i know, but to paraphrase my favourite slashdot troll: "ffmpeg = stagnated".
look at the rate of commits to both projects, and more importantly, look at the number of significant forks and projects that have switched over to libav for their media needs.
and the Australian government was in the habit of killing large numbers of Indigenous people back then (or removing their children). whatever mineral deposit they were living on, rest assured they would be killed en masse for it. sad times.
however you raise a valid point about the fuel cycle needing to be taken into account.
there have been accidents at reprocessing facilities etc.
the coal fuel cycle is pretty shitty too.
power generation is shitty. those are the breaks.
now let's try make it less shitty, in whatever form is most appropriate.
the way i see the whole pro nuke anti nuke situation is this:
pro nuke: "these designs are as safe as they can be. there's defence in depth, so even if everything goes wrong, not all that much will go wrong" anti nuke: " AAAAAAARRGGHHH!! ATOMS!!1!" me: "defence in depth depends on how good the designer's imagination is".
the fact there was a station blackout is the main problem here. the second problem is the potential (and still unknown) damage caused to the vessels and containment structures by the freaking huge quake that hit. i think defence in depth worked beautifully, but the depth wasn't quite deep enough.
new designs are passively cooled, so this wouldn't happen, but it's still far too easy to imagine a situation that could fuck it big time. even a vanishingly small chance may occur on a long enough timeline, and these things run for a long time.
i think nuclear is necessary, but the potential human problems mean that much has to be done to make it _really_ safe.
with that said, it is still safer than the practical way of generating power. research can go into two places here - one is making renewables more practical, the other is making nuclear safer. much good can be done in both those areas.
Fukushima proves what happens when a relatively safe (safety is always relative when you're trying to generate large amounts of power by any means whatsoever - large amounts of power are dangerous in any form they come in) design gets hit by a monster earthquake and an unprecedented tsunami.
it's a fucking big disaster, yes, but seriously, look at the death toll of the earthquake and tsunami versus the death toll for Fukushima. even look at projected cancer deaths, etc etc.
one thing i'd like to hear more about is that fucking big fire at the oil refinery that was on the news seconds before the nuclear story broke. i've not heard a thing about it. things can't have gone too well there, considering the chopper-mounted news cameras had to keep zooming out to fit all the flames into the frame...
"the idiot driver crashed the car. the airbag deployed, the crumple zones absorbed the majority of the impact, and the functioning brakes and tyres kept the speed of the impact very low. the driver was not injured at all. this car is therefore horribly dangerous and all cars should be banned".
certainly, about 4000 were estimated to have died from cancers related to the accident.
but then, are we including cancer deaths in our estimate of fossil-fuel power related deaths? or just deaths on the job?
only about 50 (too lazy to hit wikipedia in the middle of a rant, but i think it was 46 or so) died directly at the plant - mainly firefighters. as far as cancers from radiation exposure from the resulting radioactive smoke, it's anybody's guess. just like it is with coal power, or even asbestos mining.
the infuriating thing is people's politics (on both sides of the fence) prevent any meaningful figures or comparisons being devised.
Slashdot Mirror
the only really on-topic (albeit a bit meta) post gets modded offtopic by some saddo.
and when you take a seat, check under it for deadly red-back spiders and blue-arse flies.
successful troll is successful!
bravo!
excuse me while i get wasted on some water with the memory of hard liquor imprinted in it.
apparently men and women understand sarcasm equally.
i'm not sure what that makes you.
the smaller and more precise these things get, the more chance they have of becoming a self-replicating machine.
i, for one, welcome our new colourful plastic overlords.
strippers make more cash and don't have to fuck disgusting people...
why did you stop updating www.timecube.com?
i just spent my 15 points in yet another conservative "don't tax the rich" circlejerk thread.
but one of my hobbies is modding AC posts "insightful". i guess your timing was off, or mine was.
i know, but to paraphrase my favourite slashdot troll: "ffmpeg = stagnated".
look at the rate of commits to both projects, and more importantly, look at the number of significant forks and projects that have switched over to libav for their media needs.
i'm sure the maintainers of projects like ffmpeg (now libav) and x264 would be getting up there.
a couple years ago thousands of people died when a chemical plant exploded in india
that was quite a few years ago, actually.
we could talk about superfund sites in the USA as well, like Love Canal.
or Minimata for that matter...
i know several college educated people with mental illnesses, the symptoms of which include auditory and visual hallucinations.
mental illness wasn't particularly well understood back in the day.
not really... we revel in that shit.
just look at Kath and Kim.
