Well the Russians really set the bar high then, didn't they?

Those were much different times. There were no 24 hour news channels, no internet, and radio was somewhat different then. Print was just about the only place this kind of thing would have showed up. And since most papers were more focused on the city they were based in, it's unlikely it would be reported in another cities paper. Remember, TV news was an hour, at best, in the evening. Even if it would have ended up on the evening news, it would probably have been mentioned in a 30 second bit at best. There wouldn't have been a 2 hour "special report" on it.

FTFY.

It's unsinkable I tell you!

I believe the tsunamis are why it's to be placed several miles off shore in 100 m of water, or more. At least that's what the summary said. As for the others, A giant rock colliding in the ocean, with or without the reactor, is going to be a pretty big problem. That's how we got the gulf of Mexico along with a possible planetary extinction event. You might as well be worried about the devil himself opening up a giant hole in the ground and swallowing the entire city you live in and bringing forth the apocalypse.

Or turns it into a giant rampaging lizard that destroys Tokyo.

Didn't Jello sue them over the Jello trademark and they changed their name to "Green Jelly"

Where are you shopping? Crucial M500 480GB $240is $.50 per GB. Seagate 4TB $165 is $.04 per GB.

Sadly we gave them away for free, in the name of (false) security, not long after September 11, 2001.

It doesn't matter if you find an account with a 5% return. At $5K per year you are not going to get to a million dollars between the time you graduate college and want to retire.

$417 per month ($5004 per year) at a rate of 5% compounded yearly will take 49 1/4 years to get to $1,006,351.71. Realistically you're not going to get a job right out of school that allows you to save that kind of cash, especially if you have student loans and need to start a household. Nor is a 5% rate of return all that realistic currently.

At a 3% rate of return it'll take almost 66 years.

Regardless of how they got there, it's a very visible and obvious problem in San Francisco. While there are other cities in the US that have higher homeless populations, SF is often sited as the on with the most visible and obvious population. Which was my entire point to begin with.

Perhaps part of the problem is that San Francisco is overloaded with homeless. So people become desensitized to the plight of the homeless there. Obviously this is pure speculation on my part. But I know that hospitals from other areas, and even other states bus their mentally ill to San Francisco

Yeah, but the batteries never ran out.

It's not. That's what the GP stated.

My retirement is in lottery tickets. ;-)

I suppose as long as you can work for 200 years, this will work out great. Too bad the rate of inflation is outstripping the .06% savings accounts are at right now. In 200 years, I'm not sure a million dollars is going to buy you a tall coffee at Star Bucks.