Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:The former iPhone user is an idiot. (Score 1) 238

A "cultural blind spot"? Innocent mistake? No.

Does not play, interact with others. Proprietary, exclusionary design is the baseline, the goal. Designed in malfunction. Proof from long ago is in iTunes. A horrendous mess of extreme levels of overweight complexity to overcome basic USB storage functionality, corral and control user's behavior. Making it simply work would have required no effort at all. The current events are at least a direct consequence of this Apple closed culture mindset.

History being a predictor, I conclude it is intentional. Proving it will be another matter.

Comment Threat to USB (Score 1) 355

I hear that. Imagine, oh that is a Fibson guitar, it needs Fibson cord and amp. If USB breaks the standard, obsoletes my gear, I will look around. I have dodged Apple because of this merry go round, from the horrendous iTunes, to expensive firewire mistakes, that I did not make. It is the single reason I do not buy Apple gear, or anything with despised proprietary connectors. Never.

If USB dumps this advantage, and I am forced to change? Stupid move.

OT Rant: Woman last week, new evidently 1st gen VW Hybrid. Car would not start because the trunk was open. No joke. I did not ask her why she didn't just buy the 5th gen Prius. Some folks willingly walk into hell. Just open the door, they line up

Comment Re:Getting it done, again. (Score 1) 121

Must not happen. Well, that is impossible, I know. That is the problem. Some hungover fellow will poke a forklift through the thing.

What aspect of coal compares to this? Reactor core materials found almost 500 km from Fukushima plant -- 40,000,000,000,000,000,000 Bq/kg -- Can travel very, very significant distances -- Hot particles found in 25% of samples from Tokyo and Fukushima

Which one creates waste that will be hazardous to all biota, 20,000 years from now?

Each sides trots out stats,graphs and studies, the other call them lies. I could cite Yablonski, one million died from Chernobyl. Another showed 40,000 excess US deaths from Chernobyl. "Experts say it was 60 or so, "prove it". Well, an inconvenient problem with all of this is we can't prove any of it. Probabilities, known and unknown variables. Probably, maybe.

which set of numbers do people effectively choose to believe? It negates the value of that argument for me.

There are no easy answers, all have issues. I am open to new ideas, but am unimpressed with the US industry, its efforts, attitufe. I have learned to not trust them. So I am far from neutral. But again, I will listen, but I have to say, "prove it".

I personally love hydro. Virtual perpetual motion, water, gravity spin a gadget. Plus, lakes. I would like to see old school grandiose work in that area. Weighing the costs/benefits to coal and nuclear? Easy decision.

Comment Re:Getting it done, again. (Score 1) 121

US issues are many. Hanford, Los Alamos, Oak ridge, etc? The job did not get done. It is part of the legacy, fair or not. There is no facility for storing spent NPP fuel. 50, 60 years into the thing, no US place to put the fuel. They did not get it done. SFPs are dangerously full, past their design basis, and vulnerable.

Chernobyl, Fukushima. You folks may never go home. An acceptable risk? These are legit, open questions that have nothing to do with politics/ideology, or unfounded fears.

Public confidence would change, I believe, if a serious effort was made at Fuku, and attention paid as to what to do with the waste. Right now, radioactivity flows to the sea, no plan, no answers, and no real effort. In comparison, the Russians are getting it done. It took help? Fine. Internationally the industry needs to step up, to speak out to say, we got this. That is exactly what is not happeneing.

I think the industry has nobody to blame but themselves. WIPP, designed to last 15,000 years, made it to 15. What happened at Fuku? That is not acceptable, it must not happen, period. There is no room for error.

The final fact may decide it all for folks, really it has for me. But i am trying to be open. The bad apples are not the standard, but in this game, there is no safe place for the bad apples, the industry has to simply not tolerate it. Instead, they cower together, pay lobbyists, lie, coverup, etc. They routinely sell safety short for profit. This is TEPCO. They merit the focus of attention here.

Comment Re:Getting it done, again. (Score 3, Interesting) 121

EPA allows far less than FDA. If they just quietly say they want the EPA levels to match FDA, because why should we have two sets of numbers? Skip the details and complicated reworking of the whole thing, most folks wouldn't even look up from twitter. For example, EPAs Maximum Contaminant Levels assumes regular consumption over 70 years, accepts that one in a million will die. FDAs single dose Derived Intervention Levels accepts 2 in ten thousand. If pesky calculations like this are somehow kept out of the discussion, they might get it done without too much noise. It does legislate away an expensive problem.

Comment Re:Getting it done, again. (Score 1) 121

All of the above is correct, unfinished business that results in lost trust. These are not unfounded, irrational fears of NIMBYs wielding BANANAs. Advocates should perhaps dig deeper into how the French do things. Gov't/industry are effectively one there, perhaps the truth is on lockdown? Or are they more serious about things other than profit?

There is a major push from the trillion dollar industry, with support from this Admin, as Climate Disruption rules all. So folks should pay attention.

