Jeeebs

Scientist here. Nuclear Power issue is not as black and white as you may think, scientifically and economically.

I'm going to go ahead an assume you're SHOCKED AND APPALLED about this because Lucas Heights of the medical isotopes created there. So basically what I want to tell you about now is cyclotron systems. These are systems which fire neutrons at things to create radioisotopes and are much more safe than reactors! They're less than the size of a room, and make a lot of isotopes we need.

Here's the thing, they can't make all the isotopes we need. So at the moment we need reactors. From memory the Greens have shifted their policy to something along the lines of "Close the OPAL Reactor once we can create these isotopes using cyclotrons" (If we're lucky Senator Ludlum might clarify for me?).

I still have a few issues with the current policy here. One being the use of neutron scattering for research purposes, we can only do that with a reactor. It gives us a lot of information regarding materials research. Another is I vaguely remember a senate session where Senator Ludlum was questioning the need for another cyclotron in Brisbane at UQ (There is one at Herston (I think?) that pumps out F-18, but that's it). All of this though, my opinion of ANSTO isn't that high, as they basically require authorship on any research done if you want to use their equipment.

Short patent terms make a lot of sense in some areas, but very little in others. In Biotechnology (Excluding the Gene Patent issue), it often takes 5+ years for your product to be proven and reach the market. You also have to patent as soon as you've proven concept as to not have the idea recreated by someone else, and to further your career (Publish or perish). This doesn't touch on drugs, with typically have a 15 year development cycle, and are EXTREMELY expensive to test. This is why such long patent terms exist. If you're investing $500 million dollars into creating a drug, you need to get that money back or else you can't continue to do the same thing. Additionally reducing patent terms would require a global push, as due to treaties signed, we must be at least somewhat congruent with other countries.

I feel most of the ill-will towards patent law comes from current software cases with Apple, Google, Microsoft, Samsung, etc. These companies are patent trolls, patenting everything, and that is a flaw in the American patenting system in what is being accepted. This has also been identified by the government who are apparently trying to reform their system.

I do like the clause of "Must be using the tech" though, or at least working on that tech.

I doubt you'll see this as I'm now 12 hours late. Buuuttt...

What was your view on Assange singing "You're the Voice"???

Big Issues right here.

Sick album, glad to see it everywhere, but... where can I get my hands on a physical copy of Tinderbox/Neighbour Neighbour? Ideally in Brisbane.