"In return for allowing the public on the Internet"
Um, having paid for most of it, especially the DARPA work that made it all practical, I don;t feel the least bit of shame for taking advantage of some something I pay for still.
Yes, I pay for my Internet access, I pay for my servers and their access, I pay even for people who can't so they can go to the library and get access. I don't begrudge a dime of it. The Internet has changed everything, pretty much. Good deal.
But I don't know that I benefit much from Internet II, and it's instructive that so far no one has offered me any information on that, just a vague reference to some day when I'm sick, and of course, complaining that I'm complaining about taxes, which I'm not. They read that in where it wasn't.
1) If you knew how I felt about the Tea Party movement, you wouldn't waste the bits unless you just want a platform to vent your hyperbole.
2) Using the term 'tea bagging' is an intentional slur. You are diminished by it, except for your own insular group of the fellow-minded, which leaves you more isolated. Really, grow up and consider engaging in useful discourse. The insults remind me that this isn't about what is best for our country, it's about winning the battle and crushing the opposition. Short-sighted to go along with narrow-minded.
How do you know my ass is worthless? You know nothing about me, nor do you even know how I feel about paying taxes towards Internet II.
All I do is point out that I pay taxes, and the long-haird, dope-smoking, maggot-infested liberals come out and chastise me for my narrow, intolerant, unenlightened attittude.
See? It sounds just as stupid coming from me as it does from you. Go get an account.
Hey, Asshat, I do pay my taxes. my making a point of that is the reason some others of your ilk are trying to offend me. And hey, are you as interested in funding spaceflight and military research as much as I am funding Internet development? Bet you are NOT.
Sheesh, read huh? Oh, and you ought to get an account too.
This is the problem with subtle humor. If they don't get it is the author at fault for missing the mark, or is the audience at fault for failing to grasp the intention?
I never doubted the money would be huge. 30 years is worse than I expected.
And my sources included engineers with long experience in both accidents and decommissioning.
It's a mess, and worse than TEPCO has yet admitted to. The best-case scenario seems to be decades of cleanup, giving up on reactors 5 & 6, no discussion of the seawater problems or leaks.
Of course, the JA engineers aren't casting aspersions on their TEPCO brethren, are they?
"My acceptance of the results of science will change on a dime if evidence comes in to the contrary, and the degree of that acceptance scales in proportion to the evidence. Can you say the same about belief in God?"
Well, since in the absence of irrefutable evidence for th eexistence of God, to date, there is nothing to sway my faith.
However, if I am correct in my faith, then Christ's return will silence the doubters.
"It means that if you have a group of people with the same health problem, you should be able to heal them in the same way "
Well, here's the rub. At least for Christians, at least as I believe (and I'm a reasonably conventional reformed evangelical charismatic), you don't heal them. God heals them. Why is a very good question that has occupied theologists for a long time.
So this adds another impossible hurdle to the test of miracles. Right here, I should just cave and agree that such miracles are not repeatable, and so fail an important scientific test.
And yet, you might want to read up on Smith Wigglesworth.
"Science is demonstrable, repeatable and self-correcting."
If this is the standard, we have a problem.
The Christain faith is founded on Christ's virgin birth, sinless life, death, resurrection, and return. None of these events is repeatable, unless God chooses to offer us another Christ, and the clever rhetorical device of 'if God wishes' we will set aside for now.
So, if you wanted 'scientific' proof of Christ's validity, you are lost. It cannot be made. Much like some scientific theories of the creation of the Universe, which rely upon either the unobservable or unrepeatable, and sometimes rely on assumptions upon assumptions. But that corner of Science is a small one, and need not be considered as crucial to proof of the Scientific method or of Science itself. It can be speculative for now, and nothing is harmed in doing so.
Left with empirical proofs, you are probably going to refuse to believe, and that is your choice.
All I can offer for empirical proof is the testimony of several of Christ's contemporaries, most of whom went to their deaths defending their statements.
Which of your quantum physicists, especially the string theory experts, will accept death rather than even admit to the possibility that they are incorrect? No, that's not much of a test, and I don't think it's entirely applicable, but that is the fundamental question, that many have gone to their deaths defending their religious faith. There is something there that is dismissed much too casually.
