HackerTrans
トップ新着トレンドコメント過去質問紹介求人

plexman

no profile record

投稿

Why nuclear is the best energy

unchartedterritories.tomaspueyo.com
2 ポイント·投稿者 plexman·2 年前·2 コメント

コメント

plexman
·20 日前·議論
im only getting 504's on the website
plexman
·6 か月前·議論
Conclusion

This investigation delved into the correlation between thyroid nodules and the use of Bluetooth headphones, elucidating the potential implications of NIR in daily life, particularly its impact on thyroid health. The findings suggest that besides age, a known factor, prolonged and frequent use of Bluetooth headphones may be associated with an increased risk of developing thyroid nodules, potentially linked to the cumulative effects of NIR emitted by the headphones on the thyroid gland. Moreover, this study underscores the necessity of giving special attention to thyroid health while assessing the health risks of modern wireless technologies. Although this research offers valuable insights, its limitations preclude direct inferences of causality. Future research should further investigate the specific relationship between long-term use of Bluetooth headphones and the risk of thyroid nodules, and develop more precise preventive measures to mitigate the potential health risks posed by NIR. Additionally, the findings of this study provide crucial guidance for public health policymakers, aiding in the promotion of modern technology while simultaneously enhancing public awareness and prevention of its potential health impacts.
plexman
·7 か月前·議論
also http://piratebayo3klnzokct3wt5yyxb2vpebbuyjl7m623iaxmqhsd52c... via torbrowser
plexman
·2 年前·議論
Yeah, that looks odd 32GB recommended, also 256 GB HDD.
plexman
·2 年前·議論
Yes, right after hitler.
plexman
·2 年前·議論
Conclusion

    Nuclear is the safest source of energy:

        It has the least deaths per TWh produced.

        It has few accidents.

        When it does have accidents, few people die (except in Chernobyl, where up to 400 of them did).

        Accidents don’t make huge swaths of land unlivable, only a tiny portion, and only for some time.

        Terrorism is nearly impossible, and the risk not much worse than with other sources of energy.

        Nuclear energy is not needed to develop nuclear weapons, and also doesn’t help that much.

    Nuclear is the best source of electricity for the environment:

        It emits the least CO2 per TWh produced.

        It uses the least land.

        It generates no pollution.

        It generates little waste.

        Most of that waste is not very radioactive at all.

        The little that is radioactive is so little it can be kept in pools until we start reusing it as fuel. If we feel strongly about it we can always bury it.

    Nuclear is the most dependable source of energy, and will last us until the end of the Earth. There’s plenty of uranium everywhere, and we’ve barely started looking for it. If needed, in the future we could get it from the sea, reuse 95% of the fuel which today we consider waste, or use Thorium.

    Nuclear is the most reliable source of energy: 

        Lots of uranium comes from stable countries, and if needed, it could come from yet other places.

        We can use it to produce electricity whenever we want.

    Nuclear promotes political stability:

        Fewer wars for resources.

        Bigger strategic reserves.

        More energy independence.

        We can build nuclear plants nearly anywhere.

        It reduces trade deficits.

        It reduces energy price changes.

    Nuclear can be the cheapest source of electricity:

        It already is in some places, including South Korea. It’s quite cheap in other countries, like Japan and France.

        The key is to reduce its building costs and time, which are so high in the US due mostly to the increase in safety regulation from the last few decades, and the industry’s resulting shrinkage.

        The increases in cost due to regulation have been incurred and processed. Future plants should not be as expensive if we start ramping up the number of reactors we build. 

        We should also be realistic when making models: Account for storage costs or CO2, acknowledge that nuclear plants can work for over six decades, etc.
plexman
·3 年前·議論
keith barker is great https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AX9LandYJU

this is the beginner track form cisco https://learningnetwork.cisco.com/s/article/200-301-ccna-stu...

this book is still great `CCNA - Cisco Certified Network Associate Study Guide (6th, 07) by Lammle, Todd`
plexman
·3 年前·議論
keith barker is great https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AX9LandYJU&list=PLQQoSBmrXm...
plexman
·3 年前·議論
I got one cheap from a co-worker, the only game that i liked was TES5, played hundreds hours, but its been boxed for around two years now.
plexman
·3 年前·議論
+ it adds to the cost of new developments in the countries where its mandatory a high efficiency rating, like Ireland BER

https://www.seai.ie/home-energy/building-energy-rating-ber/

https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/1ca53-new-energy-efficienc...

