. That's not even live well, but to have a 600 sq ft apartment (compared to a 1200 sq ft house). My cost of gas may go down, but the cities public transportation sucks (busing focused on a 12 block by 12 block square around 'downtown'), so I still need the car. If I had kids the public city schools can't even meet AYP, so not a good choice versus the rural schools that can. Locally their is nothing attractive in moving to the city, which is why it looks more like a slum then anything else. Those who live their are like my ex, make average wages and half of what they make goes into their rent. Out of what's left they buy what they can and their is rarely anything left over. So while their income says they aren't that poor (lowest middle class for my area in most cases), their money after housing is worse than a rural poor person! Which then leads into crime issues, since people want things and see that they can't get them (legally).
I actually have gotten into the habit of using my desktop and laptop both at times... I didn't really see a need for a second screen before I had my laptop, but I think at times having two complete systems has been key. At least for me. I can have research or email open on my laptop (often media apps like music as well) and my desktop is used as my main workspace for whatever I happen to be working on.
It actually takes some work to set up as my desk was never meant to have two monitors let alone a monitor and laptop, but some strategically placed books and such on a short storage cabinet does wonders... I'm probably highly unusual in my recent preference though...
That's a desktop, it's not meant to be portable it's for performance oriented tasks that would take much to long otherwise. And those numbers are MAX! The core steps down to idle near 11 Watts (for 6 cores mind you, so under 2W/core) and the gpu on idle powers down to use around 25W. Neither are going in a laptop any time soon. Total idle power is under 100W or about what a lightbulb uses. I don't see how the 'typical power consumption' of a high end desktop being equal to a lightbulb is bad.
My laptop is a desktop replacement model (my 'portable desktop) and is quad core cpu with a older mobility HD 59XX series GPU. It uses around 10W total idle and 40W MAX (as far as I can tell), though MAX can't be achieved without being plugged in. It can do everything the desktop can, just slower. I can tell you though cooling is far far better for the desktop, the laptop at 40W gets extremely warm. It also benches less than half of what my brand new desktop can do.
There is no need to lessen what a desktop can do just to lower power consumption. In fact I have a feeling in the future desktops will exist solely to fit in the high end of performance single person need; with laptops, Pads, and phones filling all the lower niches. Multi-user high performance will go into servers of various types and low performance units will be things like NAS.
I can run FurMark at less than 50% gpu fan performance. And 30% fan is hard to hear, I don't know why you think it's 'loud' since, at least for me, the other coolers in my system are all louder than it. If you can't hear the gpu cooler above the sound of the stock cpu cooler what does it matter?
It depends. I've played with linux on systems with both brands gpu's in them and even nvidia's drivers don't always 'just work' in linux. Though Radeons still tend to be far more picky. If the drivers work like they should then typically the Radeon won't do any worse than the nvidia card. The biggest issue tends to be in how new the card is, linux lags behind windows and the launch date considerably. My laptops Mobility HD 5900 series card works fine in linux (though not its wireless sadly) yet my Radeon HD 6970 has issues...
I built a 6-core cpu system with a HD 6970 graphics card recently and it uses a 750 Watt 80+ gold rated PSU. I'm not really pushing near the limits (cpu 120W max, gpu 250W max), even if I bought one of those monstrous cards I'd probably still be ok though maybe maxing it out. 900-1k Watt is probably still overkill as long as you buy a good PSU, no 2kw PSU needed.
Slashdot Mirror
The analogy was used to describe wear. Which does happen for all things equally (more so when exposed to the elements). A car just happened to be the first thing I thought of.
Also the business case is much easier to make for taking an old plant offline when you have new cheaper plants, that require less maintenance and so reduced costs. Ones that potentially (we certainly haven't built any to know for sure what their designs will act like) have better life expectancy.