EPA is currently taking comments on changing the "safe" acceptable radiation levels. Environmental Standards for Uranium Fuel Cycle Facilities: Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR)

Comments are due by June 4, 2014

Comment Getting it done, again. (Score 1) 121

Chernobyl was arguably the worst design of anything in history. But the Soviets moved, 500,000 plus people. Gorbachev says it is what broke the USSR. Mistakes were made, but they are taking responsibility for the mess. This is what is needed for Nuke Inc. USA and Japan. Get it done. This would turn the tide of popular opinion.

Comment Re:Sure, I guess I agree (Score 3) 261

I consider myself a refugee from the one party state of Mass. Vermont now. Still one party, but there are more trees. Plus, a bonus, a soul still exists here in old school Vermonters, not so different from old school everywhere.

Kerry strikes me as a mediocre man. Splashed on to the scene as a impressive, whistle blowing, honest Veteran. People cared, they listened. Rewareded as Senator for life in Mass. Since then? What? Where does that experience apply?

Now this? Homeland security, TSA, info gobbling, more spy agencies than even the most ardent activist can name is correct? This is the right side of history? This man is not even a second rank intellect. He is not a serious man.

As an aside, this seems to be the hiring standard, and fatal flaw of the current admin. It explains the choice of Biden. "Dewd, that was like two years ago" on a network news program? Where did they find that asshole? Mediocrity seems to be what gets them the job. No threat to make the President look bad, in comparison. Is this the explanation?

I am open to opposing views.

Does anyone have an argument/evidence that proves me wrong? Kerry is a third rate intellect, a second rate man.

Comment Re:France: 75% of electricity from nuclear (Score 1) 288

The wise answer is neither, thank you.

Asking the nuke industry to address its longstanding issues is not a pro coal argument. Coal's issues are not an answer to nuke problems.

So the argument is a dodge, a distraction from another reality. Threat level? Different time zones, orders of magnitude difference, an utterly laughable comparison. Playing with nuclear gadgets has resulted in the world abandoning areas the size of Delaware and three or four Rhode Islands combined, now no-go zones. Nuclear toys have created a waste more deadly than anything in nature, capable of killing all biota for hundreds of thousands of years. No comparison at all is possible.

Oh but look at all the dead people who have died. We may work that out. Why do we die? It is the way. I point to this, drinking killed the man. He was run over by a beer truck.

To answer the presented impressive numbers graphs and Power Point Presentations there is also this and that serious, statistical and scientifically based analysis that Chernobyl killed a million. Nuke fans insist that is FUD. Coal fans do the same, because the problem? Neither is provable. Both are probable. Probably. Beware of beer trucks.

Coal mining vs Uranium mining? An unattractive couple, no photos at that wedding please. Which one threatens unborn children, 26,587 years from now? We have a winner.

Open question one. Should EPA change standards on safe levels of radioactivity? Begin by accepting science that says there is no no safe level. Proceed to the calculation of acceptable rates of excess deaths. How many will we kill?

EPA uses Maximum Contaminant Levels, 70 years of consumption, one in a million die.

FDAs single dose Derived Intervention Level standard accepts two extra cancer fatalities in 10,000.

How many folks are aware FDA numbers are orders of magnitude beyond EPA? Let's have a discussion on that, shall we? Good idea. Done!

Environmental Standards for Uranium Fuel Cycle Facilities: Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR)

Comments are due June 4, 2014.

It is an open question what happened at Fuku 3. Perhaps someone or something can get in there by 2025 or so and have a look around. In the meantime, radioactivity flows to the sea. How much? Trace amounts already on the US West coast, but neither FDA nor EPA are bothering to measure.

The effort to radioactivitate (sick) the Pacific Ocean is a work in progress. I would have voted to not do that. (Nukes require on the order of a million gallons per minute to cool).

Three of the current problems gifted to us by the the Safe, Reliable and Green Nuclear Industry to our largest body of water are Bioaccumulation, Hot Particles, and clumping. Big fish eat little fish, collect the stuff. Hot particles are bits of the fuel that somehow became shot all about, and clumping is the tendency of this nuke waste to gather together. It is not evenly distributed in the water, as cream in coffee.

We are all players in the World Championship Nuclear Lottery. You probably will not consume that many hot particles. Probably, long odds on that. But they get better, the chance of Winning over time increases as radiation continues to flow to the sea.

The Master Strategists, or World Class Assholes (my view) at TEPCO have recently said, err, we don't think we can stop this, any of you folks have any ideas? That only took them three years to figure out.

Marcelo, you should fight these idiots, that is your necessary, good fight. They are to blame for this. The nuke industry should be screaming, lining up to lynch them, to get them the heck out of there, yesterday. Instead they cower together, ignore the problem, lie, and point the finger at others. NIMBYS and BANANAS and COAL and GLOBAL WARMING. Business as usual. I am not impressed.