By the way there's talk from some gov officials to forbid selling old houses if the BER rating is too low. You will need to spend thousands to get it to some better rating.
plexman
·3 年前·議論
what is ERG?

[edit] ok this is news to me So what are Employee Resource Groups (ERGs)?

Employee Resource Groups are voluntary, employee-led groups whose aim is to foster a diverse, inclusive workplace aligned with the organizations they serve.
plexman
·3 年前·議論
On books about economics history, this is the best i have read.

A History of Money: From Ancient Times to the Present Day, Glyn Davies 3rd edition 2002

https://archive.org/stream/A_History_of_Money-From_Ancient_T...
plexman
·3 年前·議論
I think that gvmt's are wasteful and i just don't like to pay high taxes because i had $0 20 years ago. In this particular situation its even worse because it's double taxation.

My original comment on this is related to punishing the savers that accumulated that capital, i can't fathom that.

If you like to pay takes and are looking forward to pay more, there's nothing i can add to convince you.

> So my parents gift me money in their will, and I am owed it somehow because I share genes?

What is your take on inheritance? I understood that you think that it should not be allowed? You called a divine right! Should the gvmt have your assets? If not who?
plexman
·3 年前·議論
I mean bad sugar, one glucose molecule (not so sweet) plus one fructose molecule (very sweet), like HFCS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-fructose_corn_syrup

Fruits and vegetables have fiber, its a different story.

By the way he goes on talking about diet soft drinks, and explain that they are also bad, you produce insulin anyway.
plexman
·3 年前·議論
You should have the right to gift whatever you want to your descendants, and the general public should have no cut from your hard work and the decision not to consume it all.

You paid taxes all your life. Your descendants are going to be paying taxes for the new assets.

OP saying not to worry, its just a problem if you receive more than 1kk, well in 100 years with inflation i bet this will be a problem for everybody.
plexman
·3 年前·議論
We should not punish savers. This "wealth redistribution" talk is bollocks.
plexman
·3 年前·議論
Sugar is poison.

Check out the latest talk from Dr Robert Lustig https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n28W4AmvMDE&pp=ygUGbHVzdGln

Its a 3.5h video, but roughly sugar is as toxic as alcohol and the food industry is adding it to most products. In short if it has a label (like most processed foods with many ingredients) you should avoid, switch to the ones that don't have (like an apple).

This book is also great "The hacking of the American mind"

`While researching the toxic and addictive properties of sugar for his New York Times bestseller Fat Chance, Robert Lustig made an alarming discovery—our pursuit of happiness is being subverted by a culture of addiction and depression from which we may never recover.

Dopamine is the “reward” neurotransmitter that tells our brains we want more; yet every substance or behavior that releases dopamine in the extreme leads to addiction. Serotonin is the “contentment” neurotransmitter that tells our brains we don’t need any more; yet its deficiency leads to depression. Ideally, both are in optimal supply. Yet dopamine evolved to overwhelm serotonin—because our ancestors were more likely to survive if they were constantly motivated—with the result that constant desire can chemically destroy our ability to feel happiness, while sending us down the slippery slope to addiction. In the last forty years, government legislation and subsidies have promoted ever-available temptation (sugar, drugs, social media, porn) combined with constant stress (work, home, money, Internet), with the end result of an unprecedented epidemic of addiction, anxiety, depression, and chronic disease. And with the advent of neuromarketing, corporate America has successfully imprisoned us in an endless loop of desire and consumption from which there is no obvious escape.

With his customary wit and incisiveness, Lustig not only reveals the science that drives these states of mind, he points his finger directly at the corporations that helped create this mess, and the government actors who facilitated it, and he offers solutions we can all use in the pursuit of happiness, even in the face of overwhelming opposition. Always fearless and provocative, Lustig marshals a call to action, with seminal implications for our health, our well-being, and our culture.`

https://robertlustig.com/hacking/
plexman
·3 年前·議論
hum, can you explain what 'ruined' means to you?
plexman
·3 年前·議論
I think that one solution is to cut red tape on construction and remove related taxes or rent caps. Create the incentive to construct. Seldom any government does that, on the contrary it looks like they just reduce/remove the incentive to build.

[update] Also the regulation on gear/materials is insanely costly, in Dublin new houses need to have a BER [1] rating of 'A'. Looks great in paper but this severely increases the cost.

[1] https://www.seai.ie/home-energy/building-energy-rating-ber/u...
plexman
·3 年前·議論
> but don't pay taxes

most goods have VAT there, so this is not entirely true, i guess you mean income tax.