One reason there was negative public opinion in he United States towards nuclear power was supposedly environmental concerns of waste. This seems almost laughable to me because recycling processes exist to recover nearly all of the remaining plutonium and uranium in spent fuel rods. It can then be used in new fuel. Reprocessing of nuclear fuel from power reactors is currently done on large scale in France at a 2 mile facility in Normandy. Other nations are already doing this and others are planning to start.

Another reason is hysterical fear of a disaster. I know of one in the United States and one in Russia. The world didn't end. There are 104 nuclear facilities currently operating in the United States that have had excellent safety records for 28 years. Again, another laughable argument against Nuclear Power.

Reprocessing of nuclear fuel does not happen in the United States because of fear that weapons grade plutonium might fall into the wrong hands. Fear didn't stop us for using the technology to wage war, why should it prevent us from using it for peaceful purposes. Scientists and companies in the United States already understand how to recycle the fuel, and France is more than willing to share the technology and advances they have made on the matter with us. We should get over the fear factor and stop trying to store the waste.

Nuclear Power is reliable, much more safe than some hysterical people would have us believe. It doesn't pollute the air or contribute to global warming. The time for change is now. Millions are going to face famine and drought already. Our coast lines are going to change. People are going to have to migrate to escape flooding and natural disatsers. Why make it worse by putting more waste into the air?

I seem to be having thoughts and ideas that trigger more thoughts and ideas that seem to have very little to do with each other. It's some sort of associative thought process that gets triggered for reasons unknown to me. It starts with a small thought, observation, memory, or idea that explodes into thoughts and ideas in multiple directions that don't seem to be logically linked.

It's surprising that I can follow any of it when this happens in my mind, but this is when I often find that it is easiest to write and communicate ideas with others. Quite often I will solve complex problems in this manner. It's like being able to solve an equation and not knowing how to show my work on paper because it all happens so fast in my mind that I don't follow the steps let alone remember them when I arrive at the correct answer.

I have often come to the correct diagnosis of strange hardware and or software problems with computers, the correct solution to interpersonal problems with friends and co-workers, and complicated questions on tests by this method.

Maybe it's some sort of mental defect on my part. Is this normal?

On the morning of Saturday, March 25, 2006 one of the worst mass murders in the history of Washington State took my friend Jeremy Martin. I don't know why I'm thinking of this today, but I am and I wonder if anybody else is.

It was labeled "Capitol Hill Massacre" by the media. The man that murdered 6 people and wounded two others then turned the gun on himself and left us all with haunting questions. There were people that wanted to blame it on the victims, citing drugs, alcohol, music, and the "rave scene". Those people only served to poor salt in our wounds, obscure the truth and denigrate the memories of those we lost that terrible day. I thank God that the opinions and actions on the matter of the leaders and community at large were more realistic and caring.

The 6 people that died were Melissa Moore age 13, Suzanne Thorne age 14, Justin Schwartz age 22, Christopher Williamson age 21, Jason Travers age 32, and my friend Jeremy Martin age 26.

If you know these people please always remember them, if you don't know them please don't judge them. They didn't deserve to be murdered by a stranger that they tried to be-friend.

I'll will always miss you Jeremy, I wish you were still here.

Sucralose is as close to sugar as scientifically possible. It basically is sugar. The molecule is reversed. It taste like sugar but it is lighter and the body passes it right through with no ill effects. It's actually made from sugar.http://splenda.com/page.jhtml?id=splenda/faqs/nocalorie.inc#q1

In baked and cooked goods it taste the same, but in beverages you can tell the difference because it has a different texture and weight. This difference in texture and weight changes the flavor in liquids somewhat, especially hot ones like coffee.

What do you like to sweeten beverages with and foods with? Are you worried about potential health impacts of your choice?

Sucralose should be marketed better. It's not a neuro-toxin like Aspartame and unlike Sugar it is safe for people with diabetes. It doesn't taste good in coffee, but I don't drink coffee much any more.

It's a conspiracy! I never wanna see coffee or tea again, it's closing in on me.... help! Somebody! Please! Nooooooooo!

I live in the homeland of the McDonald's of Coffee companies, Starbucks.

Looking up at the top of one of the cupboards I can see eleven 1lb bags of coffee beans from here, that doesn't even touch what is likely in the cupboards. A member of this household works at Starbucks and gets a free bag every week or so, consequently I'm overexposed to coffee and tea.

Do you drink Coffe or Soda, do you care about the sugar or caffeine? Please comment.

When I was not even a year old the most advanced Intel microprocessor, was an 8bit 8080 running at a whopping 2 megahertz. It sold for around $360 at the time. It was the last stop before the x86 processor. It was used in the MITS Altair 8800. The first programming language written for it was Microsoft's first product, ALTAIR Basic.

Most tech minded people I know are not cognizant of personal computers, Microsoft, or Intel before the 1990's. A smaller group of these friends and acquaintances is aware of what was around in the early to mid 80's. I think I know less than 5 people personally that would have any clue about the state of affairs in 1975 as mentioned above. I was still a baby in 1975, what is their excuse?

