I support human cloning. Why not? Maybe some of us are too valuable to waste by mixing our genetics with an inferior being. I'm sure there are people who think like that. But to replace a child? Not only would the kid always worry about whether or not he was "wanted" or "playing his role" correctly, but the parents would quite likely overcompensate in one way or another. Would you really want to be a "replacement" whose parents either spoiled you stupid for being someone that isn't "you" or neglect you because you don't "match" the way you should?

Yea, I started visiting a few days ago. Interesting to see the culture and topic differences between there and here. I need to up my tech related vocab though.

And you could have easily done that with safe search before. So why remove unfiltered search?

No, you have misunderstood. Google already had a functioning method of removing those sorts of results. It was based on your filter setting. Now they have removed the "no filtering" option. I should have to search "paris hilton sex tape" if the best result for "paris hilton" is the paris hilton sex tape. Filter whatever you want google, but give me the option to turn off the nanny.

That does not justify the choice to remove the ability to opt out from these "enhancements".

Bitcoins are a virtual currency? Oh, please do tell! Thank you for letting slashdot know..this is the first we've heard of it!

That incident was directly related to very poor choices made by that CO that were contrary to training and procedure. Unless this investigations some how turns up that the CO encouraged or forced an environment where standard safety practices were compromised, there is no reason for him to be punished.

Yes, you are once again perfectly right. It is a terrible thing to have happened.

That said, there are systems and procedures in place and they work damn well. These are extremely dangerous environments and the civilians and submariners that work on them face risks like this every day.

Bottom line..shit happens. We will have training, we will review procedures, and there will be a massive critique. That said, when it comes down to it...shit happens.

You can never make anything perfect. To be so full of anger over one major accident when the group it is part of (US nuclear submarines) has an unrivaled safety record next to the huge dangers they operate with.
br. People get angry at the idea of a nuclear power plant in their state yet the US Submarine forces regularly runs dozens of reactors within miles of elementary schools because we have earned that level of trust due to our diligence and safety records.

Yes, it burns and produces toxic gas. Do you propose we insulate the hull and piping with aluminum?

This is not a surface ship; the submarine has two compartments. There is no way to flood one specific area with halon.

If you really need to have a list of the numerous flammable things that could be on board a ship during a refit period, then my original point stands.

If you are expecting someone to know what the first fuel of a fire which has an undetermined cause, I would return the question about literacy to you.

I just went through a thirty month ERO on an SSBN; I'm not speaking without experience. We maintained a third of the crew on board or, during the most extensive work(which the Miami had not yet reached) on a barge a hundred yards away to maintain watches and do work. Granted, SSBN/SSN have some differences, but overall we follow the same guidance. Anyway, my original point was to correct the claim that the ship was probably unmanned.

You misunderstood what the other submariner said. No class of US submarines has an automatic fire suppression system. It is up to the crew to fight fires.

Thank you for raising that point. The battery alone is a huge fire risk. These are not pure metal ships.

They shouldn't burn so bad that they are scraped, but that does not mean the proper precautions weren't in place or that your suggestions aren't ridiculous.

In drydock there are many cuts in the hull and equipment added or removed that makes obtaining an air tight seal impossible. Not to mention that, as was mentioned many times by other people, simply cutting off the air is not sufficient. These are not WW2 boats - these things are massive with more air than you give them credit for. All of this ignores the risk of simply allowing a fire to burn on in the presence of a nuclear reactor.