Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Just Accept the Realpolitik (Score 0) 645

by bobbied (#47775717) Attached to: Russian Military Forces Have Now Invaded Ukraine

If not for this, when?

We have a treaty with Ukraine that specifically states we (NATO) would come to their defense in exactly this situation. Unless we intend to destroy NATO and pleasure ourselves with economic sanctions, we are really going to have to do something about this. But who knows what a pacifist administration with only 3 years left will really want to do? My guess is play another round or two while letting the UN blather on and on. (Or more to the point, pass the buck/blame on to the next administration if they can).

Comment: Re:Send in the drones! (Score 4, Insightful) 645

by bobbied (#47775485) Attached to: Russian Military Forces Have Now Invaded Ukraine

It is the tepid response given to atrocities elsewhere that has sent the message that Putin can do this with impunity. He knows he can get away with this and only risk getting Russian assets frozen world wide. That might tick off the rich guys some, but Putin isn't really elected by them anyway.

Comment: Re:What else can they do? (Score 1) 154

by bobbied (#47773615) Attached to: New NRC Rule Supports Indefinite Storage of Nuclear Waste

Carter really messed up with that decision...

We can change that any time. Don't blame Carter. It's being done deliberately. Ask yourself who stands to gain if the status quo is maintained.

Bush was going down that road, but Obama reversed course. The On and Off nature of political support for this makes it impossible to actually do here in the US. The facilities that are used for this are complicated, expensive and take years to build and are dangerous for years after they are shutdown. Until the environmentalists loose control of the left, the democratic position will be "no" on reprocessing.

Comment: Re:Yucca (Score 1) 154

by bobbied (#47773539) Attached to: New NRC Rule Supports Indefinite Storage of Nuclear Waste

Still, it would have been better just to bury this stuff in Yucca mountain. Given the situation, it would be safer. Of course, my personal feelings are that we should reprocess this fuel, bury the really bad stuff in Yucca and use the rest. Lather, rinse and repeat until all the fuel is used, or just store reprocessed fuel it until nuclear becomes cost effective again.

Yucca is/was safe, questions about the data not withstanding.

Comment: Re:That's not how science works (Score 1) 137

by bobbied (#47770681) Attached to: Underground Experiment Confirms Fusion Powers the Sun

You got that right. That physics lab was a real snooze...

Actually, I kind of enjoyed the physics and chemistry labs, where we got to put all the fancy math they'd been teaching us to use in predicting stuff and measuring things like the speed of light. Even though the experiments had been done for centuries, the matching of the math to the physical world still seems a wonder to me and made me greatly respect the thinkers of old who figured all this stuff out, then invented the math to prove they where right..

Comment: What else can they do? (Score 4, Interesting) 154

by bobbied (#47770587) Attached to: New NRC Rule Supports Indefinite Storage of Nuclear Waste

Yucca mountain is a no go for political reasons, not scientific ones, so what else can we do?

The really sad thing is that there still is a lot of useable fuel in all that if we here allowed to reprocess it. Not to mention that reprocessing would greatly reduce the size of the high level waste. Carter really messed up with that decision...

So, for now, it's store in place and guard the stuff. But this is only really a problem until it cools enough to not require being under water anymore. After that guarding it isn't that hard or expensive. It can be packaged in such a way that getting into it would take hours and industrial equipment. Guarding it just means walking by every day or so and making sure nobody is messing with the containers.

Comment: Re:Red Hat distribution. (Score 1) 230

by bobbied (#47770493) Attached to: How Red Hat Can Recapture Developer Interest

As most people who know, Enterprise software means over priced software, that barely works, but somehow it makes executives feel good about using it, probably because they need a full IT Staff just to keep it running.

No, that's not a reason for using Red Hat. The reason to pay Red Hat is for support. Lets say you have an issue that your "expert" is unable to resolve. If you have Red Hat license, you put in a ticket with them and access the stable of engineers they keep employed to get you an answer. Chances are they have seen the issue before and many times have the developer who wrote the stuff in house. If you actually find a bug, they work that for you too because they have open relationships with the development teams for the things they use (and again may actually have the developers on staff).

You buy Red Hat for support, nothing more. If you don't want support, run CentOS, don't pay Red Hat, unless you absolutely need support.

Comment: Re:Dump SELinux and systemd, make it easier (Score 1) 230

by bobbied (#47770445) Attached to: How Red Hat Can Recapture Developer Interest

You do realize that SE-Linux was not originally a Red Hat thing right? That little nightmare came from the NSA. But it is now firmly part of the Linux Kernel so you can blame the Kernel team for keeping it around. SE Linux has it's place though, when you need really enhanced security, which just doesn't include most people running this stuff at home or in corporate environments. High Security = pain to setup, so you get what you pay for.

Systemd is also not something that originated with Red Hat. But it seems to me that initd, upstart and systemd all have their own corner of the world and unique issues. Systemd's problems are more about trying to be too many things to too many people making it a complex system to set up. Not that initd was intuitive or that upstart didn't have it's issues too.

Which brings me to my last point. Like Red Hat except for these two things? Fix it. Making your own distribution is not that hard..

The test of intelligent tinkering is to save all the parts. -- Aldo Leopold