SSgt Viljuri

I meant that in general terms, not directed at you personally. But duly withdrawn nevertheless. Counting Bayesian probabilities is not that enlightening. It would be even possible that if you self personally take a walk on the other side of your room, the vacuum will seek an lower energy level and collapse with catastrophic consequences to the entire Universe. That would BE in the realms of possibility, if those perpetual motion machines linked by Kettler would work. Scary, isn't it? Should we ban walking? Essentially there's no difference how "hard" we mash atoms and other particles together in some experiment or not (and in any case, similar reactions occur all the time in both "real reality" and as "virtual reality", even inside the atomic nuclei your body is made of), all of these are just movement or some fluctuations in our current topologically defined 4D space-time, what ever definitions and theories we use.

Pure economic necessity. In order to keep the growth going (it's not like anybody could work more than 24 hours in a given day), we must find sustainable new technologies of how to live on this planet (and beyond). Even if many people in the developed World are living in a relative affluence, we are not even close of being sustainable or fair enough to those who live in the developing counties in outright misery. That, and we must know more. Information is valuable for information's sake. We are just beginning to grasp what's out there. The fact that on a personal level things as love, happiness and well-being are more important doesn't mean we wouldn't have our communal aesthetic side as well or somefink.

Indeed, in the US insurance costs are (were) seen as prohibitive. Despite of what ever legislative framework is in use country by country basis, the main issue is related to how liability for damages is implemented. In the US, there's such things as punitive damages, i.e. any damages incurred are overcompensated. This makes funding and covering them burdensome for energy companies as far as common law countries are concerned. In Finland we have a proactive public-private partnership model in place, establishing funds and alike, even though actual damages as such are not capped in any way (unlike what the link says, in practice it refers to third party liabilities, which are capped to 700 million Euro, meaning anything going above that is covered by the other acts).

There are two classes of physicists, theoretical and experimental. This project falls under the category of experimental. Thankfully Pauli isn't alive any more, but this talk is bat**** crazy, resembles some kind of common man's (=the Sun reading) fear of the dark. Being uninformed or mentally deficient is never a nice sight and no, there's absolutely no possibility for anything too remarkable to happen, as we are being constantly bombarded by even higher energy collisions, when cosmic particles and gamma rays hit upper atmosphere. Science is the highest pursuit what a man can do in this world. If we as a human race would get too bored and cease to seek answers to questions supposedly too "far out there" (=to the Sun reading part of the populace), our societies will stagnate and fall to anarchy.

No, it wouldn't be. The reason why it is not popular in the US relates to life cycle and mostly broken and unfavorable law system. In nuclear, there isn't any major externalities to talk about, the whole process is being "priced" accordingly and can be read from balance sheets, whereas in other forms of generation there are lots of costs that are not incurred to their "rightful owners" and are thus omitted. Whether we apply "polluter pays" or not, taxpayer can do it too, you know! You got the get the carbon and other such emissions down even in power generation (not just traffic and other pet peeves), failure to do so will probably lead to both 1) customer rejection of US produced products and 2) penalty tariffs levied on US exports in the probable future.

