Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)D
Posts
2
Comments
56
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • In the case where you are trying to distinguish a shift in cancer rates at the 1 in 1000 level it is statistically insignificant, because your now measuring hit rates in the single digits and trying to distinguish that from other cancer causing factors that are probably at the 1 in 100 level or less (i.e, old people get breast and prostate cancer).

  • It is about safety limits in the sense that we should not be changing them to solve a PR issue. The accepted principle is ALARA. Governments do allow radiation generating devices and infrastructure usually in that framework. The PR issue is not a result of this safety framework, really it's more of an education problem. Most people will never understand radiation or statistics well enough to have a good grasp on this. But I think it is getting better. Most people I talk to take issue with the cost of nuclear more than the radiation, especially here in Aus where we have no existing industry. My understanding is even the French are struggling to keep it economically viable, especially when it's dry.

    Energy density should have little to do with cost. We have a lot of empty space, and we really don't need to capture all that much sunlight even with 20% efficiency. 20% is just fine when photons from the sun are free. The true cost savings with solar is not in the panel cost, it's that a dozen people with a TAFE degree can build a 500 MW generator in a paddock in 3 months, that operates with minimal maintenance. Nothing can beat this.

    Economically viable superconducting links are indeed a long way off but I would bet we see them before commercial fusion. In fact, we already have, they exist in a number of grids, mostly as tests and demonstrations. In east coast Aus, we lose close to 50% of our generated power to transmission lines. You take away transmission loss, and you can build a global grid. Aus can power the EU and NA in their nights with solar. It's never cloudy everywhere at the same time.

  • Yes, and it's a statistically insignificant amount of data with a strong genetic correlation that can't be taken out. The scientific result is we still don't know, more data is required. But how do we ever get such data?

  • I mean what's the hypothetical other option here? We increase the background rate in a city of 10 million people to say, 200 mSv/year for five decades and do the experiment to see if their genetics can handel it to get statically meaningful data? For all we know right now it could be fine, or thousands of people get cancer that otherwise would not have, no one has the data to know. It's a pretty unethical study.

    Even if you removed all safety requirements from the nuclear industry (never going to happen) it will still be expensive, there is too much infrastructure, too many systems, control loops and moving parts. The reality is solar just wins in cost and it is probably only going to keep making headway over the rest of the generation tech out there. Given the development rate of batteries I expect solar/batteries will become the power generation standard simply though economic drivers more than anything else. I doubt it's possible to beat that gravity contained fusion, and if we ever get cheaper superconducting links, then it's basically game over for everything else.

    But we will always have reactors. We need the medical isotopes, and let's be real, they will keep breeder reactors for bomb fuel.

  • Don't mess with bats, and never fucking eat them!

  • GitHub, hahah. Teenagers these days. The government must be concerned about the psychosocial harm caused by unaccepted pull request.

  • Brilliant show. Great acting. "Mind the sheep Richard"

  • They threw us in the deep end with trackpants and a jumper on and we had to tread water for 5 minutes back when I was like 12. Then we had to take off the heavy clothes in the water and do 50 m. I feel like one of the teachers had a clipboard marking us off, but at least at my school it was expected that every kid could manage that.

  • The fuck? Why does the guardian have a second crappy researched Aus gun laws article in the space of three days??? I literally just scrolled up from the previous one on my Lemmy feed.

  • You can get them with the right licence. It's only for professional hunters I believe but I have never looked into details. They are rightfully much harder to get than a typical class A/B licence.

  • That's some heavy shit man!

  • I mean most families don't need more than one car, but some people like to buy lots of them.

    I grew up rural and it was very rare to see a farm with more than five guns, most would never "need" more than two. If someone registers and properly stores a large collection through legal channels then I have trouble taking issue with it regardless of their location. Most rifle ranges are in or near cities and even if you were aiming for a single arm per modern calibre, you are talking about dozens of guns.

  • You took it home?!? And that is the done thing? Do they pay you to install a handgun safe??? Pistols are scary, it's too easy to change your line of fire.

  • This article has some huge issues.

    As mentioned already, the type of gun matters a lot. No mention of how many are semi auto, but I am guessing it won't be many.

    Also no accounting for population growth over the last 30 years as a factor in total gun numbers.

    This paragraph was absolutely journalistic garbage.

    "NSW firearm registry data shows that in Sydney there are more than 70 individuals who own more than 100 firearms, including one person who owns 385 guns. The register notes that this is not a collector or a dealer."

    Clearly this is a hobby/interest and the person is a collector with too much time and money (good for them I guess). What they don't have is a "collectors" licence that effectively means they cannot ever use their guns. A licenced collector will usually have inoperable firearms on display (think museum).

    All that said, the SSAA and others do have a higher than normal concentration of right wing nuts that continuously lobby the government to weaken our excellent (imo) gun laws. It's why I stopped giving them any of my money.

  • I have noticed the quality of Michael West deteriorating significantly over the last year or so. Not that I don't open any news article with a healthy dose of scepticism but it feels like they used to do better.

  • My unregulated ebike seems to work pretty well as a car replacement.

  • I have seen plenty of places here charging a percentage rate for debit card use, as recently as last week. Not saying they should but it happens.

    Who ends up benefiting from all the cash skimming I'm not sure, but chances are they are already filthy rich.

  • Oh for sure. Cash is expensive to count, store and move. Never understood how an armour guard car with 2 people emptying ticket machines made much sense, even back in the day.

    However, the infrastructure to run electronics payments is not trivial. The combination of volume, security and reliability needed adds up in hardware and software. I doubt it will ever be free to transfer money in any form.