But we are free to do so. And I do not expect to change anyone's mind. But just as I believe Fermilab may have found something very important recently, despite not seeing it for myself, I also believe the eivdence of my own eyes, and of my own body, when I claim to have witnessed and received healing in response to prayer. And without proof sufficient to claim objectivity, I won't ask you to believe based on such evidence.
But to accept some Science on nothing more than faith in the Scientifc Method is, in the end, faith by any other name. Just a reminder. Science doesn't disprove God. It just doesn't explain Him. Which it should not be expected to.
This, perhaps, is the greatest failing of religion, that it fails to adequately demonstrate the proofs it claims.
When a dozen teenagers from my former church went to Brazil in 2004 to volunteeer at a revival meeting, they witnessed healings, including restoration of hearing and sight. Without documentation, these healings are unverifiable. Documentation that should have included medical records that made obvious the ailments, examinations by doctors that verified the absence of the pre-existing ailments, and statements from those involved as to the circumstances.
It is not my former church because of thse witnesses. I believe these kids, first because they have no reason to lie, second because they have no history of lying, and third because there were many other sources of thse reports. But the verifiable documentation is not forthcoming, so I claim no 'proof'.
And repeatable healings are not possible. You can only be healed once, my friend. Multiple healings, that's a different matter. Look around, the reports are manifold. You will have to subject these to the same tests you do for any number of random scientific announcements. I understand if you do not accept them.
I'm not sure security is the big problem there. From what I can tell, draining the secondary containment and fixing the cooling systems are bigger issues. I'm happy you're not in charge of security, either. I just haven't heard much about security breaches. Most people seem to want to get away. At least the workers are sticking around, mostly.
First, the cesium issue is that it is longer-lived than iodine isotopes. It also tends to accumulate in bones. While iodine is fairly well defended against, cesium is more difficult...
The plutonium issue is precisely what everyone else seems to be glossing over. The #3 reactor is the only source of plutonium at Daiichi, and there is some minimal contamination detected immediately next to the reactor. The fear of some experts is that they may yet lose containment of #3, that the fuel may pool and eat through the floor of secondary containment, and then it's in the ground and groundwater. Clearly, they expect to be able to keep this fuel cool enough that it won't truly melt, but we've been assured more than few times that that isn't a problem, and it is now assumed by several experienced engineers to have already happened to a small extent. TEPCO is not your reliable source for info on this either. Most of this is under the heading of 'prepare for the worst'.
But #1 is again building pressure, and hydrogen. This is good, because containment is working well enough to build pressure. this is bad because an explosion will cause a lot of problems... They are trying to displace the hydrogen with nitrogen last I heard, though where the hydrogen goes I haven't looked into.
If #3 containment fails due to explosion or fuel fire, that would release plutonium, and likely as a cloud. The current expectation is that a #3 containment failure would be a meltdown, down through the floor, and plutonium would be a ground contaminant. I am not encouraged by that.
"Also bad is an explosive failure of the primary containment, but that's very unlikely these days"
This is quite possibly what has happened at #2, if I recall correctly. Lack of pressure buildup is seen as a failure of the vessel, and while it won't be described as 'explosive', that's the likely cause.
As for atmospheric releases, an ocean release doesn't seem that much more preferable. If the choice was between a burn and ash, vs. leaching and seawater contamination, I choose neither. Ultimately, we are facing a long-term discharge, I think. I don't see a workable plan to stop the water, since they are still pouring it on.
Even if they get the hydrogen under control, the amount of water, the damage to the secondary containment, the likely damage to primary containment, the contamination of the site, it's not just that Fukushima Daiichi will never operate again. Daiichi will be entombed and left to decay for at least a decade, probably longer, much longer. All six reactors are lost, 5&6 are just not going to be operated because it is too hot to work there 8 hours a day.
While they wait for decay to lower levels enough for machines to clean things up, there will be continuing groundwater and soil contamination. They will have to build a new seawall and interceptor wells to limit (not prevent) contamination of the local sea. The local population won't be allowed within 12km, and they won't WANT to be within 20km or more. Agriculture will likely be ruined, having to wait for years to once again export their products. It's the Cesium isotopes that will cause the worst problems, and cause the lasting effects, and they are not able to contain this yet. Hopefully #3 won't blow a Plutonium cloud that, even if it were minimal, would poison the area for the forseeable future. There is no assurance that this will not happen.
