[O/T] No Wonder Kodak Went Broke ...

Discussion in 'Digital Cameras' started by Dudley Hanks, May 14, 2012.

  1. Dudley Hanks

    Dudley Hanks Guest

    Dudley Hanks, May 14, 2012
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Dudley Hanks

    Mxsmanic Guest

    Mxsmanic, May 14, 2012
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Dudley Hanks

    Martin Brown Guest

    It is not entirely unsurprising. All the major film makers have used
    state of the art and bleeding edge ultra-trace analytical techniques to
    measure the purity of the raw materials they are using. Infinitessimal
    amounts of the wrong impurity seriously compromise performance. AFAIK
    the relevant impurities are considered trade secrets by all of them.

    There are similar academic research reactors in some universities eg.

    http://www.ill.eu/

    The Japanese maker Fuji was using ICP-MS in the 1990's for the same sort
    of ultra-trace chemical analysis of their refined silver purity.
     
    Martin Brown, May 14, 2012
    #3
  4. Dudley Hanks

    Dudley Hanks Guest

    While I'm not exactly up there with Einstein when it comes to physics, I do
    understand that having the parts necessary for producing a bomb is a long
    way from putting it all together. Still, this article makes it sound like
    it isn't all that tough for a corporate entity to do things we place
    embargos against foreign powers for simply contemplating.

    Given some of the less than rational corporate policies recently brought to
    light, it is not exactly reassuring to know that the guys who gamble on the
    global economy could put together a nuke with little or no difficulty.

    Take Care,
    Dudley
     
    Dudley Hanks, May 14, 2012
    #4
  5. Dudley Hanks

    Dudley Hanks Guest

    One could assume that similar care / meticulous research is inherent in
    producing ink for printer cartridges.

    I wonder how many of these micro-nuke facilities exist...
    and what kind of regulation / scrutiny is in place to protect the public...

    Take Care,
    Dudley
     
    Dudley Hanks, May 14, 2012
    #5
  6. Dudley Hanks

    Mxsmanic Guest

    What restrictions were placed on enriched uranium that Kodak didn't observe?
    As I've said, enriched uranium is no closer to a bomb than diesel fuel.
     
    Mxsmanic, May 14, 2012
    #6
  7. Dudley Hanks

    Mxsmanic Guest

    What does the public need to be protected from?

    In 1919, 21 people were killed by a flood of molasses in Boston. What kind of
    regulation / scrutiny of molasses was in place to protect the public?
     
    Mxsmanic, May 14, 2012
    #7
  8. Dudley Hanks

    Martin Brown Guest

    Actually highly enriched research reactor fuel has gotten people who
    *should* have known better into very serious trouble. That was the cause
    of the fatal Japanese criticality incident at Tokai mura.

    http://www.wise-uranium.org/eftokc.html

    BTW ANFO has been the IRA cheap bulk explosive of choice for decades.
    Fuel oil is pretty much diesel by another name. And with the right
    dispersal technology a fuel air bomb can be devastating.
     
    Martin Brown, May 14, 2012
    #8
  9. Dudley Hanks

    Dudley Hanks Guest

    I don't know. That's why I'm interested ...
    But, under the right conditions, it can be far more destructive ...

    Take Care,
    Dudley
     
    Dudley Hanks, May 14, 2012
    #9
  10. Dudley Hanks

    Dudley Hanks Guest

    That's cute ... I wonder if it's true ...

    Even if it is, I can't imagine a scenario where, in an instant, molasses
    would wipe out an entire city, killing hundreds of thousands, maybe even
    millions, of unsuspecting people ...
    and contaminating 10 times more with who knows what sorts of God-awful
    injuries ...
    I'm not saying such a situation would, or even could, happen under whatever
    regulatory regime Kodak must have been (should have been) subject to. It
    just gives me cause to reflect upon a situation I wasn't aware of.

    I mean, we have more and more production facilities moving to Third World
    countries, and crazy CEO's seem all too willing to attach larger and larger
    consequences to their corporate gambles. How long will it be before one of
    these highly paid psycho types decides to nuke a competitor's main factory
    because it'll give his own company a "competitive advantage," keeping in
    mind how easy it'd be to blame the attack on a terrorist group ...

    Like I said, it's food for thought ...

    Take Care,
    Dudley
     
    Dudley Hanks, May 14, 2012
    #10
  11. Well, I wasn't there myself (in 1919), but it's widely attested to
    online.
    Hey, we didn't manage that level of damage when deliberately bombing
    Hiroshima.
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, May 14, 2012
    #11
  12. Dudley Hanks

    Dudley Hanks Guest

    Given current technologies / population densities, it wouldn't surprise me
    if such a level of destruction is not only possible, but likely ...

    Take Care,
    Dudley
     
    Dudley Hanks, May 14, 2012
    #12
  13. Dudley Hanks

    Martin Brown Guest

    I was told some of the ink chemistry involved reactive intermediates
    that are somewhat exotic but they don't have to hit anything like the
    extreme purity levels that top quality silver halide films need.
    I suspect such a reactor comes with its own set of nuclear technicians
    to tend to its every need. The company gets to use the neutron beam and
    pays a service charge to ORNL or whoever. That was pretty much how Crays
    were operated outside the USA back in the days of the Cold War.

    Given that it does contain moderately enriched uranium I would expect
    there to be some safeguards beyond it just being too hot to handle.
    There has been a recent Greenpeace protest about moving highly enriched
    fuel from the US to the Grenoble research reactor.
     
    Martin Brown, May 14, 2012
    #13
  14. Dudley Hanks

    Dudley Hanks Guest

    Thanks, Martin, I appreciate the summary.

    Take Care,
    Dudley
     
    Dudley Hanks, May 14, 2012
    #14
  15. Dudley Hanks

    George Kerby Guest

    O, some little event in the USSR a few years back comes to mind. And, I
    don't think Rochester is close to any fault lines, or subject to tsunamis, a
    little event last year. And you find nothing wrong with the brain trust that
    dismissed digital photography after pretty much discovering it?

    *I* don't think so...
     
    George Kerby, May 14, 2012
    #15
  16. Dudley Hanks

    Dudley Hanks Guest

    Yep, George, that about says it all ... :)

    Take Care,
    Dudley
     
    Dudley Hanks, May 14, 2012
    #16
  17. Dudley Hanks

    Mike Guest

    Mike, May 15, 2012
    #17
  18. Dudley Hanks

    otter Guest

    There used to be one on the University of Washington campus in
    Seattle:
    http://dailyuw.com/news/2007/may/21/step-into-the-uws-former-nuclear-reactor/

    And from the article, about 9 other universities had them, too.
     
    otter, May 15, 2012
    #18
  19. Dudley Hanks

    Mxsmanic Guest

    So what reason is there to believe that restrictions existed, or that Kodak
    did not observe them?
    So can water. But the right conditions are extremely difficult to arrange, and
    do not arise by chance.
     
    Mxsmanic, May 15, 2012
    #19
  20. Dudley Hanks

    Mxsmanic Guest

    So has diesel fuel.
     
    Mxsmanic, May 15, 2012
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.