As a male republican, I found use of "his" as the generic irritating as soon as I saw the first gender neutral pronouns. But I hated them and they felt unrealistic so no one would use them.
The gender neutral "they" however really appealed to me. I would add a collective for exclusively male and exclusively female but they is *more* *accurate* 99% of the time and "his" is not only often inaccurate but even misleading.
I've since become liberal because the republicans became batshit crazy authoritarians with no fiscal responsibility but my use of "they" predates my last vote for Ronald Reagan.
People who fight for equal treatment and equal rights under the law for all citizens post date antecedent agreement issues.
Given that it's english, it could really be taken either way except in the strictest sense.
As I said above...
I was reading it as
Crichton was a medical doctor. Pretty sure biology is somewhere in Crichton's training.
not
Crichton was a medical doctor. Pretty sure biology is somewhere in medical doctor's training.
Antecedent agreement normally applies within a sentence. Making it a new sentence restores the subject to Crichton.
So
Crichton was a medical doctor and I'm pretty sure biology is somewhere in their (medical doctor's) training.
But...
Crichton was a medical doctor. I'm pretty sure biology is somewhere in his (Crichton's) training.
Constantly changing the subject of the overall post every sentence would be confusing.
---
I despise the term SJW and it usually identifies the poster as a right wing authoritarian racist who's also sexist and usually isn't doing that well in life so they are bitter.
That said, *as a liberal*, I recognize that there are also authoritarian left wing people who are excessive, oppressive, unjust, and unreasonable. I can understand the use of the term "SJW" to identify them as a shorthand when not used in a pejorative sense.
So I know some people who use the term are not right wing authoritarian racists. It's just a quick shorthand. But it is a stereotype as much as "SJW" is one.
The differences I see are that windmill waste isn't (so far) as toxic as nuclear plant waste. And I'm not talking the fuel. The concrete and other parts of the reactor are toxic for quite a while when a plant is decommissioned.
Also, this article is biased to the expensive side.
Reports real world, actual decommissioning projects are costing about $30,000 to $100,000 and it mentioned that there is significant scrap metal value (about $50,000 per turbine) recovered.
"The seven-turbine community-owned Black Oak Wind Farm in New York State will start construction in late 2014. The decommissioning plan would currently cost about $55,883 per turbine, although the project expects to generate at least $50,000 per turbine by selling it as scrap metal. The municipality agreement means the power company must pay $140,000 per turbine in escrow but also means the payment can be reviewed and changed if decommissioning estimates change."
It's good to make them put up bonds and to pay money into escrow. And just as with the nuclear industry, it's probably not wise to simply accept their estimate that the scrap will be worth $50,000 per turbine. Recycling markets can and do go thru price fluctuations.
My problem with nuclear is it's almost impossible to get it right. Either it's too costly due to regulation or it's too dangerous or costly to later generations due to lack of regulation. Nuclear has a place in the power mix but I'm for much smaller nuclear power plants.
A) The japanese were preparing to attack the united states with the bubonic plague in September.
In 2002, Changde, China, site of the flea spraying attack, held an "International Symposium on the Crimes of Bacteriological Warfare" which estimated that at least 580,000 people died as a result of the attack.[38] The historian Sheldon Harris claims that 200,000 died.[39] In addition to Chinese casualties, 1,700 Japanese in Chekiang were killed by their own biological weapons while attempting to unleash the biological agent, indicating serious issues with distribution.[1]
During the final months of World War II, Japan planned to use plague as a biological weapon against San Diego, California. The plan was scheduled to launch on September 22, 1945, but Japan surrendered five weeks earlier.[40][41][42][43]
B) You need to educate yourself on
*Operation Olympic (Just the beach invasion- first 60 days): 15,000 dead on the U.S. side alone. 30,000 japanese soldiers dead. 10,000 to 20,000 civilian casualties and suicides. 200-300 kamikaze attacks per hour directed at troop transports.
*Operation Downfall (The rest of the campaign to conquer Japan): The complete destruction of multiple japanese cities by conventional means. The complete destruction of Japanese industrial base.
"Operation Downfall, the codename for the U.S.-led mission to capture the Japanese homeland in 1945 and 1946 never did take place. Had the invasion not been preempted by the dropping of the atom bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, almost all agree that the campaign would have stood as the bloodiest chapter of the Second World War, adding as much as an additional 10 million dead to the warâ(TM)s already mind-boggling final body count of 50 million. https://militaryhistorynow.com...
