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


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:Wouldn't need subsidies (Score 1) 225

Wait a second... the "joke" was me ingesting tritium? Because you think I don't understand that the major problem with nuclear reactors is with bioabsorbtion of radioisotopes

You're making progress however you still have a way to go before you get to the punchline.

Yeah, uh, that's fucking hilarious.

sure is.

Comment Re:Wouldn't need subsidies (Score 1) 225

I define

Your definition is irrelevant. Your narcissism, adorable.

Do you?

Do you know you're entitled to your own opinion however you are not entitled to your own facts. You *still* don't know what you are talking about.

The issue isn't nearly as bad as it was in the days of leaded gasoline in cars, but I'm a tad worried about it all the same.

Perhaps you have ingested tritium during adolesence.

If you knew what you were talking about you could explain the joke, figure out what its about and explain why. However you don't get it because you don't understand the facts. Sad, it's really quite funny but I doubt you'll be able to figure it out before this thread closes.

I am well aware of the distinction

Prove it. What is the relationship between radioactivity and radionuclide?

Yes, those acronyms. Thanks.

You are welcome, you obviously need to begin your education somewhere.

Comment Re:Wouldn't need subsidies (Score 1) 225

Japan has had no serious nuclear accidents; at least, not serious in terms of public safety.

Fukushima is an INES level 7 event defined as a 'Major' accident which is more severe than a INES level 6 event defined as a 'Serious' accident. You are clearly, with regards to then international communities definitions of the terms in International Nuclear Event Scale, wrong.

It repeat after me:

No, you don't know what you are talking about.

Here's my breeder reactor design and I'm 70% sure it'll work despite my knowing almost nothing

What could possibly go wrong. Go read up on EBRII, IFR. Go find out what the difference between a Fast 'Burner' and Fast Breeder.

but we don't go apeshit over it because that news story doesn't contain the magic word:


Figure out the difference between radionuclide and radioactive. What is bio-accumulation? You need to understand this first.

Comment Re:Wouldn't need subsidies (Score 1) 225

With nuclear, there is no such justification. Nuclear is not getting more cost effective. It is getting worse. Building and running a nuclear plant today is way more expensive than it was 50 years ago.

Indeed! The Price Anderson Act was a temporary measure for the Nuclear Industry. It was originally set to expire in 1967 once the industry had proved itself safe. Evidently it hasn't.

When Dixie Lee Ray was the head of the Atomic Energy Commission she proclaimed that the disposal of nuclear fuel would be the greatest non-problem in history and would be accomplished by 1985, yet here we are in 2016, thirty years past that date and still there is no high level waste disposal site anywhere. The closest anyone has come is the Swiss and even their project is a multi-decade test project and extremely expensive.

However, this is the problem with the highly polarized dichotomy of this debate, it allows both "sides" loose sight of the other factions involved, that 'certain issues' exist in the debate. The first rudimentary core debate over nuclear power is storage of spent fuel. Why would oil and coal want that? It would promote more nuclear power. From their perspective such a facility is bad because it enables nuclear to eat into coal's market. It works for them that this is still an issue for nuclear.

You can see that played out in the document modified today. The Act they are talking about is the 2005 Energy Policy Act[warn:pdf]. It's a pretty interesting read. You can skip to SEC 600 for the stuff about the Nuclear Industry. I expect around SEC 613-625 of the Act will be the sections modified and there you will find funding for the owners of nuclear power plant, who are oil and coal interests building these reactors in the US.

Which, pro or anti nuclear aside, shows that a lot of these funds are simply going to Oil and Coal interests. With lobbying you can change the meaning of 'incentive' to 'welfare' for a lot less than building a nuclear reactor. I think it makes sense to be mindful of this additional dimension of the debate from the perspective of the taxpayer, that corporate welfare and political gain exists. Why is it the taxpayers responsibility that the operators can't meet the regulatory requirements and meet legal requirements in time?

