Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Comments

top

Ask Slashdot: Stop PulseAudio From Changing Sound Settings?

Giant Electronic Bra Re:Bad UI (282 comments)

Maybe. I think its actually pretty easy to do in one or another of the PA-supplied UIs, but I have yet to find clear instructions and mostly I just dread the "Oh, gosh, you touched a config file, that was a bad idea, how about not ever having sound again?" lol.

2 days ago
top

Ask Slashdot: Stop PulseAudio From Changing Sound Settings?

Giant Electronic Bra Re:Bad UI (282 comments)

Yeah, I'm still trying to figure out how to record a Skype call. I'm sure its perfectly straightforward for any of the PA developers. I just haven't even been able to wrap my head around their terminology and concepts.

3 days ago
top

Ask Slashdot: Stop PulseAudio From Changing Sound Settings?

Giant Electronic Bra Bad UI (282 comments)

I think the PA gui control programs are the biggest issue, Pavucontrol and the other tools are just utterly confusing and obtuse. Typical developer designed UI paradigm, make a widget for each configuration parameter instead of thinking through the use cases and constructing some abstractions that make sense to the user and not the developer. Once the configuration is properly presented and a task-oriented UI is constructed around that I don't think PA will give people so many issues. There are a lot of neat things you CAN do with it, IF you can figure out how. Its just that no mortal human (myself included) can make heads nor tails of the frikking thing.

3 days ago
top

MIT Study Finds Fault With Mars One Colony Concept

Giant Electronic Bra This is news? (269 comments)

Mars One is HUGELY optimistic. Optimism is great as a general life trait, but its a terrible way to design things.

about two weeks ago
top

Ask Slashdot: Software Issue Tracking Transparency - Good Or Bad?

Giant Electronic Bra Re:Wrong salesdroids (159 comments)

I have to agree, and I am a principle in a small software OEM, we deal with these issues all the time. Every one of our customers can see our buglists. Heck they can submit a ticket if they wish, and feature lists should be GOLD to the sales force.

about three weeks ago
top

Dremel Releases 3D Printer

Giant Electronic Bra Re:Underspecced? (105 comments)

Great, thanks! I am definitely getting some good info. 10 or 15 years ago when I was doing a lot of oddball stuff I'd have probably had one of these things ASAP. These days its hard to find the space and time to do projects, so I really am behind the curve. I have some interesting ideas, but nothing so solid that it yet warrants running out to spend $1000 (ouch) right now. At least I'm getting a better idea of what might be useful. Hopefully I can find a maker space that isn't too far away one of these days and try a few things out.

about a month ago
top

Dremel Releases 3D Printer

Giant Electronic Bra Re:Underspecced? (105 comments)

I get what you're saying. Most of the stuff Dremel sells is generally pretty decent stuff, or always used to be back in the day. If its a good machine and does what you need to do, then sure, that's cool. I can just imagine a LOT of interesting projects I might want to do that where I might want to use other materials or etc. So that's my curiosity really is if I spent $1000 on a machine like this one will I be hankering for the $3000 machine in a week?

about a month ago
top

Dremel Releases 3D Printer

Giant Electronic Bra Underspecced? (105 comments)

Is it me or does it sound a bit underwhelming for $1000? I don't mean the price is non-competitive, it just seems like I'd want something more capable if I was going to take the plunge. Burn $1000 and in a week won't you be hankering for a much more capable machine?

about a month ago
top

Hitachi Developing Reactor That Burns Nuclear Waste

Giant Electronic Bra Re:Already commented on this elsewhere (200 comments)

Tokamak's MIGHT work, actually probably WILL work. Big question if they can be economical or not. LFTRs definitely CAN and DO work, that's been conclusively proven. Again its a question of whether they would be economical and if they will actually be safer, cleaner, etc. which are unproven assertions, though they have some basis in the underlying physics.

about a month ago
top

Hitachi Developing Reactor That Burns Nuclear Waste

Giant Electronic Bra Re:Already commented on this elsewhere (200 comments)

Interesting. Well, frankly I've always thought these various initiatives were doomed. Its a LOT harder to design a nuclear reactor than people seem to think.

about a month ago
top

Verizon Working On a La Carte Internet TV Service

Giant Electronic Bra Re:Unbundling Horsecrap (108 comments)

What 'work'? Its basic logic. Either you can follow it or you can't.

about a month ago
top

Verizon Working On a La Carte Internet TV Service

Giant Electronic Bra Unbundling Horsecrap (108 comments)

That link about 'myths' of unbundling is horseshit. It fails the basic math test. If everyone was unbundled and only paid for what they watch then we'd have the same number of people watching the same things they watch now. The AGGREGATE money collected in fees would remain the same and it would be distributed proportionately to the same vendors it is now. Nothing would change. The author of that piece of garbage somehow thinks what, that everyone would suddenly be paying $500 a month to watch individual channels???!!! Where would all that extra money go? Man people are stupid sometimes.