" * And the likely outcome of simply blockading Japan: Likely to last over a decade and also result in millions of deaths by starvation. Here's a video going over the blockade considerations, history, and expectations.
You also need to consider that if not for attacking the two cities, the u.s. was intending to use nuclear weapons tactically to soften the beaches two to three days before the invasion landed. That would have made nuclear weapons *much* more acceptable for use in future conflicts.
Also, if Japan had not attacked the U.S. at pearl harbor, the entry into the war by the U.S. would have been much later, much less consistent, and much more tentative. There were strong isolationists including u.s. congressional representatives who opposed entering the war. The Holocaust which occurred would have *paled* compared what the Nazi's could have done with a couple more years. Instead of 15 million, it might have been 20 or even 30 million dead.
Sort of. The actual decommissioning costs have turned out to be up to two orders of magnitude more than the cost originally estimated.
So current rate payers are basically paying the decommissioning costs while people 20-40 years ago got unrealistically cheap nuclear power.
Oh... and (at least so far), we don't have to pay $8 million dollars a year (for just one site) to protect the windmills from being stolen by terrorists to build a dirty bomb.
German utility E.ONâ(TM)s breakup has led to worries that funds set aside for decommissioning reactors will not suffice, but globally the cost of unwinding nuclear is uncertain as estimates range widely.
As ageing first-generation reactors close, the true cost of decommissioning will be crucial for the future of the nuclear industry, already ailing following the 2011 Fukushima disaster and competition from cheap shale gas, falling oil prices and a flood of renewable energy from wind and solar.
The International Energy Agency (IEA) said late last year that almost 200 of the 434 reactors in operation around the globe would be retired by 2040, and estimated the cost of decommissioning them at more than $100 billion.
But many experts view this figure as way too low, because it does not include the cost of nuclear waste disposal and long-term storage and because decommissioning costs - often a decade or more away - vary hugely per reactor and by country.
âoeHalf a billion dollars per reactor for decommissioning is no doubt vastly underestimated,â said Mycle Schneider, a Paris-based nuclear energy consultant.
https://www.reuters.com/articl... According to Paul Genoa, director of policy development of the Nuclear Energy Institute, a trade group for the nuclear power industry, decommissioning costs typically run at $500 million per unit. But actual costs vary based on the plantâ(TM)s size and design, and some have reached over $1 billion â" between 10 percent and 25 percent of the cost of constructing a nuclear reactor today.... The original decommissioning cost was estimated at $719 million; the company spent nearly $1.2 billion in the end....
Which is why I should receive a payment for every advertisement served to me based on my location (my information) or my other preferences (again my information).
Except when they go to Russia for private meetings with no free press allowed.
I was a conservative who voted for republicans most of my life. This shit is going sideways and folks are so obsessed with left/right that they can't see a couple hundred years of our democratic traditions being tossed aside, republicans actively siding with the russian government, and the attacks on the free press.
For christ's sake, wake the hell up before it's gone.
and after they finish with the illegals, then you may be in the next group they come for.
I have a friend who is a strong 2nd amendment supporter and gun owner. But he's *finally* realising that the scenario where right wing police show up and confiscate his guns after a major right wing person is shot is a realistic possibility.
Mr. Trump, for example, has already shown he's willing to set aside the rule of law and a love for dictators who don't have 2nd amendment issues.
When I was 24, I left my house in the morning and no one knew where I was unless I broke the law all day until i got back home. Then no one knew if I was home unless they dropped by or called.
This is a new type of privacy right. The right to be "ignored" unless you break the law. The police, your relatives, your friends, NO ONE knew where you were or what you were doing for the first half of my life. That's a different kind of privacy and it was real.
Automation combined with a lack of mercy and restraint in law enforcement leads to a dystopian future.
I'll say this too. Behavior like this by the malls would be one just one more reason to not go to the malls.
I don't think any socialist who voted for an authoritarian was showing character and integrity. All they were showing was intense bitterness. They'd rather have a miserable life for the next 20 years than vote for their candidates rival.
Several conservative justices really don't and haven't for the last 6-7 years. Scalia pretty much just asserted what he thought was in the constitution at times.
