3 ms·

>You essentially need a very geologically inactive area away from people but can also be properly secured against thieves. Not to mention the need for extremel

>You essentially need a very geologically inactive area away from people but can also be properly secured against thieves. Not to mention the need for extremely long-term solutions on the scale of 10,000 years. You can't rely on any current civilization or language still existing. So you have to properly communicate "Don't go in here or mess with anything, this is dangerous" without words. And that's after figuring out the above problem of the actual storage facility.

EpicEng 7y ago
>So you have to properly communicate "Don't go in here or mess with anything, this is dangerous" without words. That's a solved problem already. Skull and crossbones, etc.
- madamelic 7y ago
  Is it? Skull and crossbones is a cultural symbol. Would we understand cultural symbols of humanoids from 10,000 years ago? Even having past civilizations being storytellers causes the story and culture to mutate over generations. You are talking about a 100 generation game of telephone to make sure one particular symbol is passed down with perfect recall. --- Personally the best solution in my opinion is bury it deep down in a chamber that can withstand the time needed, leave signs on the outsides of the container. Then forget about it. Don't bother marking it visibly on the surface level.
  - EpicEng 7y ago
    Will, you're right; "solved problem" was too strong a term for a complicated issue. What I meant to get across is that a lot of thought has gone into this already.
    - madamelic 7y ago
      You're right. I am sorry you are being downvoted. Too many people think "downvote" == "disagree".
      - EpicEng 7y ago
        meh, don't mind downvotes. Even PG has said that using downvotes as a disagree button is standard practice on HN.
- Godel_unicode 7y ago
  There are pirate groups which use skull and crossbones as a symbol that valuable things are located there. Iconography across cultures is a fractally hard problem, as you just demonstrated.
  - EpicEng 7y ago
    Yes, I'm sure that when people run across these[1] they're going to think "pirate booty!" [1]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hazard_symbol https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hazard_symbol
    - rtkwe 7y ago
      The problem is over 10k years and with the idea of a civilization collapse being part of your in scope posisble events you can assume nothing about the cultural link between us and them. That symbol means danger to us because it's been the sign for danger for a long time, subtract that and it could be markers for graves maybe a good place to look for resources or treasure like has been done to so many ancient tombs.
    - ceejayoz 7y ago
      They might think "sweet, an old graveyard, wonder if they buried their dead with valuables" though.
- maxerickson 7y ago
  The Jolly Roger? Arrrrg, don't be riskin' yur life inna therr!
- froindt 7y ago
  There's a really interesting 99% Invisible episode about this very topic. https://99percentinvisible.org/article/beyond-biohazard-danger-symbols-cant-last-forever/ https://99percentinvisible.org/article/beyond-biohazard-dang...
mrob 7y ago
Hypothetical communications problems could potentially kill thousands of our distant descendants. The status quo could potentially kill billions. I don't think care for future humans is a good reason to avoid nuclear power.
- slenk 7y ago
  Likewise, if we don't curb our reliance on fossil fuels, there won't be future humans to think about
- madamelic 7y ago
  >I don't think care for future humans is a good reason to avoid nuclear power. Oh definitely not, just a consideration that's needed. The bigger issue is that there is no current long-term storage solution. The communication bit is long-long-term thinking while storage of material is current need. There is a long-term storage facility in Norway, I believe, that is being built or has been built.
manfredo 7y ago
These hypothetical concerns ten thousand years into the future are absurd. The waste is buried hundreds of meters below ground, far from any useful resources. There is no warning signs or communications, the disposal sites are just made to be as nondescript as possible. Or the sites are in places already contaminated by nuclear weapons testing, so the concern of contamination is largely moot. So are we really going to block effectively unlimited non-intermittent carbon-free energy based on the concern that some future civilization might decide to dig deep in a remote location with no natural resources, and they might encounter a waste casket, and they might decide to open it. And they might do all of this without any knowledge of radiation poising. Yes, if all of those conditions are met, some poor sap thousands of years from now is going to get irradiated. I'm going to weight the positives of nuclear power way higher than the narrow chances of people being contaminated by waste. There are valid concerns over safety and costs of decommissioning, but those are limited to the operation of the plant itself and the disposal of the reactor (the pressure vessel). The waste management argument is very weak.