Expert opinions from the International Energy Association can be heard behind this link (in Finnish besides interview parts). Interesting English language tidbits can be heard in irregular intervals between 9 m 30 s and 15 m 10s. Some guy talks about European energy sector mergers, sees them to offer some benefits and some negatives, but stresses out that electricity distribution networks should be set apart from the old state-owned and new mostly privately owned integrated energy giants, according to already existing Finnish model or so, if I'm not completely mistaken myself. Getting the supposed benefits (for consumers, I hope) from free competition inside Europe requires actual cross-borders competition between producers in this regard, even if progress to this direction has been relatively slow inside Europe (EU), due to inter-European wrangling. Also, same guy offers a strong opinion against the current German government policy of getting rid of the nuclear energy altogether, especially if the country in question claims to be the leading country of new environment friendly and climate change conscious practices. My opinion: Same can be said about Sweden, which might turn the overall Northern European situation hairy, IMHO. Grid is not capable enough to distribute energy all-European wide economically, starting from basic physics things like unavoidable current losses. We need electricity generating capacity in all corners of Europe (EU), IMO. Especially if we as Europeans don't want to rely exclusively on natural gas imports (coal being a no-go, even if it is in the German plans to build 27(!) new plants), and speaking about potentially unreliable non-EU producers like Russia, Algeria and Libya. Also, one of the major corporate actors (= the Kreml) in this field, Russian Gazprom, is seen as a bit spooky, as it seems to involve itself more acquiring foreign assets than actually developing the reserves in Russia. (This was said by the other expert from the IEA.) My opinion: As from our Finnish experience, we already have experienced the Russian companies (= the Kreml) can't always deliver the amount of electricity commonly agreed, based on grid problems and the fact that in peak load times they put their internal consumers first, even if we pay absolutely the top euro from it. Even though natural gas deliveries have being quite stable, probably Russia seems to favor her German and Nordic customers, partly because she has no other option as she hopes to get permission procedures to so smoothly in order to lay a new undersea natural gas pipeline to Germany (with extension lines to Finland and Sweden). What both German and Nordic countries should acknowledge, the main reason for this project from the Russian perspective is to overcome the dependency of existing pipelines situated in Eastern Europe, which in a way is a direct attempt to divide the EU, which might or not might not be in the best long-term interests of Germany, despite the strong backing by the German social democratic party, the SPD. What ever the grand scheme of things, it is not possible to rely on imports what comes to electricity (and it's nuclear energy anyways), considering also those peak times occur in mid-winter, possibly leading to major problems for common customers. Sounds that both of these IEA guys have valuable things to say to citizens of Europe. Considering also that popular majority support for continuing nuclear energy production in Germany and Sweden is recently beginning to emerge again. In the meantime, Finland offers a focal point for all those operators that are interested in this nuclear energy option what comes to already largely free functioning and competitive energy markets, even if these guys questioned do not say a thing about this angle.

I think many have read about it, but personal experiences and recollections about it, no. Though, you did cross the pond already before the 1900's, didn't you? Old country and sorts?

As far as Finnish mindset goes, being not pleased is valued pleasure of its own. Though, ladies should know that local sperm here is among the most potent in the World, or as a motto: No time for idle chat or trifling talkers, let's get straight (in)to business. Or not.

Finland imports about 10 - 30 per cent of her energy from Russia, so additional energy generating capacity is a national security issue, as well as economic and environmental, not just for Finland, but for Sweden and other Scandinavian countries forming a single Nordic energy market. That and for energy companies there's lots of opportunities to profit from EU's carbon credit schemes, as Andreas probably knows very well. No wonder there's even German energy giants seeking an entry to Finnish energy markets.

Invading the Middle Earth has not proved to be a wise policy decision through Ages. And if one seeks seclusion and quietude, why not go elsewhere? It's not like they would be short of sheep there and not everybody likes to have close relations with them.

Ukraine is an interesting case, as the US is openly giving Ukrainians an option (not free) to seek a Western alignment. Naturally any hopes of membership in the NATO requires drastic reforms inside Ukraine, and popular support backing those reforms (which is not currently the case), and even more profound social and economic reforms for any hopes of becoming a EU member. Russia sees this as worrisome, but not overtly so, as Eastern Ukraine has an ethnic Russian population, which is firmly in mother Russia's hands and can be used in many innovative ways to destabilize the country to a certain degree. This fortunate situation for the Kreml is subjected to change if and when easily exploitable oil and gas reserves are starting to become exhausted, and they once again face the risk of social and financial turmoil. They are trying to diversify their economy, but without real success, as they have non other than themselves to blame in this regard, what comes to their existing repressive bureaucracy, deeply corrupted officials and other state actors and especially nonexistent legal system (proprietary rights or offering any legal remedies against the all-powerful official machinery), all of those in a need of immense improvement for any meaningful diversification to take place. Even if the ordinary Russians believe that political power would and should grow out of the barrel of a gun and are quite happy to live under an authoritarian state. Naturally the West must take a note of these developments, and tone down the expectations.

