Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:sounds good (Score 1) 611

That would be a ridiculously impractical place to build it. You would still need steam turbines and power distribution equipment. The ideal use, as far as I'm concerned, would be to stick these in old coal plants to replace the coal as a source of steam. Barring that, there would definitely be some kind of dedicated power plant with one or more Hyperion reactors, albeit smaller than most plants.

Comment Re:Peace through mini nukes! (Score 1) 611

You mean it would be like exploding a 30 million dollar hydrogen tank, but with a little dirty bomb action thrown in to scare anybody who may happen to be nearby? I admit, that's a lot of property damage, and you might injure or kill a few of the people maintaining the turbines. Still, wouldn't bombing large, expensive office buildings be more harmful? Especially if you manage to get some uranium ore and phone the cops saying it was a dirty bomb with uranium in it; the fear alone would make people reluctant to go near the undestroyed parts of the office building.

Comment Re:BIG psychological barrier (Score 1) 611

China and India are both attempting a massive nuclear power buildup, as fast as they can manage, because apparently their government leaders have to breathe the same coal-sullied air as everybody else. Americans respond very easily to fear, and this is something to be afraid of: being left in the dust.

Comment Re:I can see it now. (Score 1) 611

You didn't read the article, did you? Also, even making your bizarre assumption that the thing is above ground and made out of thin plastic or something, how are you going to "contaminate the neighborhood" by running a car into a radioactive chunk of metal? Nuclear fuel isn't a green glowing liquid. Hell, even with dirty bombs the risk of irradiation is negligible unless you're standing right next to the blast, in which case you should probably worry more about the conventional explosive that just exploded you. What I'm saying is that you should read the article.

Comment Re:India (Score 3, Informative) 386

What thermonuclear war would that be? If you're talking about the potential of nuclear war between India and Pakistan, then bear in mind some important facts:

1. India and Pakistan have fission bombs, not fusion bombs. "Thermonuclear" means fusion (set off by fission.)

2. The nuclear arsenals of both countries are relatively small -- about enough to completely destroy the city of Bangalore, on each side. Assuming that all the bombs work and can be efficiently delivered to their targets.

Research, man!

Comment These guys just don't get it. (Score 1) 377

This guy mentions the way that the Internet democratizes content, but he doesn't really understand it. If anybody can post on a web site, then there's naturally going to be a lot of material that would offend him. You could maybe partially filter the Internet in 1997, back when there were fewer web sites and they changed less often, but now it's just implausible. How can you ever call a blog PG-rated when it could have a new post talking in detail about the author's BDSM fetish at any moment? How can you decide that a discussion forum is child-friendly when it may suddenly get a thread about eugenics or penis bisection? Hell, even Wikipedia has a lot of stuff that would make Family Values wankers blanch, and it's one of the most useful web sites out there. Censorship is incompatible with the modern Internet.

Slashdot Top Deals

Systems programmers are the high priests of a low cult. -- R.S. Barton

Working...