Chernobyl was arguably the worst design of anything in the history of the world, but the Soviets moved. 500,000 plus people involved, got it done. Gorbachev insists the costs are what broke the Soviet Union. But they got it done. The nuke Industry's current bleeding wound is Fukushima.

Pointing the finger at someone, something else, calling names? Playground tactics of children. Children who now insist on more of the same. No. And until you behave properly, no new toys. We may yet decide to take the ones you have.

Comment Re:France: 75% of electricity from nuclear (Score 1) 288

Many choose to ignore anything that contradicts preconceived ideas, "accepted thinking, "settled science". TEPCO was certain a tsunami was no threat. They were told about it repeatedly. Arrogance and hubris from men that are accustomed to being the smartest man in the room. This is the fatal flaw. Not the technology. The people.

Transuranics were spread far and wide. How? A very serious question. I do not take it lightly, nor listen to fool's rant. Measures of Xenon gas isotopes would decisively prove/disprove this theory due to a half life measured in hours. That information has not been released. Why?

Arnie Gundersen is no ranting, stoned hippy. He was a gung-ho Nuke industry pro, a true believer. B.A. Nuclear Engineering Cum laud from the serious and respected Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (1971) . Master's degree in nuclear engineering thanks to a prestigious Atomic Energy Commission Fellowship (1972). 40 plus years nuclear power engineering experience, holds nuclear safety patent, licensed reactor operator, former nuclear industry senior vice president, managed and coordinated projects at 70-nuclear power plants in the US.

There is nothing of a lightweight in the man.

Arnie found radioactivity in an office safe.(IIRC) Well, how could that happen, he properly asked, and insisted on an answer. He was fired. Became a whistleblower, they tried to destroy him. He ended up broke, but not broken, and now "out of the priesthood". He dedicated his life to increased safety. His approach is cool, calm, fact based, science. After Fukushima he decided there are no safe Nukes. Because, People.40 good years, and one very bad day. The risks are not manageable over the long term. Odds are, something is going to break. The proof is in the results.

Here, many links about finding fuel bits

google of prompt criticality Fukushima

The google search does not yield a scientific rebuttal of his argument. Nor have you attempted to rebut the argument. Nor evidently even bothered to watch the vid? Here is the link, again

Fukushima is permanently abandoned. You say the risks are over stated. Was the evacuation an error? Inside the buildings, levels are so high that machines cannot function. Men must enter this dangerous place, risk their lives for other's mistakes, for the next 40 years. Is this an acceptable risk?

The entire industry is threatened, Germany is shutting down. 5 closed last year in the US, another 8 plans canceled. Why? They have themselves to blame. The men in the industry did not listen, called it FUD, scaremongering. They did not act, repeatedly ignored warnings, repeatedly dodged safety issues. Now Japan has 50 reactors turned off. Very expensive rusting junk.

Now here in the US, a move to lower safety standards?

To the question? Fukushima is permanently abandoned. You say the risks are over stated. Was the evacuation an error?

Marcelo, I did not manage to find links to Mr Stansbury? If he has written about this, I am interested. Thanks. And Thanks for the good discussion. These are serious issues, of great consequence.

Comment Re:France: 75% of electricity from nuclear (Score 1) 288

You are answering questions I do not ask. Fukushima has GE MK I BWRs. Spent fuel pools on the fifth floor, under no containment.

Plus once a reactor is shutdown, prompt criticality is impossible. Perhaps on Gen I reactors (all retired for at least 25 years now), but not even on any of Fukushima reactors.

This is the official position, NRC. Proof of concept was in the Borax experiments, years ago. The criticality was in the fuel pool. Not the reactor. The reactors just melted. Harmlessly, except the building is cracked, and ground water is flowing through.

Pumps down after station blackout. No coolant flow. Workers tried to access it, run water, valves did not function. Systems likely broken by earthquake. 3 levels of earthquake resistant gear, descending in toughness as one moved away from the reactor. The stuff thought to not be that important is what gave up. (NHK Documentary) Water boiled off, exposing the spent fuel rods. Hydrogen went boom, as in the others, in less than an instant, Zoom. Black mushroom cloud of volatilized spent fuel.

Check it out. If it is BS, it should be easy to debunk. So far, noone has. Instead, they call him names, say, oh well, he is a denier sort of thing. Really. Arnie's Vid

Comment Re:France: 75% of electricity from nuclear (Score 1) 288

A Chernobyl like accident has a chance of happening again like one in a million.

Probabilistic Risk assessment. I love that stuff. Lets call it one in a billion. Give each employee one opportunity to completely screw up per day...

435 nukes x 10 years x 365 days x 600 employees equals...

A Billion!

So based on my billion wild ass guess, and three generally bullshit things I multipled together I came up with what? The Bullshit that there should be an accident every 10 years. Well, that turns out to be actually true, but nevemind that. The problem is, some hungover idiot is going to put a forklift through it.

So, should Japan not evacuate Fukushima? Should Putin start a Discount Homestead act for Chernobyl?

Slashdot Top Deals

You have a tendency to feel you are superior to most computers.