Obviously the Cable Cos. know all of this. They don't want to unbundle because it would cut customer's bills, they don't like it because once you stop having ESPN on your dial you'll forget it exists and pretty soon you'll only be paying for what you actually watch, and if that's cheap shows THEN they really will get a lot less revenue. Beyond that the ad revenue drops because people will just skip ESPN if they only watch it 5 times a year. Indeed, once the customer's start picking what they want to pay for the Cable Co becomes just what it should be, an ISP.

about a month ago
top

Hitachi Developing Reactor That Burns Nuclear Waste

Giant Electronic Bra Re:Already commented on this elsewhere (200 comments)

You're largely preaching to the choir here, but you might want to read the papers and etc on the Terrapower design because it sounds like it isn't quite how you are envisaging it. OTOH I agree, a liquid metal cooled breeder/fast neutron reactor is not going to be passively stable and not going to be inherently stable at all in the same way that a uranium oxide fueled PWR is basically stable when properly designed and won't spike to 50 or 100x its designed power output (like the nice Russian graphite reactors are prone to do).

about a month and a half ago
top

Hitachi Developing Reactor That Burns Nuclear Waste

Giant Electronic Bra Re:Already commented on this elsewhere (200 comments)

I'm not asking for anything, I just described ONE POSSIBLE technology that Hitachi could be working on. Honestly I don't know a large amount about the safety characteristics of such a reactor, but it doesn't appear to be 'vast'. I'd suggest doing some general reading on the subject. These ARE liquid metal cooled reactors, with all that implies and I'm NOT saying I think they would be safe, etc. Don't mistake me for one of the blind followers of the nuclear light. I don't think all nuclear power is The Devil necessarily, but I'm a pretty deep skeptic on the subject. Still, I can see the allure of a technology that could in principle supply 'clean' power for 1000's of years using nothing but existing stockpiles of a substance that is generally considered useless and could burn up troublesome waste.

about a month and a half ago
top

Hitachi Developing Reactor That Burns Nuclear Waste

Giant Electronic Bra Re:Already commented on this elsewhere (200 comments)

Sounds good to me, let me know when you have a design and I'll fund it!

about a month and a half ago
top

Hitachi Developing Reactor That Burns Nuclear Waste

Giant Electronic Bra Re:Already commented on this elsewhere (200 comments)

The implementations I've seen bandied about are primarily 'TWR' type designs where the fuel is roughly 90% U238 and 10% U235 or Pu238. These are ESSENTIALLY fast breeders, but they are capable of burning up about 35% of their fuel in a single cycle. The resulting spent fuel can be remelted and recycled through the reactor without chemical separation. Because existing spent fuel from LWRs is still mostly fertile U238 it can be utilized directly to feed a TWR. Obviously a TWR wouldn't be 'waste free', there will be daughter elements produced as in any reactor, etc. In fact it has been characterized as a rather tricky type of reactor to build, even for a breeder, and eventual decommissioning would be fairly nasty. HOWEVER due to the vastly high fuel use efficiency a TWR could essentially just be fueled once and sealed with no provision for refueling at all. Conceivably the core could be designed such that it would simply be removed and replaced after 40 years, at least in theory. Reality is more like you'd end up with a very hot core that would still have to be disposed of, but this would amount to a very much smaller amount of waste than with an LWR. The beauty of this sort of system is that you can burn depleted Uranium there are VAST stockpiles of the stuff around, enough to fuel 1000's of TWRs for millennia (the US alone has over 700,000 tons in inventory).

I'm not advocating these things, but if some similar sort of design is what Hitachi is talking about, then it certainly would be able to burn waste. I can see the lure. I suspect there are a lot of these heavy industry corporates that have nuclear expertise that are keeping these kinds of projects on low simmer somewhere thinking that maybe in a decade or two the world will be banging on their door desperate for a clean energy solution and willing to put up with nuclear power. Its possible they are right. Frankly though I doubt they will push it through to an actual build of anything in today's climate, but perhaps in 5 or 10 years when they are good and ready things will be different. At least by then they may have a good idea whether such a concept is really economical.

about a month and a half ago
top

Hitachi Developing Reactor That Burns Nuclear Waste

Giant Electronic Bra Re:Already commented on this elsewhere (200 comments)

238U isn't a transuranic, by definition. You CAN OTOH burn up Pu 239, Americium, etc much faster than it would decay if you have a good neutron flux. I don't know of anyone who doesn't believe something like a 'traveling wave' reactor, or a fission/fusion hybrid wouldn't WORK, its just a matter of if it would produce economical results vs just burying the waste in a repository.

about a month and a half ago
top

Hitachi Developing Reactor That Burns Nuclear Waste

Giant Electronic Bra Re:Already commented on this elsewhere (200 comments)

Purex is a process, not just the place in Hannford where they ran it at one time. Its an example of what highly radioactive materials processing is like.

