spirinolas @ spirinolas @lemmy.world

Posts

6

Comments

354

Joined

2 yr. ago

It ended very quickly.

Yes they do. The old "we expect more from YOU".

That stang...

Also, when you see it happen and you actually start trying and do better but some teachers always give you a lower mark to "motivate" you so you'll "try even harder".

I'm so going to pull this shit on my lady unannounced!

It's a piece of paper that says "no, yu!"

Been a long time gone, Constantinople

Will we still have access to other similar communities in federated instances or are those blocked too to lemmy.world users?

"Radiations"

Ahahahah!

Regardless of how wise it is to use nuclear energy, we can all deduce, from your replies, that you know jack shit about what "radiations" actually is.

You failed to address any of my arguments. You only attacked me and put words in my mouth. I see no point to keep answering you.

It is probably the only thing that can really buy us time

That's the only way it would make sense as a solution. It's a gamble, but it's a risk worth taking in the short term. But that only works with already built reactors.

We will find a way to solve the waste issue

"we will", but we haven't. We're creating a problem now and leave the solution for later which is exactly what got us into this mess. Always kicking the can down the road.

Today, the strategy is to built the plants smaller, making the impact of such disaster also smaller.

Still potentially catastrophic in a perfect storm. Remember Chernobyl had multiple reactors (who kept functioning) after the disaster. That was only one. I don't think downsizing would solve the risk but I hope I'm mistaken. Remember how we went into panic when the Russians entered Chernobyl or whenever we see news about Zaporozhia?

We haven't seen yet the worst possible nuclear energy disaster. I fear we might not see many...

Any oil tanker sinking is a worst disaster than the worst nuclear accident ever was

You are delusional.

A nuclear power plant is not a bomb

I never said it was. A nuclear disaster is much worse than a bomb on the long term. A bomb causes immediate destruction and fallout which clears in a few years at most. A bomb like Hiroshima, which is by atomic bomb standards a very "dirty" bomb, gave a radiation dosage of about 360 mSv to survivors 1 mile from the epicenter. The radiation went down to 1/1000 in 24 hours and 1/1000 of that within a week.

Chernobyl firemen received 37 times the same dosage and the core kept emitting radiation to this day (though slowly diminishing) hence the sarcophagus.

Hiroshima was never even abandoned after the bombing. It is a thriving city today. Chernobyl and the surrounding regions had tp be evacuated and its access is restricted to this day. In the Russian invasion you had soldiers dying because they digged in contaminated soil. The melted core is, to this day, emitting deadly radiation and only the sarcophagus stops that poison from spreading. And it could've been much worse. And it will stay this way for centuries or even millenia. A breach in the sarcophagus is enough reason for panic. This was ONE disaster.

The current climate crisis is the result of over a century of CO2 emissions and multiple disasters. Chernobyl was just one and had the potential to turn half a continent uninhabitable. How many would we need to turn the planet into a wasteland in the immediate future?

I'm all to take measures to keep global warming in check but lets not burn the house down because the plumbing is not working.

Downvote me all you want but nuclear is not a long term solution. Short term at best.

It's relatively clean compared to fossil fuels but it has several critical flaws on the long term.

For starters, it produces extremely toxic waste which we have no idea how to get rid of besides burying it and forget about it. Everytime someone mentions this all we hear is "we can create x method to dispose of it cleanly". Right, but while we develop X method that shit keeps piling up. And when X method fails to work as we intended "oh, well, just keep bury it and lets start thinking about Y".

And the biggest problem is this. Nuclear is actually relatively safe since the security regulations are (or should) be very strict. But all it takes is one bad enough disaster. Disasters like Chernobyl had the potential to leave half of Europe inhabitable for centuries. But, hey, as long as the regulations are strict and we have equipment and procedures that manage the human error we would be fine, right? Not really. Murphy's law. The worst scenario will happen eventually. A obscure bug in the security systems, an unexpected natural disaster, war or terrorism. There's always a failure point. In other energy types, we can manage that risk. One very rare disaster is not enough to make it not worth it if the good outweights the bad. Not in nuclear energy. Only one disaster can be potentially catastrophic and outweight all the good it made for decades or even centuries.

On the long term it is just not worth it. On the short term...it's a gamble.

If apps were girls:

I was always in love with Sync. But life happened and we had to go different ways for non-romantic reasons. Some fucker called Spez, long story...

Eventually I met Voyager and she was great. Any user would be lucky to have her. But Sync was always the one that got away. Everyday I looked at Voyager and thought she was awesome but I was always holding a candle for Sync. But Sync was gone and I had to move on. But I could never really move on.

But life happened again and Sync was coming back. I had committed to Voyager but, as great as she was, I always thought how she came short of Sync. Sync came back and she was as stunning as I remembered. I couldn't stay with Voyager. I'm sorry Voyager. You're an awesome girl but I was pretty much just using you since I couldn't have Sync.

I'm a user Voyager, I make no excuses. There, there...

It's also worth adding that in addition to the portuguese exodus we are also "importing" lots of digital nomads who earn much higher wages and contribute to the housing crisis, along with lots of low skilled workers from other countries to work the jobs the portuguese left when they were unable to afford rents. These workers live in horrible conditions sometimes splitting a single room between several people. When their support networks fail they are forced to turn to crime which has increased greatly in Portugal.

I was always very pro-immigration but that is changing. I'm seeing everyone I grew up with leave. Their place being taken either by rich foreigners who treat you like you're a servant or desperate very poor ones who would run you over for half a job.

Meanwhile, you barely hear our language in our own capital. And it's visibly spreading to the other cities. It's scary. This is colonization with extra steps.

Why would the admins expect anything different? Are they really that out of touch?

You'd be surprised...

I always say this! I don't understand how some women DON'T wear dresses. There's nothing better on a hot day.

A few years ago I was in a music video from a local band were I was dressed in drag. A skirt and a light shirt. It was one of those very hot summers and we'd be basically dancing in a basement in the video. I was happy like a little princess, jumping around between takes while everybody was sweating their balls off.

We want male manly dresses NOW!

I stuck with Windows 7 far longer than I should've. Windows 10 just rubbed me wrong with all the unrequested changes every feature update and privacy issues.

Then I found Windows 10 LTSC and I'm not going back.

Not even a bit :/