Besides, this nomination is about putting in someone who will ignore precedent for abortions.
The particular guy will also be pro corporation over citizens and they'll be pro trump/conservative presidents over the law.
I've heard these speeches before. They often proceed layoffs the second year. So the company works you to death (in our case literally for one person and non-fatal heart attacks for five others plus the one unconscious contractor who we never found out what happened) and to divorce (a half dozen divorces) and *then* laid 95% of the staff off .
HBO is going to suck terribly.
It's like corporations have gone in sane and are taking hatchets to their own golden gooses.
"bitter" Sanders voters in those three key states put Trump in office.
If they had just stayed home, Clinton would be president.
Only about 12% flipped but that was enough.
Some were probably trump voters to begin with messing with the election. But just 6% would have flipped the election. If they really were liberals, they slit their throats for the rest of their lives.
I agree. She comes across as angry, insulting, and likely to drive away long term customers. She went nuclear after a civil comment making a minor game idea.
Slashdot Mirror
As a male republican, I found use of "his" as the generic irritating as soon as I saw the first gender neutral pronouns. But I hated them and they felt unrealistic so no one would use them.
The gender neutral "they" however really appealed to me. I would add a collective for exclusively male and exclusively female but they is *more* *accurate* 99% of the time and "his" is not only often inaccurate but even misleading.
I've since become liberal because the republicans became batshit crazy authoritarians with no fiscal responsibility but my use of "they" predates my last vote for Ronald Reagan.
People who fight for equal treatment and equal rights under the law for all citizens post date antecedent agreement issues.
Given that it's english, it could really be taken either way except in the strictest sense.
As I said above...
I was reading it as
Crichton was a medical doctor. Pretty sure biology is somewhere in Crichton's training.
not
Crichton was a medical doctor. Pretty sure biology is somewhere in medical doctor's training.
Antecedent agreement normally applies within a sentence. Making it a new sentence restores the subject to Crichton.
So
Crichton was a medical doctor and I'm pretty sure biology is somewhere in their (medical doctor's) training.
But...
Crichton was a medical doctor. I'm pretty sure biology is somewhere in his (Crichton's) training.
Constantly changing the subject of the overall post every sentence would be confusing.
---
I despise the term SJW and it usually identifies the poster as a right wing authoritarian racist who's also sexist and usually isn't doing that well in life so they are bitter.
That said, *as a liberal*, I recognize that there are also authoritarian left wing people who are excessive, oppressive, unjust, and unreasonable. I can understand the use of the term "SJW" to identify them as a shorthand when not used in a pejorative sense.
So I know some people who use the term are not right wing authoritarian racists. It's just a quick shorthand. But it is a stereotype as much as "SJW" is one.
Sorta...
I agree with your points on large numbers.
The differences I see are that windmill waste isn't (so far) as toxic as nuclear plant waste. And I'm not talking the fuel. The concrete and other parts of the reactor are toxic for quite a while when a plant is decommissioned.
Also, this article is biased to the expensive side.
http://www.windconcernsontario...
Reports real world, actual decommissioning projects are costing about $30,000 to $100,000 and it mentioned that there is significant scrap metal value (about $50,000 per turbine) recovered.
"The seven-turbine community-owned Black Oak Wind Farm in New York State will start construction in late 2014. The decommissioning plan would currently cost about $55,883 per turbine, although the project expects to generate at least $50,000 per turbine by selling it as scrap metal. The municipality agreement means the power company must pay $140,000 per turbine in escrow but also means the payment can be reviewed and changed if decommissioning estimates change."
It's good to make them put up bonds and to pay money into escrow. And just as with the nuclear industry, it's probably not wise to simply accept their estimate that the scrap will be worth $50,000 per turbine. Recycling markets can and do go thru price fluctuations.
My problem with nuclear is it's almost impossible to get it right. Either it's too costly due to regulation or it's too dangerous or costly to later generations due to lack of regulation. Nuclear has a place in the power mix but I'm for much smaller nuclear power plants.
Thanks.. I was reading it as
Crichton was a medical doctor. Pretty sure biology is somewhere in Crichton's training.
not
Crichton was a medical doctor. Pretty sure biology is somewhere in medical doctor's training.
Why do you choose their when talking about a specific person?
Just interested.