This is already inevitable, and there will be no real discussion, because TEPCO cannot admit to the inevitable outcome yet. To do so is to admit defeat, lose all face, and watch them become a single-yen stock.
And somehow Japan needs to replace the generating capacity. Quickly.
Overall this situation is redefining 'worst-case'. It may have been simpler to have a couple of core melts and just pour concrete and sand over the whole damned thing. Now we've gotten broken containment, multiple vectors, and inadequate resources. Oh, and the Japanese way of self-reliance to the point of failure. Works for the residents and their migration, doesn't work for engineering problems.
in gas, at today's usurous rates. Let's ignore insurance, tires, and repairs for the moment.
If would cost me about 4% net to take a 10% pay cut and stay home. In other words, a 6% cut would break even.
I already took a 15% cut in 2009 to keep my job. I'm not interested.
If, however, you're actually paying more than 10% of your gross on commuting, you might want to reconsider either your method of commuting, your distance, or your salary.
Because that seems like you're already losing, to me. And I'm on the cusp of losing.
Yes, for those of you about to give me a good going-over, I'm considering finding work closer to home, but this position has many advantages that have enough value to keep me here unless something very sweet comes up closer. And I'm not expecting anything. The market is not that good yet.
I can't quickly get a straight answer if Yoshi will run on my 32B witrh radio 2.22.23.02 (DangerSPL) and HBOOT 1.33.2005 (2k5 kernel hack). It SAYS radio 2.22.28.25 or 27.08, no kernel notes, but I suspect I get a new kernel with the ROM. And I will need a new SPL, 1.33.0013 or 1.33.0013d apparently, something of a downgrade I think, so I'll lose some RAM, like 15MB off the top maybe... They say 013d solves that, at least it's Danger-compatible.
I had enough trouble with CM, I'll try Yoshi when I've got a weekend to flash/wipe/restore/wip/restore/flash/wipe/restore/reinstall. I've had my G1 bricked so bad it needed to be JTAG'd, and I need to actually use it, so I'll wait until I get my other G1 back in the new casing...
I'm thinking of SenseUI etc. Launcher Pro isn't a Samsung or Motorola product, is it?
Asking "Why can (sic) manufacturers do the same?" misses the point entirely. The manufacturers use their own skins to add perceived value, differentiation, and revenue (ads, paid placements, etc.).
Just accept that manufacturers will keep adding skins no matter, and that problem will delay them delivering new releases. And remember when you bought a phone, and whatever it was on the day you bought it, that's all it ever was. Android is a big leap past that, even with frags.
"nimrod (nmrd) noun 1.also Nimrod A hunter. 2.Informal A person regarded as silly, foolish, or stupid. Origin: After Nimrod. Sense 2, probably from the phrase “poor little Nimrod,” used by the cartoon character Bugs Bunny to mock the hapless hunter Elmer Fudd."
I used the casual or slang form. I know who Nimrod was from the Bible.
Most fragermentation up to now has been due to hardware. My G1 (and the MT3G) won't run Gingerbread, no matter what. The OS finally outgrrew the old hardware.
Now, my G1 does run Froyo, CM 6 something, but that is a struggle.
And the memory constraints weren't limited to those phones. A few Moto phones also lack memory.
The next big problem is melding the UI some makers have into a new release. Blame openness.
Yes. And my niece who teaches fifth grade last year was required to teach vertice edge graphs and parallel/series resistance. to meet state testing requirements.
Not Ohm's Law, mind you. Just series/parallel resistance.
I had to go look up vertice edge graphs. What the &*($ does a fifth grader need those for? The state exam? Stupid.
Slashdot Mirror
"In return for allowing the public on the Internet"
Um, having paid for most of it, especially the DARPA work that made it all practical, I don;t feel the least bit of shame for taking advantage of some something I pay for still.
Yes, I pay for my Internet access, I pay for my servers and their access, I pay even for people who can't so they can go to the library and get access. I don't begrudge a dime of it. The Internet has changed everything, pretty much. Good deal.
But I don't know that I benefit much from Internet II, and it's instructive that so far no one has offered me any information on that, just a vague reference to some day when I'm sick, and of course, complaining that I'm complaining about taxes, which I'm not. They read that in where it wasn't.