Red missiles to NA take a ballistic route over the Polar regions, and considering also installations like RAF Fylingdales already exists, so the answer is no. Even if the amount of operationally reliable missiles are probably still diminishing in their arsenal, due to financial and technical constraints. No amount of newly acquired energy income will turn back time, too much decay have already happened. Maybe they fear that at some point in the future their deterrent is potentially gone, thanks to advances and experiences gained by the projects like these, learning by doing or somefink. IMHO, there is no rational reason, but geopolitically the Russians still find it useful to rhetorically attack against the "Western aggression" by using Soviet style, largely for keeping up the appearances for their internal political consumption. Also they believe they can at least partly divide European allies (or rather the EU) by using propagandist pretexts like these, even if energy is much effective political weapon in this regard.

Not much to see here, apart from excess noise. Might there have been a bug what comes to board migration?

One slight worry though, my post count seems to indicate a loss of 2500+ posts? Where have all the flowers gone?

Let's start by poking fun at Toronto Maple Laughs. Guaranteed last-place finish, with less than 80 regular season points. Nik Hagman and Jeff Finger?They must be kidding!

While pondering things like these, it would be advisable to remember that more than half of the units currently "in the books" are theoretical, mostly because reservists' skills are lacking (fitness is the least of worries) and equipment assigned would not serve any purpose on a modern battlefield. Even a full-scale war (of annihilation) against the A2yellow type enemy would not mean full mobilization. Any current or future scenario involving Finnish participation should be modeled with the up-to-date and appropriate gear and let the old thinking derived from the Second World War experiences lay to a rest. [ April 02, 2008, 12:48 PM: Message edited by: SSgt Viljuri ]

Maybe Serbians will think twice whether or not to go genociding next time! A petty country Serbia might be, but her war crimes are major. Whether the Serbian state or serbian ethnic paramilitary sponsored, but murdering and ethnic cleansing attempts were a fact all over the former Yugoslavia in the 1990's, so it shouldn't come as a big surprise when Serbian pleas or appeals regarding Kosovo's status are dealt with a well-deserved contempt by the international community. The current state of affairs is clear. No amount of overly pompous Russian or Serbian nationalistic rhetoric will change that. It can only make thing worse for Serbia. The road to respectability and economic prosperity is a long one, for any nation, but for the hot-headed it is an endless one.

I don't see him at all. Hear Hear!

At this point it seems quite likely that the US Marines are about to choose Patria AMVs as their next wheeled vehicle, so maybe we could see a Finnish module as well? :cool:

I think that's really not fair, because the sun the moon and the stars were part of the "foundation" of the new engine and probably didn't take that long to set up or code (just guessing). </font>

For the year 1944, they could very easily use and acquire data based on epoch 1950 (Julian Date 2433282.423) (widely available on most star databases, electronic or paper, even if it's now been replaced by epoch 2000 based charts)

Received 11 months worth of Jaeger infantry and NCO training from various units, among them Savo and North-Carelia Brigades, starting in 1994. Since 1995 reserve rehearses, most interesting ones in and near Hamina and Lappeenranta - Kouvola axis. (<=> the main attack route for our possible adversary, the a2yellow) Current reserve rank Senior Sergeant. I do have a war-time assingment, which is partly revealed at the bottom of this message. Translates to a light mobile infantry, supposedly the men and equipment are the second best of what we have here. (after those Rapid Reaction Units)

A quite interesting thread, with a couple of even more interesting by-plots.

Looks a bit surreal. Or Fallistic. Then again, maybe not...

I did my basic training at Savon Prikaati (Savo Brigade), too, before being assigned to a different NCO training unit. When "we" jaeger infantry conscripts lamented these BTR drivers and guys, they usually just told us to wait some exercises, when we would be doing the walking, running, crawling and stuff at the earnest, they would be just doing a nice scenic driving around the countryside for a while until the piece of junk would eventually broke down, and they would get regural opportunities for breathers and maintenance sessions! Those should have had been retired after that Taipalsaari incident, really.