SerS - The Serious Squad Thread

i think of the nuclear energy as the easiest way out to answer today's energy crisis.

it's clean,reasonably cheap,high energy/area used for reactor ratio,and ready to use at a huge scale.

but here's the catch:
1.it's really dangerous if there's something wrong with the reactor.chernobyl proves that.
2.the current amount of nuclear waste is already creating problems as it should be dumped in special locations to minimize the radiation.
3.the stock of the radioactives like U-235 used for reactions is getting scarce and it's not renewable,so it shouldn't be treated as renewable source of power.

so i don't think that nukes is the best energy solution out there.
it's just temporary energy solution.

so instead of increasing the nuke energy output(and make the nukes our main source of energy),we should just allocate more time and money to find ways to reduce energy usage/capita,increase the energy efficiency for buildings and appliances,use the renewable sources of energy(wind,sun,water,geothermal)more,and do researches regarding the potential new source of alternative energy solutions(like cold fusion,plasmagasification,etc.)

well cold fusion is not really a way cause it is not usefull to gain energy. There is not even a single study that say that it is even efficient.

But DT-fusionreactors might be a good way. But I think we have to wait until the new reactor ITER will show the results in 2018. And even if it brings up a new way to create energy, it will probably take years until much more reactor of this kind are build.

And you also have to think about that fact that the implementation of new technology cost a lot of money, since it is money that reigns the world most companys will probably use cheaper ways to create energy and make money. Only way to convince companys to use alternative energy sources it to subsidize companys when the build those facilities.

The crux being us building sub-companies with all revenue solely directed to research and development of our own reactors. With a small empire of businesses with the primary goal not to expand but to fund a strong energy source that's cheaper than everybody else it would make for an interesting goal to set.

That being said with sole ownership of the cheapest energy source and the ability to essentially steal cash from every person on the planet. How would you keep the government from taking your power from you?

Being insulted for race, and being discrimtated under law are two different things.

As much as you want defeat De Facto with laws, you can't. You can only do that with De Juro segergation. Laws can't change wahts in people's hearts. Only actions and a battle of thoughts can.

I agree pretty much completely. +rep

I'd say the best route for a renewable energy source would be Hydrogen. It's an abundant element, and the only byproduct is water. However, the problem is; pure hydrogen is highly volitile. Any fuck up would result in catastrophy.

yes,it's abundant,renewable and clean(although volatile).

but it got one major weakness:the energy needed to divide the hydrogen from water is HUGE.and where are the electricity needed to produce the required energy came from?fossil fuel?then where's the advantage of hydrogen if we still needs fossil fuel?

do you know the honda's FCX project?it's basically a car running on hydrogen,and a full tank of hydrogen is good for about 200 miles on it.
it seems to be the answer for the energy problems,but a tank of hydrogen needs one week worth of electricity derived from a 4x15 meter solar panel to divide the hydrogen from the water.

so it's not a feasible option yet,at least for now.

Yeah, I probably should've mentioned that. I agree, currently we don't have the technology to make Hydrogen Fuel Cells a feasable alternative.

I always liked the nuclear system, an finite chain to eventually become stable. Iron ahoy!
Fusion! hydrogen->helium->...->iron<-...<-xenon<-Uranium Fission!

My question is WTF do you do with the iron waste product? Are you then stuck with nothing but matter/antimatter collisions?

i'm with you here.+rep.

Regarding hydrogen:
It does have a good potential to be used as an energy source. It does have risks, but we wouldn't be living in the same society as now if we did not take risks. Gasoline used for stoves, cars and many other things was considered potentially dangerous but used anyway and we are doing fine right now.


Blah, this topic is over but just to clarify:
People (Whites) do get fined for saying racial remarks while non-whites seem to get away with all kinds of racial remarks.

regarding hydrogen,i think what's currently halting us from using hydrogen in a big scale is not the risks(we use nukes,although it's risky,remember?),but the source of energy needed to divide the H atom from H2O...

After the Chernobyl accident you hardly see any nuke plants built because of the risks. Same with hydrogen power. Many scientists have been saying it's too risky. Though you are also right on the fact that you are barely conserving energy since you use some to split the molecule.