Pus.
1) If you knew how I felt about the Tea Party movement, you wouldn't waste the bits unless you just want a platform to vent your hyperbole.
2) Using the term 'tea bagging' is an intentional slur. You are diminished by it, except for your own insular group of the fellow-minded, which leaves you more isolated. Really, grow up and consider engaging in useful discourse. The insults remind me that this isn't about what is best for our country, it's about winning the battle and crushing the opposition. Short-sighted to go along with narrow-minded.
How do you know my ass is worthless? You know nothing about me, nor do you even know how I feel about paying taxes towards Internet II.
All I do is point out that I pay taxes, and the long-haird, dope-smoking, maggot-infested liberals come out and chastise me for my narrow, intolerant, unenlightened attittude.
See? It sounds just as stupid coming from me as it does from you. Go get an account.
Hey, Asshat, I do pay my taxes. my making a point of that is the reason some others of your ilk are trying to offend me. And hey, are you as interested in funding spaceflight and military research as much as I am funding Internet development? Bet you are NOT.
Sheesh, read huh? Oh, and you ought to get an account too.
I don't have access to it, being just a private citizen with an average-paying job, all I do is pay the taxes to support it. Not for me to use.
This is the problem with subtle humor. If they don't get it is the author at fault for missing the mark, or is the audience at fault for failing to grasp the intention?
Ack. Like I need karma.
Some current events to consider:
Slashdot article, some Japan Atomic engineers (among others) lay out a long slog to fix this.
And Bloomberg's reporting.
I never doubted the money would be huge. 30 years is worse than I expected.
And my sources included engineers with long experience in both accidents and decommissioning.
It's a mess, and worse than TEPCO has yet admitted to. The best-case scenario seems to be decades of cleanup, giving up on reactors 5 & 6, no discussion of the seawater problems or leaks.
Of course, the JA engineers aren't casting aspersions on their TEPCO brethren, are they?
need.
Quote me on that.
They also will only need 2GB RAM, 32GB storage, and maybe an 8-threaded Nvidia GPU.
And maybe Flash. Some day.
Turns our 640k of RAM wasn't enough after all, but those people were just stupid.
"My acceptance of the results of science will change on a dime if evidence comes in to the contrary, and the degree of that acceptance scales in proportion to the evidence. Can you say the same about belief in God?"
Well, since in the absence of irrefutable evidence for th eexistence of God, to date, there is nothing to sway my faith.
However, if I am correct in my faith, then Christ's return will silence the doubters.
Until then, well, it's faith alone I suppose.
"It means that if you have a group of people with the same health problem, you should be able to heal them in the same way "
Well, here's the rub. At least for Christians, at least as I believe (and I'm a reasonably conventional reformed evangelical charismatic), you don't heal them. God heals them. Why is a very good question that has occupied theologists for a long time.
So this adds another impossible hurdle to the test of miracles. Right here, I should just cave and agree that such miracles are not repeatable, and so fail an important scientific test.
And yet, you might want to read up on Smith Wigglesworth.
"Science is demonstrable, repeatable and self-correcting."
If this is the standard, we have a problem.
The Christain faith is founded on Christ's virgin birth, sinless life, death, resurrection, and return. None of these events is repeatable, unless God chooses to offer us another Christ, and the clever rhetorical device of 'if God wishes' we will set aside for now.
So, if you wanted 'scientific' proof of Christ's validity, you are lost. It cannot be made. Much like some scientific theories of the creation of the Universe, which rely upon either the unobservable or unrepeatable, and sometimes rely on assumptions upon assumptions. But that corner of Science is a small one, and need not be considered as crucial to proof of the Scientific method or of Science itself. It can be speculative for now, and nothing is harmed in doing so.
Left with empirical proofs, you are probably going to refuse to believe, and that is your choice.
All I can offer for empirical proof is the testimony of several of Christ's contemporaries, most of whom went to their deaths defending their statements.
Which of your quantum physicists, especially the string theory experts, will accept death rather than even admit to the possibility that they are incorrect? No, that's not much of a test, and I don't think it's entirely applicable, but that is the fundamental question, that many have gone to their deaths defending their religious faith. There is something there that is dismissed much too casually.
