Comment Re:too much assessment? (Score 2) 184
We've raised 4 kids since the 1990s, two turned out to be big readers, two did not.
Similar here. My parents (one reader, one not) had three kids, two readers, one not. My daughter had two parents who were both readers, she is a reader.
Cousins were readers if their parents read, mostly ignored books if their parents didn't read.
Comment Re:No, not in case of an invasion (Score 1) 31
Congratulations on inherent self-contradiction, it is the normal state of the modern human.
Okay, I'll bite. When in history did everyone involved behave sensibly from start to end? Certainly not WW1 or WW2....
Comment Re:Physical not Chemical (Score 1) 166
Comment Re:F*ck the moon (Score 1) 72
Chernobyl type plants have never been build and have always been wildly illegal in every western country.
And yet, Chernobyl, for all it is the End Of Life As We Know It, deaths from Chernobyl are still lower than average Rush Hour DAILY deaths.
Yes, most every day, more people die in traffic than have died as a result of Chernobyl from 1986 to present.
Comment Re: ULA? (Score 1) 41
Comment Re:The results of a long term low rate policy (Score 1) 176
It's not the borrowing rates it is the constant raises and inflated wages that got us here and now it will be the high borrowing rates that doom everyone with a lower salary.
No, it's the $2.2T that Biden poofed into existance last year. Add 11% to the money supply without adding 11% to the supply of things that can be purchased with that money is pretty much a guarantee of 11% increase in prices for everything.
Which we're in the middle of right now. If (and I don't really think the government will be able to do it) the government can overcome the urge to print more money (for which read: buy more votes) then things will settle down with everything costing 11% more, and everyone being paid 11% more.
Comment Re:Where would they put it? (Score 1) 49
The melted fuel is highly radioactive
Or not.
Radioactive, yes. "Highly radioactive", not so much.
Note that the more radioactive something is, the quicker it changes from "radioactive" to "not radioactive". A half-life of a day is really radioactive, but in a month it's 0.000000001x as radioactive as it was a month back. And it'll be another 0.000000001x as radioactive in another month. And again the following month, and every month thereafter....
Comment Re:stupid idea (Score 1) 168
Oddly enough, that doesn't seem to have been problem in 1940.
Which, FYI, was when the 40 hour workweek became law. Yeah, up till WW2, the "work week" was six days, not five.
Comment Re:Doesn't sound like the new rocket failed (Score 2) 32
In other words, SpaceX rockets going ***BOOOM*** aren't actually inserting new carcinogens into the atmosphere (hell, it's not like the Japanese rocket used anything more complicated than kerosene either)...
Comment Re:The French already are (Score 1) 128
Comment Re:SpaceX making NASA look stupid. (Score 1) 53
170ft x 300ft.
No, a spaceX landing ship is not three thousand feet long.
Comment Re:Maybe... (Score 1) 127
Comment nuclear power? (Score 4, Interesting) 110
I see they didn't include that one in their comparison of deaths by various power-related means. I assume they ignored nukes because the deaths from nuclear power to humans is less than five per year so far even with Chernobyl, TMI, and Fukushima....