Most of what I know is self taught. Sure, I went to college and got the degree to back up what I had learned already, but I'm amazed at the ignorance of some "experts". I know software engineers that are so specialized that they aren't qualified to maintain or trouble shoot basic computer problems, CS 101 instructors that had never heard of anything but windows until they had me in class, and MCSE's that couldn't find their way out of a paper bag let alone support an operating system.

It seems like many intelligent computer geeks are either full blown computer science degree types or hobbyists that tinker in their spare time and don't even work in IT. I know a couple exceptions to this but not many.

I am an admitted Linux Geek, my Linux machine does everything my Wndows machines ever did with minimal maintenance and configuration hassles. Upgrades are seamless and I do so over the internet with no worries. This includes full OS upgrades.This does not mean that I'm anti-Microsoft however. They are right in my own backyard so to speak. I live less than 25 miles from the Redmond campus and Microsoft is a major driving force in the economy of the county and state I live in.

I'm also not one of those people in the Linux camp that learned about Unix and Linux on the x86 platform from revisionist history. I am well aware that many of the most common features in a modern Linux or Unix for the x86 platform owe their existence in part to Microsoft. Microsoft Xenix created most of the infrastructure for Unix and indirectly Linux on the x86 platform. Alt-F1,F2,F3,F4,F5,F6 console switching is one of the many features and technical solutions offered first in Microsoft Xenix. I realize that this was long ago and Microsoft abandoned Xenix in favor for OS/2 which they eventually forked to develop the NT kernel. The point is that they laid the groundwork for a lot of things I take for granted in my modern Linux distribution.

I don't agree with Microsoft business practices, I don't like the price of Windows, DRM bugs the heck out of me, and while security in windows has come a long way, it still has a long way to go, but I'm not anti-Windows. It does the job for most people with minimal hassle as long as they use intelligent computing practices. Unfortunately in my brief, yet intense experience in the world of residential hardware and software support I have begun to believe that the average end user doesn't even understand yet engage in intelligent computing practices.

Decades were spent arguing the validity of Global Warming and billions of people face famine and drought as a result of little to no action on the matter. Is it to late to make a change now? What impact will this report by the IPCC Working Group II have on policy if any?

Please keep in mind that this list is very broad and covers flaws in more than one version of windows operating systems.

1) Microsoft uses monopolistic approaches to business. They started with OS detecting in code Windows 3.1 so that Windows would only run on MS-DOS and not any of the DOS type operating systems from other companies. This behavior has continued in different forms ever since? Anybody remember Netscape?

2) Windows comes pre-installed on most computer systems intended for home use.
Windows is full of security flaws that in combination with it's domination of the market make it a huge target for hackers and malware. It's like painting a big huge target on yourself and running through a shooting range.

3) Windows is one of the few systems that actually has normal users logged in with root privileges all the time. If you aren't, many applications will not run properly if they run at all. There is no real sudo functionality in windows unless you install and configure third party software to do the job. Sure, Vista at least nags you and has slightly better support for limited accounts, but people will train themselves to just click accept without heeding the warnings. Being logged in all the time with root privileges means that malware can run and delete or modify important system files without you even knowing. The life of malware on Linux, BSD or MacOs would be very difficult because it wouldn't have this access.

4) Many many many security flaws - too many to list them all. There was an RPC flaw that allowed access computers connected to the internet during the install process. IE's ActiveX is full of security issues. These are just a few of the well known security flaws in various windows systems. If you don't shell out $$$ for the latest and greatest subscription to a full anti-malware solution (not just virus scanning) you could be a sitting duck with windows installed.

5) It's not open source. Some of us want to know what kind of code is in the software we use. Some of us want the ability to patch problems on our own if the need arises. Besides, if it's not open who knows what kind of nasty things like back doors could be in the software? Open Source applications allow people to identify and correct problems with the software and to submit their own enhancements and features, as a result updates are more frequent.

6) Windows Genuine Advantage. I realize that Windows is probably the most pirated software in the world but at the prices charged with the near monopoly status of Microsoft is anybody surprised? Maybe if Microsoft lowered the price of windows more people would start buying Windows instead of using pirated copies. WGA is not the right approach to fight piracy, anyone with access to google can find ways around WGA or activation for that matter.

7) Linux can be used with minimal hardware requirements. You can run Linux on almost anything. Switching to Linux might allow you to keep the hardware you have now for another few years and keep some electronics out of landfills. The increasing hardware requirements of Windows upgrades turns the PC into a highly disposable platform. No wonder so many people are buying macs.

8) Linux is FREE. Windows is expensive. Linux systems can be used on limitless machines without paying additional fees for each installation or computer.

9) No single person or organization controls Linux.

10) Why should anyone pay to cripple their computer and themselves with DRM when you can just use Linux? DRM is supposed to be a way for copyright holders to prevent unauthorized duplication of their work but what it actually does is restrict how you use digital media like music, or movies in ways that are not included in law or licensing of the works.