Those Original plants were designed specifically to have a expiration date. They were meant to be replaced. The original companies behind them new this. And unlike Dams which are in fixed places and can't really be moved, nuclear plants can be built just about anywhere we let them build one. I'm quite willing to let them build one within 20 miles of me and there is plenty of empty spaces for them to do it in. Sadly it now requires, local, state, and federal permissions for them... This takes years, even decades and no nuclear plant plan has survived that long in the US since the 1970's.
On the other hand we have plants that are falling apart and seriously _need_ to be taken offline, but are often critical to a state's energy needs. A New England state (I don't recall which) has a plant nearing true failure levels and yet it is renewed each year because it provides nearly 50% of the states entire energy need. If they could just build a new plant, they could force the old one offline once a replacement was ready. That should have been the case a decade ago and the old one taken offline in the very near future. But they can't build any new plants. So they old one will just eventually fail. Probably not spectacularly, well at least it probably won't fail with a boom. Instead half the state's power will go offline and possibly take down power along all the east coast as the grid tries to service the demand.
I didn't say it was an isolated incident. It is just a small part of a larger problem (continued use of outdated designs). Much safer designs have been created since the 1970's when US reactor construction ended. Ones that often get mentioned here, many that don't use water for cooling for instance... Ones with less moving parts to wear out... You know newer ones from a more mature understanding of nuclear power?
I'd love to see them keep the graphics engine, and retool the rest for use in a new game... The only thing they got right was the visual appeal. Everything else was fail even from closed beta. I was a beta tester. They didn't even bother to listen to us either. Long standing complaints from day 1 where never solved and the beta site sucked. So after a bit of time I simply stopped even testing it. It was awfully pretty though with compelling visual characters. If it wouldn't cost me just to go in, I'd love to play around with the character generator again. Maybe it's a bad sign when the funnest part of the game was the character creator?
All nuclear plants are not created equal. The far far bigger problem is continuing to use early reactor designs past their end of life! It's like a 30 year old car that has not spent those years in a garage. It needs considerable work to stay usable, often to the point of requiring it to be rebuilt. Well the same thing holds true to nuclear plants, but we just don't spend that sort of money renovating the old ones. So they start to fail. How much effort is actually required to have severe problems is rather interesting, but I for on do not expect them to simply keep working.
We should have continued building and updating designs over the last 30 or 40 years, but anti-nuclear nuts have left us all pretty damn screwed.
I don't have cable and so in the US can't see the BBC normally... but I tend to instead download and watch when I want a large amount of BBC programming... combined by a few worth Discovery pieces that still retain quality... But the best part is I get to pick what I chose to watch.
I did however watch SGU, which got fairly good for modern sci-fi in season 2... Though many series start slow and need a season 2 to ever get good...
I think 'inworld' only about 6 years have passed... Either way I preferred Smallville to any of the Superman movies.
Something always replaces what came before. Mad Max anarchy isn't exactly anarchy. What you quickly find is certain people who become 'warlords' and replace that anarchy with their own culture, laws, and economy. If it doesn't happen from within outside forces tend to force it along. Witness the recently 'freed' middle east.
Not only that, but I doubt we can implode quickly enough for your view to work. Left to it's own devices and without apocalyptic events things take considerable time to devolve.
It is drastic. I'd call the enforcement people and tip them off on what this guy is doing. He wouldn't need to be to worry about getting fired, he'd be worrying about how much jail time he's going to serve. Hospitals, Educational Institutions, and Banks have some of the strictest rules they must legally follow to ensure private and confidential data does not go AWOL.
You just don't do what he described. Period. End of story. This is not the sort of thing to be mellow about.
I really doubt all the equipment in use at the hospital can isolate data from network (probably behind some sort of user/password protection). I'm actually kinda curious now what the inherent protections are on each piece of equipment in use.
On the other hand, allowing this is just asking for something worse. Given a box on a medical network and one outside port I can do all sorts of stuff, including remote access to then let me hammer on their inner network for holes. No one has perfect security, the best we get is 'really good' security. Given enough time and effort I can crack 'really good' security. I'm hardly alone in that. So this type of box is just asking for a headache.