I prefer "they" as a gender neutral pronoun also.
Well, this site values my content enough that I am not subject to advertising.
Tho they probably sell my information.
A) The japanese were preparing to attack the united states with the bubonic plague in September.
In 2002, Changde, China, site of the flea spraying attack, held an "International Symposium on the Crimes of Bacteriological Warfare" which estimated that at least 580,000 people died as a result of the attack.[38] The historian Sheldon Harris claims that 200,000 died.[39] In addition to Chinese casualties, 1,700 Japanese in Chekiang were killed by their own biological weapons while attempting to unleash the biological agent, indicating serious issues with distribution.[1]
During the final months of World War II, Japan planned to use plague as a biological weapon against San Diego, California. The plan was scheduled to launch on September 22, 1945, but Japan surrendered five weeks earlier.[40][41][42][43]
B) You need to educate yourself on
*Operation Olympic (Just the beach invasion- first 60 days): 15,000 dead on the U.S. side alone. 30,000 japanese soldiers dead. 10,000 to 20,000 civilian casualties and suicides. 200-300 kamikaze attacks per hour directed at troop transports.
Here's a video going over the plan and expectations.
https://youtu.be/k2NZVQzfAbo
*Operation Downfall (The rest of the campaign to conquer Japan): The complete destruction of multiple japanese cities by conventional means. The complete destruction of Japanese industrial base.
"Operation Downfall, the codename for the U.S.-led mission to capture the Japanese homeland in 1945 and 1946 never did take place. Had the invasion not been preempted by the dropping of the atom bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, almost all agree that the campaign would have stood as the bloodiest chapter of the Second World War, adding as much as an additional 10 million dead to the warâ(TM)s already mind-boggling final body count of 50 million.
https://militaryhistorynow.com...
"
* And the likely outcome of simply blockading Japan: Likely to last over a decade and also result in millions of deaths by starvation.
Here's a video going over the blockade considerations, history, and expectations.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
featuring an interview with historian D.M. Giangreco.
---
You also need to consider that if not for attacking the two cities, the u.s. was intending to use nuclear weapons tactically to soften the beaches two to three days before the invasion landed. That would have made nuclear weapons *much* more acceptable for use in future conflicts.
Also, if Japan had not attacked the U.S. at pearl harbor, the entry into the war by the U.S. would have been much later, much less consistent, and much more tentative. There were strong isolationists including u.s. congressional representatives who opposed entering the war. The Holocaust which occurred would have *paled* compared what the Nazi's could have done with a couple more years. Instead of 15 million, it might have been 20 or even 30 million dead.
Sort of. The actual decommissioning costs have turned out to be up to two orders of magnitude more than the cost originally estimated.
So current rate payers are basically paying the decommissioning costs while people 20-40 years ago got unrealistically cheap nuclear power.
Oh... and (at least so far), we don't have to pay $8 million dollars a year (for just one site) to protect the windmills from being stolen by terrorists to build a dirty bomb.
https://www.reuters.com/articl...
German utility E.ONâ(TM)s breakup has led to worries that funds set aside for decommissioning reactors will not suffice, but globally the cost of unwinding nuclear is uncertain as estimates range widely.
As ageing first-generation reactors close, the true cost of decommissioning will be crucial for the future of the nuclear industry, already ailing following the 2011 Fukushima disaster and competition from cheap shale gas, falling oil prices and a flood of renewable energy from wind and solar.
The International Energy Agency (IEA) said late last year that almost 200 of the 434 reactors in operation around the globe would be retired by 2040, and estimated the cost of decommissioning them at more than $100 billion.
But many experts view this figure as way too low, because it does not include the cost of nuclear waste disposal and long-term storage and because decommissioning costs - often a decade or more away - vary hugely per reactor and by country.
âoeHalf a billion dollars per reactor for decommissioning is no doubt vastly underestimated,â said Mycle Schneider, a Paris-based nuclear energy consultant.
https://www.mercurynews.com/20...
Diablo Canyon costs warning issued while higher PG&E bills loom
https://www.reuters.com/articl... ... ...
According to Paul Genoa, director of policy development of the Nuclear Energy Institute, a trade group for the nuclear power industry, decommissioning costs typically run at $500 million per unit. But actual costs vary based on the plantâ(TM)s size and design, and some have reached over $1 billion â" between 10 percent and 25 percent of the cost of constructing a nuclear reactor today.
