adam-f

my sarcasm detector is clicking.

I think the only architecture that can be copied is the replication in staging and test.

You're a brave person to use "tongue in cheek" on this thread.

curiously "slashdot.org." redirects to "slashdot.slashdot.org"

curiouser and curiouser, "slashdot.slashdot.org." redirects to "slashdot.slashdot.slashdot.org"

and so on... =)

Hackernews is bad for your server's health?

This is pretty the sole reason I don't use gimp anymore and have no plans to go back, ever. I used it on OSX under X11 and had no problems with the mental gymnastics using control instead of command because, well, it wasn't GIMPs fault.

I was so excited when they made it a native app, too.

If Command-E actually brought the window up in front of the rest of the windows instead of hiding it behind the main window, it might have been a different story.

Just my two cents.

This could be worse than the Silicon Valley and the housing market bubbles combined.

Yeah, 84.38.212.89 (or whatever coffee shop I'm posting from) is my correct IP address. I guarantee it. o_O

Well, that makes two of us.

Working great on a macbook-pro with Windows 8. :-P

Neither.

But for the sake of argument, I'd rather see

  ['10','10','10','10'].map(Number);

I thought planes generally want you to "turn off all electronic devices" at take-off and landing. Pardon the pun, but how is this idea going to fly?

Also, Q. Why is the dollar sign on the wrong side?

A. "This page is in Italian! Would you like to translate it?" >_<

A Death Note fan would write an analysis this detailed.

U233 more readily fizzes than booms, since it fissions faster it tends to pre-explode before getting into a really good super critcal state (probably something to do with the .6 instead of 1.6 delayed neutrons per 100 fissions mentioned above, it also has a slightly better neutron production factor than u-235).

U233 will have U232, which decays through some very high energy gamma emitters, making U233 impossible to smuggle through shipping ports etc... These gamma emissions also kill humans in minutes, so would-be bomb makers would need to use robots or other remote handling techniques to fabricate a bomb. This is something a rouge state would have a hard time pulling off, and is practically out of reach of basic terrorists.

It's not impossible but it would be easier/cheaper to just mine/steal some natural uranium and build centrifuges. It's easy to make U233 from thorium and thorium is abundant, so, really, how would reactors make thorium/U233 more available to rouge states when they could basically make it themselves, and why would they choose the U233 route?

I've heard this concern raised before, and the real question is whether the thermal expansion of the fuel salt acts as a strong enough negative coefficient of reactivity.

I've come across some mentions of MDR (Multidrug Resistance) pumps, and MDR pump inhibitors:

I assume there's a reason we're not mixing in Oregon Grape root into our antibiotic cocktails? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon-grape http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC26451/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11321580

I completely agree. The word toxic is used almost interchangably with radioactive, but heavy metal poisoning isn't mentioned as a possible cause at all.

Radiation is easy to detect and easier to vilify. But notice that no actual numbers we given in the article. The best they could get was "up to 88 times higher than those allowed under international guidelines." A statement so emotional and devoid of actual content.

That said, I wish companies would try to properly dispose of their toxic (and/or radioactive) waste products and not give it to people to paint their houses with.

It's less significant if you consider that the Capacity Factor of a wind farm is around 20-40% (wikipedia).

That comes out to more than 3 dollars per watt.

I didn't know the definition of "hack" included "buy some of-the-shelf parts from Ikea and stick them on your desk".

My experience with it has been mostly fighting with enabling various language extensions to get some (real) sample programs working. The algol languages are much easier to debug compile issues, Haskell's purity makes certain issues non-obvious and complicated.

Also, I think Stevey satirized the situation quite nicely.

http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2010/12/haskell-researchers-...

I actually tried to run one of the featured projects on github: OPAcman.

This was my experience:

1. install OPA. Get surprised by the AGPL license because the main page mentions that it can be used to develop closed source apps.

2. git clone OPAcman.

3. run make, fail. Read error message (in color, with a little unicode "flag" symbol right where the error is!)

4. change makefile to use --parser classic, also fails

5. hack off score.opa because --parser classic database directives are irrevocably broken and I can't be arsed to figure out the new syntax, also patch opacman.opa with a stubbed out Score object.

6. Run make, get ocaml errors: Error: This expression has type Bsl_init_.CR.t = QmlClosureRuntime.t but an expression was expected of type QmlFlatServerLib.record = ServerLib.ty_record

7. Take a look at some of the ml code generated

let _v686_const = ((Obj.magic) (((QmlFlatServerLib.unsafe_init_static) ([| (((Obj.repr) (( (* ["label" ; "ty"] ) Link_opacman_001._v5_shared_vtable)))) ; (((Obj.repr) (None))) ; (((Obj.repr) (Link_opacman_002._v226_const))) ; (((Obj.repr) (_v685_const))) |])))) let _v687_const = ((Obj.magic) (((QmlFlatServerLib.unsafe_init_static) ([| (((Obj.repr) (( ( ["hd" ; "tl"] *) Link_opacman_001._v6_shared_vtable)))) ; (((Obj.repr) (None))) ; (((Obj.repr) (_v686_const))) ; (((Obj.repr) (Link_opacman_001._v8_const))) |]))))

8. Run AWAY.

300 comments and not one mention of megaupload.

Fascinating.

Still, if you made a u233 device (and I'm thinking it would have to be a dirty bomb, an explosive seems unfeasible), it would difficult to get it to a target since it's so easy to spot the gamma rays.

u235 is still the way to go, since you can just hide it in a lead pipe in a crate of bananas.

No no no no.. you don't want to do subcritical particle accelerator reactors. Well, you don't want solid fuel reactors, solid fuel has the same cooling issues as standard uranium, since it's the fission product breakdown that caused the Fukushima accidents (not an initial nuclear excursion, like Chernobyl).

Molten salt can be passively cooled (much better thermal conductivity) and can be moved from core to containment by gravity. Also it expands when its hot, which slows the reaction, and it's chemically stable and doesn't crack like uranium fuel pellets.