he had sex with a woman who was asleep, thus unable to consent.
Sorry, I don't give a flying fuck about that guy Assange but I have to intervene here: that idea that screwing a girl in Sweden who's asleep makes you guilty of rape is revolting bullshit that need to stop being thrown around. This entire thing has been discussed on reddit for instance here. As I wrote there:
The relevant part of the Swedish criminal code has been translated here and the wording makes it perfectly clear that what is punished as rape is the fact of having sex with someone, knowing that the person would not consent to it should this said person be aware of what was going on (e.g., said person was asleep, passed out, etc).
Basically this is a perfectly common and sensible definition of rape, that is probably valid in any western country, and does obviously not include things like making love to a girl you're in bed with while she's asleep, especially if she doesn't ask you to stop when she awakes. The Swedes are not crazy and it is ludicrous to attribute them insane laws like that.
Please for the love of the flying shit stop repeating such ridiculous nonsense this is hurting my gulliver.
Put a 1% tax on the sale price (not gains) for any stock which is held for less than 1 minute. HFT will instantly disappear.
I used to fancy on the idea of a 0.1% tax on any stock or financial product held for less than 1 month, or possibly 1 week. Would it make sense? I have the feeling it would rid us of any kind of speculation in a very short time and would possibly bring finance back to its true use, which is to provide funds to the economy. What would the drawbacks of such a system be?
This is going to be even funnier when a swatted fly falls into the printer and misprints your name. The potential consequences may be hilarious really.
that doesn't mean that the benefits doesn't vastly outweigh the risks
Even that part is not obvious, with vaccines like MMRV which may delay the outbreak of diseases to adulthood instead of keeping it restrained to childhood as it was. But slahshdotters don't like complex answers. It's so much more comfortable when everything can be expressed in terms of radioactive bananas.
Viruses are not decidedly living nor dead as far as we can tell. They are more like parasites to living cells but cannot be defined as living by themselves as they do nothing a living being does (in particular eating). They are "deactivated" in a vaccine, i.e., they have their most "toxic" part removed.
Also you should not have been downvoted for asking a genuine question.
You're making way too much sense for slashdot. The guys here like to fancy they can think but still it has to remain simple! Radioactive bananas are ok.
Please somebody point me to anything even vaguely comparable to the masterpiece that DirectoryOpus is on Windows. That will be the day when I switch to Linux on the desktop.
BTW, anyone reading this who has to hide porn from the So, should sit down and talk to there So about it, right now. Make a decision, either get comfortable watching it, or decide not to watch it.
I do wank as much as I want and nobody needs to know anything about it, wife included. She's not interested in it anyway, no more than she's interested in the stench of my shit. I'm perfectly comfortable with it. May I humbly suggest that you and your likes go fuck yourselves?
Anti-nuclear hysteria and subsequent heavy regulation
You seem to imply they were unwarranted, which the article you cite does not corroborate. "Several nuclear related accidents and cover-ups" do in fact perfectly justify public suspicion (which you call hysteria) and stricter regulation, even if this implies additional costs. This is not specific to the nuclear industry.
Japan discontinued a bunch of new nuclear construction projects from the late 90s to early 00s. Fukushima's lifespan was subsequently extended. I'd say there's a definite cause and effect here.
And where does it say that this was because of anti-nuclear activism? Looks to me this could very well and in fact much more plausibly due to simple financial reasons.
Most of the radioactive part is U-238, which is barely more radioactive than your typical rock (half life 4/4 Billion years).
This argument is misleading at best since toxicity of radioactive elements is incomparable depending on whether the exposure is internal or external. External typical rock radioactivity is probably negligible. Internal exposure of aerosoled U238 is markedly more dangerous.
that's why the old ones are still running in many cases.
I don't believe that, and I think you are deluding yourself at best, dishonest at worst. The reason if much more probably because it's more profitable to let things go this way.
A fission nuclear bomb consumes a large part of its fissile fuel for its explosion
Not really, Fat Man converted about 20% of it's Pu load into energy; also of lot of radioactive elements were probably produced by the encasing during the explosion.
And it contains a small amount of it, to begin with
That's most certainly the point. Fat Man contained 6kg of plutonium. Tepco estimates that about 68 tons of fuel melted in Fukushima reactor no 1 alone.
I read also that one of the reason to put them on the quake-threatened east coast rather than on the seismically more quiet west coast was that the dominant winds blowing eastwards meant that normal gaseous radioactive emissions were to be blown over the Pacific ocean rather than over populated areas. And it happened that during the Fukushima accident, the winds blowing mostly offshore did in fact prevent a much more serious outcome.
Slashdot Mirror
he had sex with a woman who was asleep, thus unable to consent.
Sorry, I don't give a flying fuck about that guy Assange but I have to intervene here: that idea that screwing a girl in Sweden who's asleep makes you guilty of rape is revolting bullshit that need to stop being thrown around. This entire thing has been discussed on reddit for instance here. As I wrote there:
The relevant part of the Swedish criminal code has been translated here and the wording makes it perfectly clear that what is punished as rape is the fact of having sex with someone, knowing that the person would not consent to it should this said person be aware of what was going on (e.g., said person was asleep, passed out, etc).