The original decommissioning cost was estimated at $719 million; the company spent nearly $1.2 billion in the end.
https://www.iaee.org/documents...
A series of abstracts with information on further studies.
Which is why I should receive a payment for every advertisement served to me based on my location (my information) or my other preferences (again my information).
I don't recall democrats actively trying to stop a democratic investigation into russian influence on our elections.
a citation would be nice...
Wake the hell up. i was a republican and voted for three republican presidents. Something is badly wrong in our government.
yea.. and the russians are opposed to Russia.
Except when they go to Russia for private meetings with no free press allowed.
I was a conservative who voted for republicans most of my life. This shit is going sideways and folks are so obsessed with left/right that they can't see a couple hundred years of our democratic traditions being tossed aside, republicans actively siding with the russian government, and the attacks on the free press.
For christ's sake, wake the hell up before it's gone.
Ah, so if immigration laws are not enforced, then you are okay with your guns being confiscated?
It only protects us if the government respects the constitution and the rule of law.
Now what about the last two years of GOP behavior makes you think that is as true as it used to be?
They are literally going to repeal certain laws by not defending them.
and after they finish with the illegals, then you may be in the next group they come for.
I have a friend who is a strong 2nd amendment supporter and gun owner. But he's *finally* realising that the scenario where right wing police show up and confiscate his guns after a major right wing person is shot is a realistic possibility.
Mr. Trump, for example, has already shown he's willing to set aside the rule of law and a love for dictators who don't have 2nd amendment issues.
Your current location is your personal information. It's as key as your appearance which IS legally protected I.P.
This is a huge problem in that it can make it easier for a fascist government to control the citizenry.
We should really be subverting and destroying these cameras. We've accepted the possibility of being enslaved in return for security from theft.
People forget what privacy was like.
When I was 24, I left my house in the morning and no one knew where I was unless I broke the law all day until i got back home.
Then no one knew if I was home unless they dropped by or called.
This is a new type of privacy right. The right to be "ignored" unless you break the law. The police, your relatives, your friends, NO ONE knew where you were or what you were doing for the first half of my life. That's a different kind of privacy and it was real.
Automation combined with a lack of mercy and restraint in law enforcement leads to a dystopian future.
I'll say this too. Behavior like this by the malls would be one just one more reason to not go to the malls.
I don't think any socialist who voted for an authoritarian was showing character and integrity. All they were showing was intense bitterness.
They'd rather have a miserable life for the next 20 years than vote for their candidates rival.
Several conservative justices really don't and haven't for the last 6-7 years.
Scalia pretty much just asserted what he thought was in the constitution at times.
Besides, this nomination is about putting in someone who will ignore precedent for abortions.
The particular guy will also be pro corporation over citizens and they'll be pro trump/conservative presidents over the law.
I've heard these speeches before. They often proceed layoffs the second year.
So the company works you to death (in our case literally for one person and non-fatal heart attacks for five others plus the one unconscious contractor who we never found out what happened) and to divorce (a half dozen divorces) and *then* laid 95% of the staff off .
HBO is going to suck terribly.
It's like corporations have gone in sane and are taking hatchets to their own golden gooses.
haY! Don't loose it because I'm playing fast and lose with grammar and speling.
If democrats do not get control of the senate, abortion goes away by 2020. And for the rest of our lives.
Also whoever is put in will be strongly pro business rights over citizen rights.
I like Sanders. He is is direct and non evasive.
"bitter" Sanders voters in those three key states put Trump in office.
If they had just stayed home, Clinton would be president.
Only about 12% flipped but that was enough.
Some were probably trump voters to begin with messing with the election. But just 6% would have flipped the election. If they really were liberals, they slit their throats for the rest of their lives.
Seems like a risky crime. Video evidence, probably your car license.
Did he not think of the emergency shut off valve?v My understanding is that's a physical system. A hard physical shutoff from the tanks to the pumps.
Interesting, I took your comment the other way.
If Deroir had been a female, would Ms. Price have reacted differently. She certainly wouldn't have used "mansplaining" in her tirade.
I agree. She comes across as angry, insulting, and likely to drive away long term customers. She went nuclear after a civil comment making a minor game idea.
https://www.theverge.com/2018/...