I'm amazed that you can be moderated up for that post. Fukushima's workers did everything they could to avert the distaster, including risking their own lives.
What caused Fukushima was the sea wall was too low (and that was already a know fact, even before the earthquake).
Also, the reactor had several critical design flaws:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB...

Nuclear reprocessing is one of the biggests myths proponed by nuclear advocates.
Only the plutonium, which is less than 1% of the spent fuel rod, can be really used again as MOX. However the process to seperate the plutonium is a extremely expensive and dirty one, involving pumping low level nuclear waste into the sea.
The rest of the uranium in the used fuel rod is uneconomical to reprocess because of contaminated with U232 and U-236:

"No use of reprocessed uranium in French reactors in the near future
The uranium recovered from reprocessing of spent fuel in France is not expected to be used for the manufacture of nuclear fuel in the near future. French utility EdF rather has made provisions for long-term storage of the reprocessed uranium for 250 years. This was revealed in a report of the French Court of Auditors on the decommissioning of nuclear facilities and the management of radioactive wastes.

Usage of the reprocessed uranium (REPU) is problematic for several reasons: since the REPU is contaminated with the artificial uranium isotopes U-232 and U-236, special precautions are necessary during processing: the U-232 and its decay products cause elevated radiation doses for the plant personnel, and the U-236 as a neutron absorber requires higher enrichment levels to achieve the same reactivity. In consequence, use of the REPU is not very attractive at present market conditions: conversion is three times more expensive than conversion of natural uranium, and enrichment cannot be done in France's sole enrichment plant (Eurodif gazeous diffusion plant), since the REPU would contaminate the plant's circuits. "

There are other, better reviews for this card, for instance Tom's hardware, but every single hardware review story on Slashdot seems to be obliged to link to Hothardware.
So, which editor own's Hothardware shares?

AMD have an agreement with globalfoundries, so it may not be as bad as you think

No, that's not it.
Intel said that they will provide foundry services for any company willing to pay the price, no exceptions.
The reason Intel is a non-option for AMD and Nvidia is, obviously, the price is too high.
Intel are accustomed to enjoying a 65% margin and that's the way they want to keep it. Brian Krzanich publicly stated this at the Citi 2014 Global Technology Conference in so many words.

Ha ha. You really think owning a fab is advantagous?
AMD did have it's own fab and the massive capital expenditure to keep that going nearly drove them to bankruptcy. Neither AMD nor Nvidia have the volume to justify owning their own fab.
The fabless model works just fine - you will note that Apple and Qualcomm, the companies getting first tabs on 14/16nm, are both fabless companies.

Ha ha. You really think owning a fab is advantagous?
AMD did have it's own fab and the massive capital expenditure to keep that going nearly drove them to bankruptcy. Neither AMD nor Nvidia have the volumn to justify owning their own fab.
The fabless model works just fine - you will note that Apple and Qualcomm, the companies getting first tabs on 14/16nm, are both fabless companies.

No, because Ivy Bridge was 22nm and this is 14nm

I use google news quite a bit. It's essential for investors, for instance, if you need to know the latest company rumours.
But will it block the service for anyone with a Spanish IP, or is it just blocked from google.es?
And what about Bing, will they block Bing too?

Yes, Nvidia is always better, but what about Intel then? How does Intel OpenGL support stack up against AMD?

Investing in Chinese companies is probably a tactic to get on the good side of the Chinese government.
Consider what Intel is doing in China: giving away subsidised SoC's that compete directly with local Chinese companies. That sort of anti-competive behavour normally attacts tariffs (a similiar sort of thing has happen before US Department of Commerce Ignores WTO, Imposes Preliminary Anti-Dumping Tariffs of 26-165%

AMD will probabably leave the tablet market:
http://www.pcworld.com/article...

The tablet market is in a price battle and profit margins for chip makers are minuscule, said Kevin Lensing, senior director for mobility solutions at AMD.

âoeWeâ(TM)re evaluating [tablets] closely. Itâ(TM)s not our priority,â Lensing said.

The real reason why Nvidia tablet is doomed is because of the lack of games written for it. They aren't anywhere near as much AAA games as for Playstation, or XBox.

Considering that the USA reciently put tariffs on Chinese produced solar panels, because they were being subsidised by the Chinese government. I wonder if the Chinese could do the same thing, as Intel's subsidised SoC's are competing primarily in the Chinese market against local Chinese companies (i.e Mediatek)

Yes, also it's quite telling that Intel's low cost SoFIA SoC (i.e. they one that will not require contra revenue to sell) is made at TSMC, not at Intel's own fabs.