The Current Events Thread

[D-vid]

Wouldn't it be more sensible to check an upcoming law's constitutionality before people vote on it?

[Madican]

It would, but California is kind of famous for pushing through these laws and having people vote for or against it, while also spending cheddar on lying about the proposition so they can get their required votes.

[D-vid]

I mean that happens here too. One law even was in effect for almost 2 years until the constitutional court ruled that it wasn't okay.

[Stranaton]

First new US nuclear reactor since 1978 got approved.
Discuss.

[Madel]

Nuclear energy isn't as dangerous/horrible as some people make it out to be, and a new reactor would be waaaaaay safer than anything they could build in 1978. Personally I approve.

[FatOldRobot]

Yeah, the dangers of it are really exaggerated. Even though I live in the USA, I wouldn't be against it.

[D-vid]

The main problem is not with the danger of accidents but with the storage of the waste that develops. Shoving everything inside hollow mountains or underground won't do forever and the stuff stays dangerous for millions of years.

[Stranaton]

The main problem is not with the danger of accidents but with the storage of the waste that develops. Shoving everything inside hollow mountains or underground won't do forever and the stuff stays dangerous for millions of years.

the french have a neat system where they re-energize the waste using the nuclear plant, and make it a cycle. after several cycles, the waste shrinks and all that is left is much less harmful stuff. You lose quite a bit of output energy doing the re-energizing, but I think it's worth it.

and we also have Thorium plants in development, which are impossible to meltdown and have safer waste.

[FatOldRobot]

That Thorium stuff seems really neat.

[Shad]

What you said is true, Stran, but it's still a danger for the environment in the long run.

[Fauche]

More copyright. Article is in German so I won't link it.

Basically, an artist has to pay 1400€ because he quoted newspaper articles about himself on his website.
I fucking hate our dumb copyright.
You don't produce and sell the newspaper where the article was published anymore? THEN DON'T EXPECT GETTING ANY MORE cheddar FOR IT AND LET PEOPLE QUOTE IT FOR PRESERVATION GODDAMMIT.
What makes it even better is that as almost always, the ones who actually MADE the articles didn't even know about that and are shocked about what the newspapers did.

There's a difference between claiming ownership of something that isn't yours, which should be the main target of copyright laws, and simply quoting, alluding, referencing, sharing things, inwhich one does not claim ownership of someone else's work but is simply sharing it with the rest of us. I don't understand why people make it so complicated D;

[Stranaton]

What you said is true, Stran, but it's still a danger for the environment in the long run.

but only for 10's of years, instead of thousands.

[D-vid]

Saw this retweeted by Norrin.

Oh Republicans. It's almost as if you WANT to be seen as stereotypical disney villains who are evil just because.

[Stranaton]

Saw this retweeted by Norrin.

Oh Republicans. It's almost as if you WANT to be seen as stereotypical disney villains who are evil just because.

Editorials...

[D-vid]

Huh, I can't see the article anymore, what happened.