I agree, in fact, I couldn't agree more.

A few years I heard that a Dutch metalworks factory (aluminium plant?) has an interesting arrangement with NUON, an energy company. NUON will provide cheap electricity to the metalworks factory if there is energy from their turbines. The factory can then make a decision to run at odd (but cheap) hours. That sounded smart to me.

There are some interesting numbers coming out of the research (I believe we are at a few percent now), but lifetime, printability and base chemical cost are still to be improved before we have a viable organic solar cell. With the money being poured into that field, I suspect that may take five to 20 years but I am no longer very connected with that field.

I agree. Let's get the funding back, fire the beancounters, get the press out of the sensationalist mindset and let's get back to science.

Cheers!

Funny, as I have colleagues researching alternatives to using rare earth metals in solar cells, as well as colleagues searching for better alternatives to rare earth metals in wind turbines (dysprosium being a rather expensive one). I do not come empty-handed though, I have a reference: http://phys.org/news/2012-09-rare-earth-metals.html

That reference says explicitly that rare earth metals are used in solar cells. But I suppose my colleagues and my reference are "just completely wrong".

Your second paragraph is an ad hominem and a "wisdom of the crowds" statement. So many people believe in Homeopathy, so it must be true. But I guess that is typical for anti-nuke Slashdot crowds.

I suppose it was not clear I was joking. Let me put on a slightly more serious note:
- anti-nuclear activism has caused a massive drop in support for further development of this technology, so much that research money in the field is almost nonexistent. Furthermore, they have prevented construction of newer replacement power plants of improved designs to replace the old with the result that the old are kept alive longer risking more catastrophic failures rather than graceful shutdown and dismantling. Lastly, they have prevented (in collaboration with the government on that aspect) development and construction of breeder plants which would reduce the waste problem by a whopping 99%. There are breeder plants around, but not enough and some are idle due to political pressure. Very lastly, fear of all things nuclear has also shut down research reactors for making neutrons, at least in Japan, seriously hindering many fields of science (biology, materials science, ...)
- Wind is an option, but we have to get away from the idea of 24/7 power. If there is wind, there is power. Too many people here in Japan scream for renewables but are unwilling to change their energy consumption (and poor, poor insulation) and energy expectations. Change that mindset and I'll be rooting for wind.
- Solar is not a good option as solar cells require rare earth metals. As was recently said at a conference, it is impossible to power even Australia with just solar cells: as soon as you've produced enough cells you have depleted all earth resources of several rare-earth metals. That just leaves the rest of the world without solar power.
- Nuclear fusion is hypothetically interesting, but funding is very scarce for this field which slows down progress by decades. Nuclear fusion scientists are now fighting for money to exist as opposed to actually doing science.

So, we're not out of the woods yet.

Instead of pointing fingers, let's focus on how to solve this problem...

Like maybe burn all the overzealous anti-nuclear campaigners.

Indeed, I said prevent, not cure. It is a healthier lifestyle that is the likely cause for the people exposed to the Hiroshima bomb to have a lower than average cancer rate.

And can be effectively prevented by exercising and eating healthily.

Isn't it supposed to be "Windows 8 not working on LG devices"?

Sure, Because Wifi is like my wife. Smooth simile.

Perhaps. After all, it is in the nature of companies to ask as much money as possible for as little work as possible.

So is this going to focus on Python 2 or 3? Might be a reason to upgrade..

Instead of messing around trying to get a higher resolution out of 35mm, I found it much easier to simply shoot medium format film. Much more resolution to be got there!

By a person looking through reversed binoculars, surely :). Which 6x7? The Pentax 67, Mamiya 67, or Mamiya RB67 (not that one, unless the observer was blind)?

On the other hand, my Pentax 645Nii is about the same size as one of my friend's Olympus DSLR (with a sensor smaller than 35mm equiv.). On the third hand (what, you don't have three?) it is considerably bigger than my favourite 35mm: the light, cheap and small Pentax MV.

B.

Please let me buy a cruise missile, I promise to look after it well and never use it!

In other words, promises are empty if the actions speak volumes themselves.