EpicEng 7y ago

>So you have to properly communicate "Don't go in here or mess with anything, this is dangerous" without words. That's a solved problem already. Skull and crossbones, etc.

madamelic 7y ago
Is it? Skull and crossbones is a cultural symbol. Would we understand cultural symbols of humanoids from 10,000 years ago? Even having past civilizations being storytellers causes the story and culture to mutate over generations. You are talking about a 100 generation game of telephone to make sure one particular symbol is passed down with perfect recall. --- Personally the best solution in my opinion is bury it deep down in a chamber that can withstand the time needed, leave signs on the outsides of the container. Then forget about it. Don't bother marking it visibly on the surface level.
- EpicEng 7y ago
  Will, you're right; "solved problem" was too strong a term for a complicated issue. What I meant to get across is that a lot of thought has gone into this already.
  - madamelic 7y ago
    You're right. I am sorry you are being downvoted. Too many people think "downvote" == "disagree".
    - EpicEng 7y ago
      meh, don't mind downvotes. Even PG has said that using downvotes as a disagree button is standard practice on HN.
Godel_unicode 7y ago
There are pirate groups which use skull and crossbones as a symbol that valuable things are located there. Iconography across cultures is a fractally hard problem, as you just demonstrated.
- EpicEng 7y ago
  Yes, I'm sure that when people run across these[1] they're going to think "pirate booty!" [1]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hazard_symbol https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hazard_symbol
  - rtkwe 7y ago
    The problem is over 10k years and with the idea of a civilization collapse being part of your in scope posisble events you can assume nothing about the cultural link between us and them. That symbol means danger to us because it's been the sign for danger for a long time, subtract that and it could be markers for graves maybe a good place to look for resources or treasure like has been done to so many ancient tombs.
  - ceejayoz 7y ago
    They might think "sweet, an old graveyard, wonder if they buried their dead with valuables" though.
maxerickson 7y ago
The Jolly Roger? Arrrrg, don't be riskin' yur life inna therr!
froindt 7y ago
There's a really interesting 99% Invisible episode about this very topic. https://99percentinvisible.org/article/beyond-biohazard-danger-symbols-cant-last-forever/ https://99percentinvisible.org/article/beyond-biohazard-dang...

mrob 7y ago

Hypothetical communications problems could potentially kill thousands of our distant descendants. The status quo could potentially kill billions. I don't think care for future humans is a good reason to avoid nuclear power.

slenk 7y ago
Likewise, if we don't curb our reliance on fossil fuels, there won't be future humans to think about
madamelic 7y ago
>I don't think care for future humans is a good reason to avoid nuclear power. Oh definitely not, just a consideration that's needed. The bigger issue is that there is no current long-term storage solution. The communication bit is long-long-term thinking while storage of material is current need. There is a long-term storage facility in Norway, I believe, that is being built or has been built.

manfredo 7y ago

These hypothetical concerns ten thousand years into the future are absurd. The waste is buried hundreds of meters below ground, far from any useful resources. There is no warning signs or communications, the disposal sites are just made to be as nondescript as possible. Or the sites are in places already contaminated by nuclear weapons testing, so the concern of contamination is largely moot. So are we really going to block effectively unlimited non-intermittent carbon-free energy based on the concern that some future civilization might decide to dig deep in a remote location with no natural resources, and they might encounter a waste casket, and they might decide to open it. And they might do all of this without any knowledge of radiation poising. Yes, if all of those conditions are met, some poor sap thousands of years from now is going to get irradiated. I'm going to weight the positives of nuclear power way higher than the narrow chances of people being contaminated by waste. There are valid concerns over safety and costs of decommissioning, but those are limited to the operation of the plant itself and the disposal of the reactor (the pressure vessel). The waste management argument is very weak.