Right. If only someone had the vision to write (Economic) Science Fiction. . . (or maybe that's Fantasy writing right there. . . )

Yes; I'm looking back at my "mac fanboi problems" from the 1990's, and the reason I bought Macs then, was to run Mac OS, or some mac-only software - the hardware was always pretty much playing "catch up". The fishtank-iMac was the first glimmer of hope on the hardware front. The dual G5 was amazing, even if OS X was kind of rough.

But at a certain point, it became obvious that the OS team was being pillaged of talent for the i-device (iOS) team. The fact that Apple pulled all support for PPC kind of put a knife in it for me. And that's when I went over to PC hardware.

Windows 8 was an amazing opportunity for Apple - and they totally blew it. Microsoft tripped, stumbled, and Apple could have curb-stomped them with a great development effort to tune-up OS X. They blew that opportunity off. And Microsoft STILL isn't really on their feet yet.

Now: I have a macbook pro - because it's just an "insanely great" piece of hardware. But the ONLY reason I'm running OS X is to be able to use VMWare Fusion. If VMWare Fusion's features were available on Linux, that's what I would be running on my MBP.

I suspect arson was somewhat frowned on then as it is now.

lol. If it "creates jobs" - then it is pretty much accepted with open arms, if not worshiped and deified.

just a word about this program - sometimes it gets flagged as spyware. I don't know if it's because f.lux has to know your location (in order to time the local sunset) - or if there's something else going on. There are some other programs. There is g.lux, and redshift, for starters.

Oh look, here come the same "social engineers" that brought us soaring male suicide rates and burgeoning single motherhood with it's associated social outcomes,

The only problem with this statement, is while these theories on raising children are a relatively new thing (last 100 years or so) - it can not be demonstrated that any kids are ACTUALLY being raised this way. Maybe a few, here and there, but by and large, most parents still raise their kids using traditional violence-based methods.

So to blame these new science-backed techniques for the "decline of modern civilization" is just a bunch of bullshit; to justify frustrated parents whose first tool in their parenting toolbox is the paddle.

Lol, in Gary, you're at much higher risk from industrial pollution than you are from random hooligan violence on the street. That shit gets into your body every day, all day long. You can't shoot it back. And it's completely legal.

Exactly.

And if NK wanted to REALLY threaten Sony; they'd just assassinate Seth Rogan. Seems like the easiest and most sensible thing to do. Seriously. The rest of this just makes no fucking sense at all.

he idea of moving the population to local cities where they can use public transportation especially in less dense areas like the United States, just won't happen. If you tell the population that they need to move from their houses which they have put a lot of money in, and live in an area the matches how they want to live and go to a crowed loud crime ridden city, will cause a lot of people to put a gun to your face, whether or not it is legal to have guns.

bah. Worked out well for Stalin, didn't it?

People are still moving to the central valley and commuting to jobs on the coast

Why are there only jobs on the coast?

I think this is the real root of the problem. Everybody wants to cram into (for example) Silicon Valley - because it's where the best paying, most stable jobs are. Why can't these employers employ workers elsewhere. I've actually worked for a company that tried that tactic. Guess what? During hard times, (or mergers), they tend to shut remote sites down, and the workers are laid off or uprooted.

But yeah - a lot of problems would be resolved if employment were more distributed.

This is because America is without responsible civilians. Or non-civilians, for that matter.

The cleanup will consist of getting those bioconcentrating mushrooms to grow across the contaminated region, then harvesting and isolating them as nuclear waste.

Well, that sounds cost-effective. I'm sure the shareholders will be pleased. Unless they're not on the hook for this cost, and we taxpayers are.

Does not the fuel, inside the wreckage of the reactor building, continually produce new I-131, Cs-134, Cs-137, Sr-90, Radon, Xenon, and a host of others? The fuel is no longer critical, but fission of the enriched Uranium is ongoing. That's why the stuff is still physically and radiologically hot. Production of radionuclides will be ongoing for many thousands of years.

It's true that the nuclides will be more or less contained inside the reactor building, but some of it will seep out, because it's not hermetically sealed like the reactor containment was. If you seal it (ie. make an airtight sarcophagus) - then heat from decay will build-up. It requires air circulation to cool, and that's the whole point of the sarcophagus. It will still allow some byproducts to get out, and will affect all of those who are nearby; and this will continue until the fuel cools enough for workers to get in there, physically remove it, and put it into sealed storage.

It's the ongoing release and exposure of these materials that is the health-hazard. And it will remain so for thousands of years. This is precisely why safety systems for nuclear plants are so highly engineered. This was the scenario they never wanted to happen.

Chernobyl wasn't ever dangerous, since only a few dozen people were killed.

Also; you can't call it "Engineering" if you don't have a process that is well-documented, tested, proven, and repeatable. Also: good luck with that.

Just remember to get buy-in from ALL stakeholders, first!

(good luck with that).