I was the admin for a educational network and similar HIPPA-style rules are enforced. A rogue box is a huge no no. Sadly CEO level management tended to ignore the law and just want certain things 'done'. As the highest level IT person I had to do my best to stay safe and do what the CEO wanted. The fact that I'm no longer there should imply I failed to keep the CEO happy (the legal actions wouldn't touch me, I made sure I had records).
If they get welfare. Plenty of poor people don't actually get on or even qualify for state or federal aid. You do realize that right?
There are also much different dynamics in the US. I mentioned some of them like phones in my post before. Things like electricity and water are considered basic necessities and in lots of ways you can't have a house or apartment that doesn't at least have access to both. We also require certain things of buildings. Even a shack has to meet certain standards for the area it's built, so of course it will be better than many places in the world. It will also cost more to have. Which is why the gap between homelessness and basic poverty is so large in the US.
Again our culture, laws, and economy require both a higher standard of living and cost more to have and maintain. We can't simply 'give up' those three things and just 'live on less'. That is not how it works.
rich... yes we are just so rich... with our homeless and our poverty ridden cities... The conditions we would have to live in to compare wage to wage to China or India are not possible with the cost of living in this country. Well not possible and eat daily or have a roof over your head (both tend toward being prerequisites to having a job in the US). 30 or 40 years ago, you may have been able to have a room at the local WMCA in a big city like NYC and hold down a job. Those days are long gone, you need a phone at the least to have a job. Usually a permanent address (not a PO box) is also required. Taking a bath every morning and 'smelling nice' are also important to getting an HR person to hire you. Looking the way that person or even that business wants is key to. It is very hard to keep a tailored suit looking nice and live in a homeless shelter.
Our society is just damn well built wrong to ever hope to compete. Yet you somehow think it is. I don't think you've ever tried to live on a very low income in the US.
I can tell you as a Pennsylvanian that we have little to nothing in common with Californians, and just about everyone here would agree with that. Which is ironic as Californians are the traditional gatekeepers of media culture. I've never been to the EU, but I doubt you've ever lived in the US. I find things strange just going into New York, a state less than 50 miles from where I live. I lived in Ohio for almost 4 years and always found many things odd there the whole time. I doubt that feeling is any different from someone from Belgium visiting France or the Netherlands.
It can just as easily be PA. As a network admin in that state I made considerably less (about half) what I could in NYC or Cali. On the other hand cost of living is somewhat better here than either of those places...
Many people could no longer continue to buy... not and have a roof over their heads or food on the table... Yet it's a catch 22, not having money to buy gas means you likely will lose your job and so loose your shelter and food anyway...
Not all nuclear reactors use water. Not all nuclear plants that even use water need to be built along fault lines...
I haven't run anything other than an Ati card in a decade in my desktops at home. I have rarely than ever had a crash caused by a video driver.
I haven't had any big issues with Nvidia cards at work either.
Well in windows at least... I've had tons of problems with both in linux. I think the powers behind linux seriously need to look into how the companies handle video drivers so both can stop crapping all over linux.
However your view "call me when you're drivers can run something other than this years Call of Duty game & WoW" is way off the mark as I don't run either and still have no issues. I think far more people aren't having driver issues, but hardware issues that may not even be specific to the video cards.
I built a new desktop recently and it was the first time I'd seen a BSOD in like 2 years.. Though it was a bad motherboard, a RMA later and no BSODS once more... Out of all things in a PC video cards tend to cause some of the fewest BSODS anymore. I have seen a card get hot causing driver restarts though. My poor old 3XXX series Radeon was put out to pasture because it's tolerance was failing.
While not the highest end card you can buy... I have run both of those benchmarks on a 6950 (flashed to be a 6970) and those don't even stress it. That was with a old Athlon 64 x2 6500+ cpu system with DDR2 memory.