I wonder how much 'spent fuel' infrastructure it would buy. How much spending on building railways from the many reactor sites to the repository. What about developing accelerator technology that transmutes non fuel waste products, how many STEM jobs there? That's a lot of jobs in a lot of places if science instead of politics is used to actually site the repository. Just some food for thought.

I see this is a loss for pro and anti nuclear folk, for different reasons. AP-1000 and EPR are the two approved reactor technology for the US. Nukkers aren't going to get their AP-1000s or EPRs any sooner because of this and everyone else is going to have their tax dollars sent to the oil and coal companies when it could be spent on solving nuclear infrastructure problems.

The rough translation is the Oil and Coal industry would like you to know, they're still in charge.

Comment Re:It's OK to Not Tolerate Inteolerance (Score 1) 633

It's OK to refuse to tolerate intolerance. Indeed, it's something you need to do.

The Paradox of tolerance:

"Less well known is the paradox of tolerance: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.

We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant."

Votaire had a few things to say about that, however he is more passionate about it.

Comment Re:And yet still can't tell TAB from Ctrl-I ... :- (Score 1) 123

I use IJKL for character movement along with Ctrl IJKL for screen movement which means I can't use Tab and Shift-Tab for insert a literal TAB (say for Makefile) and/or indent / unindent . The work-around is to use the slightly awkward Shift to indent/indent and and Ctrl-Q Tab to insert a literal tab respectively.

I see. I don't mind the arrow keys, however I use pg up/dwn, home/end in combination with Ctrl. Ctrl+left/right yields a word progression as opposed to character progression. So I press Ctrl for large movements and arrows for character movements. I think there are a few more I use unconsciously as well that don't come to mind immediately.

I'm very fussy about keyboard customization and optimization of minimal keystrokes

I very with you on this. I think it's important because it is the limiter on the throughput you have to your machine, fatigue and injury using a computer, in my experiences.

I don't remember when it happened, however the left or right click terminology for mousing stuck when users were trying to understand how to use a computer en masse, however it doesn't translate to the left side of the body. For context, consider using a right handed mouse. The right hand index finger is on the left button called 'select' and right button is called 'context' or 'menu'. The middle button is called 'middle' and introduced paste, then later scroll wheel and left/right. Now consider the same thing with a left handed mouse, left and right click no longer makes any sense.

I realised this when I first helped left handed users get set up ergonomically. Later injury forced me from being a right hander to left for some time and I got to experience their frustrations. I ended up ambidextrous (and a pretty good drummer), so I use two mouses to satisfy the ergonomics I have requirements to avoid re-injury.

I don't know if that is formally defined somewhere or I've unconsciously picked it up along the way, however to communicate it specifically during training sessions, I started referring to them as 'select' as index finger click, middle as middle finger click and 'context' as outside finger click, so that it makes sense to left handers as well.

The reason I told you all that is..

This works but I find it clunky.

If I may offer a suggestion, you may find some favourable vim functionality by using it with cygwin/X term, it's (DEC VT100) vs (ansi) terminal type. So when manipulating text an index click positions the cursor, a double index selects a word or a begins a drag to select, and a triple click selects a line (as normal). However you add the middle click and that becomes your first paste buffer, which is also a visible buffer.

Find the right terminal type (like xterm under linux) and vim will support the scroll wheel to page text, the mouse to position the cursor which *might* help the issue you are facing .

-- which is the main reason I love Vim's modal style.

When you add text in the edit mode of vim then select an add or insert at a certain position you can continue to select and paste text into the edit point by only using index and middle clicks. It is a simple, but powerful facility that I use in combination with command mode. For example apply the same regular expression over a range on some things over a number of files by middle click and y/n, :'a,'b g/expression/ s/find/replaced/gc :wn

I _would_ use Ctrl-# for bookmarks, and Buffer Management, along with other macros I use daily.

Interesting. I tried Ctrl-#, but I'm not sure how it should work? Would you mind sharing what I am missing?

I don't know your preferred hotkeys and shortcuts so I can't say. Probably not.