You are right on several aspects. In the United States, no new nuclear power plants have been built in many years. The irony of this is that these new plants would likely be safer and more efficient than the old ones. And even though there is a potential for danger, including a catastrophic accident, such as a meltdown, the odds of it are unlikely. For example, France has built many nuclear reactors in recent years and they have not had any major problems with them.

However, you are not quite right on your last point. Although energy is required to split the molecules, a much greater amount of energy is produced. The energy(heat) is then used to boil water to spin turbines etc.

As for hydrogen fuel sources, hydrogen is not inherently dangerous unless put under pressure in a pure hydrogen tank (which some car manufactures are experimenting with.) Hydrogen can also be seperated from water through electrolysis and used almost immediately, minimizing the explosive risk, however, the downside to this is that electrolysis requires electricity. This could be circumnavigated through the use of solar cells, but they can be expensive to manufacture and will not work in the absence of sunlight.

Perhaps for now, the best alternative is nuclear energy, with increased safety measures and ways of dealing with the radioactive waste.

so since no one posted anything so far.
What about change topic ?

please.
i'm not a good topic maker,so i'll let others do it.

Nuke the whales.

censorship in hentai. is it a respective medium for explicit content or is it a contradicting standard when the content is deliberately explicit? what are the credentials, are most of them culturally relevant? ill start us off.

the japanese have very unique expectations for pornography in general, i guess it all goes back to early customs. sexual intercourse between a man and woman was taboo in any visual expression and i believe thats a primary factor of why tentacles became a popular compromise. the labia of the vagina and foreskin of the penis were then strictly censored when intercourse became less of a taboo, and skipping into current times the majority of these censorships are a matter of customary respect from the artists. i heard alot of this off sextv, please dont quote me lol

anyways, what do we all think about it? is it a good idea in general or should censorship even be a worry when considering the target audience? in my opinion there shouldnt be such a thing in hentai, it isnt morally wrong for a picture of someone to go at it with anoter picture. i respect the japanese customs but i think that censorships a little overdone, its the detail that really distinguishes the artists effort after all.

Censorship isn't a good or bad thing and taboo rather than censorship should always be in mind in thinking of a target audience. What you can say about it is that it does slow down the creating and exploration of new ideas. Without proper recognition of the audience's limits setting off even one will send it into pop underground, rarely seen and rarely heard. Which is fine if you don't mind your work popping up one to two decades later when minds have given themselves time to adjust. Some ideas just don't spread quickly even if the material is great. That doesn't stop you form saying whatever is taboo but it's certainly not going to increase distribution. Though it amazes me the good stories that get held back for the longest time only for me to find them pop up in a bookstore 30 years after they were made in the smallest dark corner of a library in a anthology book.

Things just come out as taboo, and people are willing to push the lines but some are really strong. A lot of us have experienced on the internet something that breaches our lines, it's shocking and near impossible for us to ever have wanted to cross the line, it instead is a surprise of force. There are many unspoken subjects those of us western minds don't even consciously hold to be noted as unspoken but is odd how quickly we retract from it when brought into the light.

I think censorship is one of those magic blinds spots that gets pushed and pushed but never breaks in the Japanese mindset. I think it would take quite a few more decades for it to break out of culture shift. Whereas the simpler more expedient method would be to make a partnership between a small start up western company and one of the lesser known hentai animation studios. Giving the legal fronts to the western partner. Allowing a "faux" director and an experienced co-director head the work. Allowing a single production with missing censors or a continuing series of productions with ever reducing censors. Either with the goal of pushing the boundaries till it breaks hopefully keeping the Asian partner unscathed. The company would probably break apart, be disbanded, and be a kamikaze venture. Though sad, It would allow for the taboo to have a very deep dent in it's armor. With that other companies would have a precedent to at least attempt after seeing the folly of the censor and have the burden of being the first taken off their shoulders. With hope we wouldn't have to enter in as partners to continue the push a second time.

Hello, its my first visit to this thread... thinking Im abit out of depth here lol