You have to understand, I've BEEN to some of these places. I've SEEN IT. I know what the physics is and the chemistry and a fair amount about the engineering. This level of radioactivity is devilishly hard to completely contain and when even relatively small amounts escape you have nightmares like groundwater contamination and fun things like that. Its NOT easy like you seem to think. You need to study the subject instead of just some idiot's hype about it.

And again, I'm not saying it can't be worth it. Maybe it IS worth it, but I can guarantee you there will be billions and billions spent on controlling the resulting mess. Its just the nature of the beast. If spending $40 billion on building and cleaning up such a facility saves $200 billion and there isn't a big environmental problem left over afterwards then fine, its worth it. You simply cannot automatically assume that will be the case. I'm sure Hitachi looked into it, but I would be careful to see what they were reporting internally to their board BEFORE they decided to go ahead, because that will be the conservative and less biased view of it. Once they get going its all gung-ho with these corporations. You really have to watch what they put out at that point, its often very optimistic at best.

about a month and a half ago
top

Hitachi Developing Reactor That Burns Nuclear Waste

Giant Electronic Bra Re:Already commented on this elsewhere (200 comments)

Well, first of all I didn't say the whole area would be waste. I said the structures and etc would be waste. Of course nobody knows exactly what that would entail, no such facility has been built, but when I look at existing purex plants and other similar infrastructure that has handled high level waste and performed any sort of significant handling, it has turned out to be a very big mess. All I'm suggesting is that we have to consider this when we think about 'burning waste' and such things. I MAY not turn out to be the deal that its proponents claim. We don't know yet. That doesn't make me pro or anti nuclear, it makes me an intelligent human being who weighs all sides of an issue before declaring that its good or bad. When the evidence is in, then I'll decide. Until then I just point out the pros and cons and maybe what we can guess about their merit. You can do no better unless you have some font of otherwise secret knowledge about this subject that the rest of the world is lacking.

about a month and a half ago
top

Hitachi Developing Reactor That Burns Nuclear Waste

Giant Electronic Bra Re:Already commented on this elsewhere (200 comments)

Or its a nuclear chemist telling you how it really is. Gosh, sorry the world doesn't conform to your desires...

Windmills and solar plants may have to be dismantled someday, but they don't have effectively a finite lifespan due to extreme safety concerns which nuclear plants do, so the chances are slim that they WILL be retired. When elements of such plants DO get demolished this is just an ordinary demolition project and the leftovers are either recycled, used for fill, or etc. as appropriate. In the case of all of the operating equipment part of a nuclear power plant ALL OF IT is low level waste and has to be disposed of in specific ways. You don't have to believe me, just go and investigate for yourself. Now, the employee parking garage and some offices over on the other side of the site? Maybe not, they're probably just going to the landfill. However, at ALL FACILITIES that have dealt with some sort of processing of transuranics and longer-lived daughter elements very expensive cleanups have been required. Vastly more expensive than the often billion-dollar cleanups at power reactors. It is absolutely certain that anyplace that is opening casks and moving the stuff around that is inside them will have to do some chemistry on what's in there, and when they do they WILL MAKE A NASTY MESS. If you don't understand this, then you're too ignorant of the subject to be commenting.

about a month and a half ago

Submissions

top

Colchicine targets tumor blood supply

Giant Electronic Bra Giant Electronic Bra writes  |  more than 3 years ago

Giant Electronic Bra (1229876) writes "The drug, known as a "vascular disrupting agent" (VDA), is based on colchicine — a highly toxic substance in the flowers, leaves and seeds of the autumn crocus. Previous attempts to employ it to fight cancer have failed because of the compound's extreme toxicity, but Prof Patterson's team found a way of rendering the drug harmless until it was exposed to a protein enzyme called MMP1 only found in tumours.

"Our novel delivery method uses the presence of this active MMP to activate the drug, which attacks and breaks down cancer blood vessels, destroying the tumour's lifeline", said Prof Patterson, who will outline the research at the British Science Festival taking place at the University of Bradford this week.

Tumor angiogenesis, the growth of blood vessels in solid cancers, has long been seen as a key process in tumor development and growth. Could this new form of colchicine finally provide a way to disrupt tumor blood supply and provide a magic bullet against many forms of cancer? Human trials may begin in as little as 18 to 24 months."

Link to Original Source

Journals

Giant Electronic Bra has no journal entries.

Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?