I use bookmarks, however I think I might be using vim differently. First I use "m" (for mark) and then a upper or lower case letter to set a bookmark. Then ' (a single quote, followed by the letter. So 'mq' and 'mQ' can set two different locations which are accessed by 'q or 'Q. Sure I am limited to 52 bookmarks, however I have rarely used more than 30. Obviously you can then use that to set up ranges to cut, copy paste, use regular expressions on or apply functions to.

Vim is like 99% close to perfection for me. Just wish it wasn't stuck at 99%.

I also feel your pain. For me I just have not found a vim plugin for Eclipse or VS that is has the satisfying power of vim. This for me has really stifflled my interest in IDEs. No matter how much I like them and want them, I can't stand the text editors, I feel lobotomised.

Comment Re:No no no. (Score 1) 271

Class A uses the most power (~20% efficient), Class AB about 60% and D comes in a little under 100% (~90%) or so because the semiconductors are acting as switches dissipating very little heat. The downside is that the high frequency switching can induce all manner of interference which will cause havoc if not properly dealt with.

You are right. I was confusing a class D amp construction with an amplifier type that has only a single power amp transistor on the output phase - thanks for pointing that out.

Comment Re:No no no. (Score 1) 271

Actually that's not true, just ask a guitarist (and IAAG - I Am A Guitarist!)

Vacuum tubes create a noisy signal, but in a weird coincidence, they do it in a way that is pleasing to the ear. The clipping and distortion sounds "warm," and there's an added depth in the sound (harmonics) that you don't get via transistors....So, sir, you might argue that you dislike what a noisy tube does to your signal, but you can't say some people won't perceive it as improved, as it's about personal taste.

IAAP and Vacuum amps add a 'third harmonic distortion' to an input signal. Whilst this is desirable for a guitarist, for home listening it introduces distortion that I did not intend to be there when I produced your excellent performance. All that time I spent adjusting the attack and release on the compression to capture those really cool movements of your fingers on the strings are lost because a 'audiophile' decided that they knew better that the people who produced the music in the first place.

Transistor based amplifiers also introduce distortion. Referred to as THD (Total Harmonic Distortion) I like to think of it as 'temporal' distortion. It occurrs when the push and pull sets of the amp cross the waveform (sine) over 0v. It takes about .6v to activaste the transistor and this translates to a 'jag' at 0v of the waveform. It is unlikely that you are ever going to hear it - however that is what semi-conductors are all about, getting more accurate. I think the new class D amps eliminate even this issue, however they use more electricity.

You're right - to some extent it is a matter of personal preference. However home stereo valve amps reduces the "accuracy" of what was intended to be presented to you, the listener and to some extent being an audioophile is an oxymoron. If you like the 3rd harmonic distortion then that is ok, however many audiophiles like to claim this is an 'accurate' representation of a playback, when in fact it is distortion.

Now pick a valve amp for an instrument, then that is different because the valves and electronics are being vibrated by the amplification of yor playing - it sounds cool. You don't get that same effect from a semiconductor guitar amp. My friend and I like to mess around with these amps and do things like changing the transformers to give the amp a more 'ballsy' sound. We took a Musicman 130W valve amp and used Australian sourced transformers as the iron used in them is denser (I'm told) which seems to make the sound more meaty - so it is not just about the valves in the amp.

For my next trick a valve amped Theramin - at least for the pre-amp stage :)

Comment Re:Grammar note (Score 1) 123

Although it may not look right, its is the correct word here. It's always means "it is." If "it is" doesn't make sense, then use its instead.

My bad for posting tired.

Comment Re:Rivalry (Score 1) 123

Vim's 8.0 release was actually September 12th. Emacs 25.1 came out yesterday, September 17th.

Slashdot is just incredibly slow. :)

Yeah, I was wondering why it hadn't been picked up earlier by someone - it had been out for a while.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Irrigation of the land with sewater desalinated by fusion power is ancient. It's called 'rain'." -- Michael McClary, in alt.fusion