But we are free to do so. And I do not expect to change anyone's mind. But just as I believe Fermilab may have found something very important recently, despite not seeing it for myself, I also believe the eivdence of my own eyes, and of my own body, when I claim to have witnessed and received healing in response to prayer. And without proof sufficient to claim objectivity, I won't ask you to believe based on such evidence.
But to accept some Science on nothing more than faith in the Scientifc Method is, in the end, faith by any other name. Just a reminder. Science doesn't disprove God. It just doesn't explain Him. Which it should not be expected to.
This, perhaps, is the greatest failing of religion, that it fails to adequately demonstrate the proofs it claims.
When a dozen teenagers from my former church went to Brazil in 2004 to volunteeer at a revival meeting, they witnessed healings, including restoration of hearing and sight. Without documentation, these healings are unverifiable. Documentation that should have included medical records that made obvious the ailments, examinations by doctors that verified the absence of the pre-existing ailments, and statements from those involved as to the circumstances.
It is not my former church because of thse witnesses. I believe these kids, first because they have no reason to lie, second because they have no history of lying, and third because there were many other sources of thse reports. But the verifiable documentation is not forthcoming, so I claim no 'proof'.
And repeatable healings are not possible. You can only be healed once, my friend. Multiple healings, that's a different matter. Look around, the reports are manifold. You will have to subject these to the same tests you do for any number of random scientific announcements. I understand if you do not accept them.
I'm not sure security is the big problem there. From what I can tell, draining the secondary containment and fixing the cooling systems are bigger issues. I'm happy you're not in charge of security, either. I just haven't heard much about security breaches. Most people seem to want to get away. At least the workers are sticking around, mostly.
First, the cesium issue is that it is longer-lived than iodine isotopes. It also tends to accumulate in bones. While iodine is fairly well defended against, cesium is more difficult...
The plutonium issue is precisely what everyone else seems to be glossing over. The #3 reactor is the only source of plutonium at Daiichi, and there is some minimal contamination detected immediately next to the reactor. The fear of some experts is that they may yet lose containment of #3, that the fuel may pool and eat through the floor of secondary containment, and then it's in the ground and groundwater. Clearly, they expect to be able to keep this fuel cool enough that it won't truly melt, but we've been assured more than few times that that isn't a problem, and it is now assumed by several experienced engineers to have already happened to a small extent. TEPCO is not your reliable source for info on this either. Most of this is under the heading of 'prepare for the worst'.
But #1 is again building pressure, and hydrogen. This is good, because containment is working well enough to build pressure. this is bad because an explosion will cause a lot of problems... They are trying to displace the hydrogen with nitrogen last I heard, though where the hydrogen goes I haven't looked into.
If #3 containment fails due to explosion or fuel fire, that would release plutonium, and likely as a cloud. The current expectation is that a #3 containment failure would be a meltdown, down through the floor, and plutonium would be a ground contaminant. I am not encouraged by that.
"Also bad is an explosive failure of the primary containment, but that's very unlikely these days"
This is quite possibly what has happened at #2, if I recall correctly. Lack of pressure buildup is seen as a failure of the vessel, and while it won't be described as 'explosive', that's the likely cause.
As for atmospheric releases, an ocean release doesn't seem that much more preferable. If the choice was between a burn and ash, vs. leaching and seawater contamination, I choose neither. Ultimately, we are facing a long-term discharge, I think. I don't see a workable plan to stop the water, since they are still pouring it on.
"big enough to view from a greater distance"
That's called a television. We have a multitude of remote control options that don't require multi-touch or even putting down the Diet Coke.
Even if they get the hydrogen under control, the amount of water, the damage to the secondary containment, the likely damage to primary containment, the contamination of the site, it's not just that Fukushima Daiichi will never operate again. Daiichi will be entombed and left to decay for at least a decade, probably longer, much longer. All six reactors are lost, 5&6 are just not going to be operated because it is too hot to work there 8 hours a day.
