The etymology of English "cassette" appears to come from the French word for "little box", which makes sense for tape cassettes but not for bicycle gearing. Considering that bicycle cassettes were invented in the 70s whereas tape cassettes are from the 60s, I'd be curious to know the reason for the name.
Little box to hold a removable piece or mechanism, so seems a bit of a stretch unless cassette gears pop out for replacement? There were far earlier uses. The box that held the glass plates in early plate cameras was called a cassette.
Because there is no need to. The radioactive material wasn't a problem before it was dug out of the soil. It's not a problem if it returns to where it came from. The problem is that most government try to find an idiotic central storage location instead of simply distributing the spent fuel over many locations.
Yes. Launch vehicles sometimes fail. They may explode, or they may not make it all the way to orbit and have to re-enter. Either way, this would scatter the radioactive material over a wide area.
Why does everyone turn from Nuclear though? It seems like the most viable option in my opinion. I'd rather have a network of nuke power where energy reliability is weather-independent than forests of wind and farms of solar. I feel like its a much greener approach overall. What's the manufacturing breakeven in carbon costs for a windmill or a solar panel?
In my case geopolitical reasons, mostly. I prefer nuclear plants not be in what the US president lovingly calls shithole countries. Those tend to not yet have nuclear, but a drastically increasing need for energy. Many of them are also a lot closer to the equator than western countries with existing nuclear, making solar much more viable than e.g. in the UK.
> What's the manufacturing breakeven in carbon costs for a windmill or a solar panel?
This questions feels like you mostly try to justify your otherwise preexisting preference. A proper system would have external costs factored into the price, by the way.
The genuine answer to your question is that their news sources haven't been demonising renewables and green government initiatives for the last 20 years (in order to prop up their fossil fuel sponsors) so they don't automatically think "communist, hoax, inefficient, boondoggle, political correctness gone mad, end of civilization as we know it, bloody hippies, etc." when renewables gets brought up. Instead they think "cheap, efficient, distributed tech that keeps getting cheaper and that I can use for energy independence on multiple scales" so it's not that they have any great distaste for nuclear, they've just not been trained to hate and fear renewables.
They don't for example, wonder if no one has thought to calculate the carbon impact of renewables, because they assume the scientists and other authority figures they trust who recommend it would have taken that into account. And if they did wonder, it's a short Google away, and their usual info sources would provide facts, not scaremongering propaganda.
That's why you'll rarely see a defence of nuclear that doesn't quickly degenerate into attacking Californian hippies, or government interference, or the collapse of Germany into a solar powered Islamic no-go-zone, or flat out denial that climate change is even a problem anyway" that they've read about in their highly reliable news sources. Generally they're more anti-renewable than pro-nuclear.
iirc its the 30% cut they take from developers, some folks are really against it and vow to boycott. I'm sure there's plenty of other reasons but thats the first that comes to mind
If the developer looked at the trade offs between using the Mac App Store and decided to use it anyway, why should the customer care?
I would think just the opposite, I would be more inclined to use the App Store that already has my payment information on file than pay an unknown developer directly.
No I work in telecom and he's not onto anything. It's technically impossible for one, and the ROI wouldn't be there even if it was.
The ROI on spray and pray is high enough. (EDIT: Not as high as like actual legit telecommunications services but it takes a tiny fraction of the expertise.) Literally all the information they need is your phone number. They just spoof the "from" number, often to appear to be a toll-free number or a number in your area code and crank out as many calls as their carriers will let them without shutting them down. The underlying costs are cheap enough where only a teeeeensy percentage of people have to fall for it for it to be worth it.