That's like saying it's Microsoft's fault that someone used a Windows computer to write a virus.
can we leave Apple fanboys out of this, just this once? this doesn't involve them.
i think it's terribly efficient actually. if a little hodge-podge.
i love the fact that one can say something and completely fuck the grammar out of it, and yet still be understood.
redundancy is actually quite important in a language, especially when the phonics we've inherited from the Romans can have such similar sounds.
try distinguish between "n" and "m" over the phone. you can't.
the uranium in the '50s was mined for weapons...
and the Australian government was in the habit of killing large numbers of Indigenous people back then (or removing their children). whatever mineral deposit they were living on, rest assured they would be killed en masse for it. sad times.
however you raise a valid point about the fuel cycle needing to be taken into account.
there have been accidents at reprocessing facilities etc.
the coal fuel cycle is pretty shitty too.
power generation is shitty. those are the breaks.
now let's try make it less shitty, in whatever form is most appropriate.
people like you will not be satisfied until the "true" 100% death rate of chernobyl is released in 100 years.
in 2111 AD: OMG 100% of people who lived near Chernobyl in 1986 are now dead!!1!
the way i see the whole pro nuke anti nuke situation is this:
pro nuke: "these designs are as safe as they can be. there's defence in depth, so even if everything goes wrong, not all that much will go wrong"
anti nuke: " AAAAAAARRGGHHH!! ATOMS!!1!"
me: "defence in depth depends on how good the designer's imagination is".
the fact there was a station blackout is the main problem here. the second problem is the potential (and still unknown) damage caused to the vessels and containment structures by the freaking huge quake that hit. i think defence in depth worked beautifully, but the depth wasn't quite deep enough.
new designs are passively cooled, so this wouldn't happen, but it's still far too easy to imagine a situation that could fuck it big time. even a vanishingly small chance may occur on a long enough timeline, and these things run for a long time.
i think nuclear is necessary, but the potential human problems mean that much has to be done to make it _really_ safe.
with that said, it is still safer than the practical way of generating power. research can go into two places here - one is making renewables more practical, the other is making nuclear safer. much good can be done in both those areas.
different datasets entirely.
Fukushima proves what happens when a relatively safe (safety is always relative when you're trying to generate large amounts of power by any means whatsoever - large amounts of power are dangerous in any form they come in) design gets hit by a monster earthquake and an unprecedented tsunami.
it's a fucking big disaster, yes, but seriously, look at the death toll of the earthquake and tsunami versus the death toll for Fukushima. even look at projected cancer deaths, etc etc.
one thing i'd like to hear more about is that fucking big fire at the oil refinery that was on the news seconds before the nuclear story broke. i've not heard a thing about it. things can't have gone too well there, considering the chopper-mounted news cameras had to keep zooming out to fit all the flames into the frame...
no, the analogy is more like:
"the idiot driver crashed the car. the airbag deployed, the crumple zones absorbed the majority of the impact, and the functioning brakes and tyres kept the speed of the impact very low. the driver was not injured at all. this car is therefore horribly dangerous and all cars should be banned".
you beat me to it!
it depends how you quantify it.
certainly, about 4000 were estimated to have died from cancers related to the accident.
but then, are we including cancer deaths in our estimate of fossil-fuel power related deaths? or just deaths on the job?
only about 50 (too lazy to hit wikipedia in the middle of a rant, but i think it was 46 or so) died directly at the plant - mainly firefighters. as far as cancers from radiation exposure from the resulting radioactive smoke, it's anybody's guess. just like it is with coal power, or even asbestos mining.
the infuriating thing is people's politics (on both sides of the fence) prevent any meaningful figures or comparisons being devised.
evacuating Boston?
people would just assume there were some lite-brites mounted on a bridge.
you should go watch "old boy".
did you never go anywhere but home and college?
fuck man, i spend the vanishing minority of my time at university actually attending classes.
you might know me from that busy intersection near your work. come by and mention slashdot, and i'll squeegie your windscreen for free!