As much as I hate their methods (namely wanting hefty money to even be able to do simple things like saving results), futuremark does a much better job of constantly updating to stress each generation of cards.
This is why I find myself p2ping documentaries... I may watch two or three tv programs, but my 'tv watching' is dominated by other things.
Though I'm not the parent poster you replied to, I can tell you where I live cost of living is double in my local big city as it is 20 miles out. So I'd need to make twice as much to live there. That's not even live well, but to have a 600 sq ft apartment (compared to a 1200 sq ft house). My cost of gas may go down, but the cities public transportation sucks (busing focused on a 12 block by 12 block square around 'downtown'), so I still need the car. If I had kids the public city schools can't even meet AYP, so not a good choice versus the rural schools that can. Locally their is nothing attractive in moving to the city, which is why it looks more like a slum then anything else. Those who live their are like my ex, make average wages and half of what they make goes into their rent. Out of what's left they buy what they can and their is rarely anything left over. So while their income says they aren't that poor (lowest middle class for my area in most cases), their money after housing is worse than a rural poor person! Which then leads into crime issues, since people want things and see that they can't get them (legally).
I actually have gotten into the habit of using my desktop and laptop both at times... I didn't really see a need for a second screen before I had my laptop, but I think at times having two complete systems has been key. At least for me. I can have research or email open on my laptop (often media apps like music as well) and my desktop is used as my main workspace for whatever I happen to be working on.
It actually takes some work to set up as my desk was never meant to have two monitors let alone a monitor and laptop, but some strategically placed books and such on a short storage cabinet does wonders... I'm probably highly unusual in my recent preference though...
That's a desktop, it's not meant to be portable it's for performance oriented tasks that would take much to long otherwise. And those numbers are MAX! The core steps down to idle near 11 Watts (for 6 cores mind you, so under 2W/core) and the gpu on idle powers down to use around 25W. Neither are going in a laptop any time soon. Total idle power is under 100W or about what a lightbulb uses. I don't see how the 'typical power consumption' of a high end desktop being equal to a lightbulb is bad.
My laptop is a desktop replacement model (my 'portable desktop) and is quad core cpu with a older mobility HD 59XX series GPU. It uses around 10W total idle and 40W MAX (as far as I can tell), though MAX can't be achieved without being plugged in. It can do everything the desktop can, just slower. I can tell you though cooling is far far better for the desktop, the laptop at 40W gets extremely warm. It also benches less than half of what my brand new desktop can do.
There is no need to lessen what a desktop can do just to lower power consumption. In fact I have a feeling in the future desktops will exist solely to fit in the high end of performance single person need; with laptops, Pads, and phones filling all the lower niches. Multi-user high performance will go into servers of various types and low performance units will be things like NAS.
I can run FurMark at less than 50% gpu fan performance. And 30% fan is hard to hear, I don't know why you think it's 'loud' since, at least for me, the other coolers in my system are all louder than it. If you can't hear the gpu cooler above the sound of the stock cpu cooler what does it matter?
It depends. I've played with linux on systems with both brands gpu's in them and even nvidia's drivers don't always 'just work' in linux. Though Radeons still tend to be far more picky. If the drivers work like they should then typically the Radeon won't do any worse than the nvidia card. The biggest issue tends to be in how new the card is, linux lags behind windows and the launch date considerably. My laptops Mobility HD 5900 series card works fine in linux (though not its wireless sadly) yet my Radeon HD 6970 has issues...
I built a 6-core cpu system with a HD 6970 graphics card recently and it uses a 750 Watt 80+ gold rated PSU. I'm not really pushing near the limits (cpu 120W max, gpu 250W max), even if I bought one of those monstrous cards I'd probably still be ok though maybe maxing it out. 900-1k Watt is probably still overkill as long as you buy a good PSU, no 2kw PSU needed.