While they wait for decay to lower levels enough for machines to clean things up, there will be continuing groundwater and soil contamination. They will have to build a new seawall and interceptor wells to limit (not prevent) contamination of the local sea. The local population won't be allowed within 12km, and they won't WANT to be within 20km or more. Agriculture will likely be ruined, having to wait for years to once again export their products. It's the Cesium isotopes that will cause the worst problems, and cause the lasting effects, and they are not able to contain this yet. Hopefully #3 won't blow a Plutonium cloud that, even if it were minimal, would poison the area for the forseeable future. There is no assurance that this will not happen.
This is already inevitable, and there will be no real discussion, because TEPCO cannot admit to the inevitable outcome yet. To do so is to admit defeat, lose all face, and watch them become a single-yen stock.
And somehow Japan needs to replace the generating capacity. Quickly.
Overall this situation is redefining 'worst-case'. It may have been simpler to have a couple of core melts and just pour concrete and sand over the whole damned thing. Now we've gotten broken containment, multiple vectors, and inadequate resources. Oh, and the Japanese way of self-reliance to the point of failure. Works for the residents and their migration, doesn't work for engineering problems.
Imagine the joy when the early adopters figure this out.
And the joy when they get tired of haivng their TV in their lap all the time.
Tablets will, repeat, will be a fad. Then they will become a niche product.
in gas, at today's usurous rates. Let's ignore insurance, tires, and repairs for the moment.
If would cost me about 4% net to take a 10% pay cut and stay home. In other words, a 6% cut would break even.
I already took a 15% cut in 2009 to keep my job. I'm not interested.
If, however, you're actually paying more than 10% of your gross on commuting, you might want to reconsider either your method of commuting, your distance, or your salary.
Because that seems like you're already losing, to me. And I'm on the cusp of losing.
Yes, for those of you about to give me a good going-over, I'm considering finding work closer to home, but this position has many advantages that have enough value to keep me here unless something very sweet comes up closer. And I'm not expecting anything. The market is not that good yet.
I can't quickly get a straight answer if Yoshi will run on my 32B witrh radio 2.22.23.02 (DangerSPL) and HBOOT 1.33.2005 (2k5 kernel hack). It SAYS radio 2.22.28.25 or 27.08, no kernel notes, but I suspect I get a new kernel with the ROM. And I will need a new SPL, 1.33.0013 or 1.33.0013d apparently, something of a downgrade I think, so I'll lose some RAM, like 15MB off the top maybe... They say 013d solves that, at least it's Danger-compatible.
I had enough trouble with CM, I'll try Yoshi when I've got a weekend to flash/wipe/restore/wip/restore/flash/wipe/restore/reinstall. I've had my G1 bricked so bad it needed to be JTAG'd, and I need to actually use it, so I'll wait until I get my other G1 back in the new casing...
I'm thinking of SenseUI etc. Launcher Pro isn't a Samsung or Motorola product, is it?
Asking "Why can (sic) manufacturers do the same?" misses the point entirely. The manufacturers use their own skins to add perceived value, differentiation, and revenue (ads, paid placements, etc.).
Just accept that manufacturers will keep adding skins no matter, and that problem will delay them delivering new releases. And remember when you bought a phone, and whatever it was on the day you bought it, that's all it ever was. Android is a big leap past that, even with frags.
From yourdictionary.com:
"nimrod (nmrd)
noun
1.also Nimrod A hunter.
2.Informal A person regarded as silly, foolish, or stupid.
Origin: After Nimrod. Sense 2, probably from the phrase “poor little Nimrod,” used by the cartoon character Bugs Bunny to mock the hapless hunter Elmer Fudd."
I used the casual or slang form. I know who Nimrod was from the Bible.
Most fragermentation up to now has been due to hardware. My G1 (and the MT3G) won't run Gingerbread, no matter what. The OS finally outgrrew the old hardware.
Now, my G1 does run Froyo, CM 6 something, but that is a struggle.
And the memory constraints weren't limited to those phones. A few Moto phones also lack memory.
The next big problem is melding the UI some makers have into a new release. Blame openness.
Context, my cowardly friend. As with so many of your ilk, you ignore the context.
You should be forced to register. Or are you merely too lazy to log in?
Yes. And my niece who teaches fifth grade last year was required to teach vertice edge graphs and parallel/series resistance. to meet state testing requirements.
Not Ohm's Law, mind you. Just series/parallel resistance.
I had to go look up vertice edge graphs. What the &*($ does a fifth grader need those for? The state exam? Stupid.