One becquerel = 27 pico curie.

One trillion becquerel = 27 curie.

Sounds a lot less frightening now.

However, one curie is an awful lot of radiation. You wouldn't go near that. On the other hand, becquerel and curie are measures of "radiation per hour", so "1 trillion becquerel released" doesn't make sense.

I can't get how such an idiotic drivel would be considered "insightful" by anyone.

Did it ever occur to you that the East German government (which was always under considerable pressure from the USSR, and remembering Russian tanks rolling through East Germany), and the East German people didn't quite agree about politics and economy? How does your statement "private property was outlawed" match the fact that in any decent family, as soon as a child was born the parents would order a car for him and her (which, due to long waiting lists, would just be ready for the child's 18th birthday).

The article just claims "cheating". However, cheating happens in different situations. There is cheating on your friends or family or neighbours, and there is cheating on authorities.

In East Germany, the authorities were out to get you. Spying on you. Trying to catch you out. Your neighbours on the other hand were the people that you had to rely on and that had to rely on you. A person coming to you and asking questions was highly suspicious and probably up to no good. Everyone would lie to them. But not to your friends and neighbours.

That's probably still there, so if some scientists will come and ask questions, whatever the questions, nobody raised in East Germany will have any problem lying to them. Will they cheat to take advantage of their neighbours? I doubt it.

Of course a company can hire back fired employees. It could be seen as an admission that the firing shouldn't have happened and was wrong, but there is nothing wrong with the hiring. Especially since it would at least partially fix the wrong that happened with the firing.

A tiny step further: If the employer has no money, make their customers pay the fine. Suddenly the customer has much less reason to buy from someone who is cheap because they employ cheap labour.

That may be true, but there is a difference between jobs and job growth. Job growth in one year means there are more jobs. Forever.

The 110 MHz PowerPC was at the time the fastest machine for running 68K code. At the time there were actually Atari users who bought a PowerPC Mac + Atari emulator because it was the fastest Atari computer that you could buy for any money.

As a result, Apple had the more POWERful chips for many years. They avoided the Pentium debacle completely. Pentium M was the first sane chip that Intel produced, and Apple got in with the Core Duo - just when the whole world was screaming how for ahead AMD was, and just before Intel turned things around.

The suicide candidate (he is not an attacker, the damage is entirely self-inflicted) intentionally created 65,534 other processes in between.

And your evidence for that is what?

This is not a problem where an outside attacker can successfully attack the software. It is a problem where a malicious developer can attack his or her own software. So the vulnerability is not that an attacker can shoot at me with a gun, the vulnerability is that I can use my own gun to shoot myself in the foot. But only if I construct a clever framework that causes the anti-shoot-in-the-own-foot measures provided by the gun to be blocked.

Please give an example.

What's true is that if the EULA says "you may do X only if you do Y", then nobody can force you to do Y, but then you also don't have the right to do X. If you have done X already, you have the choice of deciding whether you do Y, or whether you did X without permission. Whatever is better for you.

What an idiot. Destroying your career and going to jail for 25,000 euros for someone in a western country is pure idiocy.

However, it is only in the last ten years that they changed from German grapes that need less sun to French ones that need a lot more sun and that wouldn't have produced any wine when you were a kid.

Fact is that whatever I personally do has not measurable effect on the climate. Every person individually is better off not worrying about the climate and to go on consuming. Most people also know that there would be an improvement if _everybody_ changed their behaviour.

The logical consequence is that behaviour change must be forced through legislation, taxes etc. And every rational person should agree to that.