Basically this is a perfectly common and sensible definition of rape, that is probably valid in any western country, and does obviously not include things like making love to a girl you're in bed with while she's asleep, especially if she doesn't ask you to stop when she awakes. The Swedes are not crazy and it is ludicrous to attribute them insane laws like that.
Please for the love of the flying shit stop repeating such ridiculous nonsense this is hurting my gulliver.
Put a 1% tax on the sale price (not gains) for any stock which is held for less than 1 minute. HFT will instantly disappear.
I used to fancy on the idea of a 0.1% tax on any stock or financial product held for less than 1 month, or possibly 1 week. Would it make sense? I have the feeling it would rid us of any kind of speculation in a very short time and would possibly bring finance back to its true use, which is to provide funds to the economy. What would the drawbacks of such a system be?
This is going to be even funnier when a swatted fly falls into the printer and misprints your name. The potential consequences may be hilarious really.
that doesn't mean that the benefits doesn't vastly outweigh the risks
Even that part is not obvious, with vaccines like MMRV which may delay the outbreak of diseases to adulthood instead of keeping it restrained to childhood as it was. But slahshdotters don't like complex answers. It's so much more comfortable when everything can be expressed in terms of radioactive bananas.
Viruses are not decidedly living nor dead as far as we can tell. They are more like parasites to living cells but cannot be defined as living by themselves as they do nothing a living being does (in particular eating). They are "deactivated" in a vaccine, i.e., they have their most "toxic" part removed.
Also you should not have been downvoted for asking a genuine question.
You're making way too much sense for slashdot. The guys here like to fancy they can think but still it has to remain simple! Radioactive bananas are ok.
But I thought vaccines were perfectly safe and anybody doubting the dogma was a hopeless idiot?
Going after those producing it is going to be even more efficient.
I think we've evolved this response over time to ensure the continuation of our species.
I think this is a very bad interpretation of the theory of evolution.
Please somebody point me to anything even vaguely comparable to the masterpiece that DirectoryOpus is on Windows. That will be the day when I switch to Linux on the desktop.
BTW, anyone reading this who has to hide porn from the So, should sit down and talk to there So about it, right now. Make a decision, either get comfortable watching it, or decide not to watch it.
I do wank as much as I want and nobody needs to know anything about it, wife included. She's not interested in it anyway, no more than she's interested in the stench of my shit. I'm perfectly comfortable with it. May I humbly suggest that you and your likes go fuck yourselves?
Thanks for the interesting - and seemingly quite needed - clarification.
Interesting thoughts, but you should fix your shift key.
That's how probable cause works. You can't just arrest somebody willy nilly.
Beg your pardon, you definitely can if he's black.
Nuclear proponents (or should I say "nuclear islamists"?) have been so much more cold-headed and rational lately.
Anti-nuclear hysteria and subsequent heavy regulation
You seem to imply they were unwarranted, which the article you cite does not corroborate. "Several nuclear related accidents and cover-ups" do in fact perfectly justify public suspicion (which you call hysteria) and stricter regulation, even if this implies additional costs. This is not specific to the nuclear industry.
Japan discontinued a bunch of new nuclear construction projects from the late 90s to early 00s. Fukushima's lifespan was subsequently extended. I'd say there's a definite cause and effect here.
And where does it say that this was because of anti-nuclear activism? Looks to me this could very well and in fact much more plausibly due to simple financial reasons.
Most of the radioactive part is U-238, which is barely more radioactive than your typical rock (half life 4/4 Billion years).
This argument is misleading at best since toxicity of radioactive elements is incomparable depending on whether the exposure is internal or external. External typical rock radioactivity is probably negligible. Internal exposure of aerosoled U238 is markedly more dangerous.
that's why the old ones are still running in many cases.
I don't believe that, and I think you are deluding yourself at best, dishonest at worst. The reason if much more probably because it's more profitable to let things go this way.
A fission nuclear bomb consumes a large part of its fissile fuel for its explosion
Not really, Fat Man converted about 20% of it's Pu load into energy; also of lot of radioactive elements were probably produced by the encasing during the explosion.
And it contains a small amount of it, to begin with
That's most certainly the point. Fat Man contained 6kg of plutonium. Tepco estimates that about 68 tons of fuel melted in Fukushima reactor no 1 alone.
You need to differentiate between internal and external exposure. Bragging random bullshit about nuclear energy is not going to help it.
You can get a patent for stuff like that?
You can get a patent for clicking once on a mouse button.
Care to elaborate?
Yes and you're probably part of the 1%, amiright?
I read also that one of the reason to put them on the quake-threatened east coast rather than on the seismically more quiet west coast was that the dominant winds blowing eastwards meant that normal gaseous radioactive emissions were to be blown over the Pacific ocean rather than over populated areas. And it happened that during the Fukushima accident, the winds blowing mostly offshore did in fact prevent a much more serious outcome.