13 ms·
int __THIS_IS_NOT_A_PLACE_OF_HONOR() # no highly esteemed deed is commemorated here. # nothing valued is here. # What is here was danger
by roywiggins 5y ago
int __THIS_IS_NOT_A_PLACE_OF_HONOR()
# no highly esteemed deed is commemorated here.
# nothing valued is here.
# What is here was dangerous and repulsive to us.
# This message is a warning about danger.
# The danger is still present, in your time, as it was in ours.
- loa_in_ 5y agoWhen your cat's fur changes colour it's not our fault, but it's time to pack and leave.[1] (1) http://www.theraycatsolution.com/#10000 http://www.theraycatsolution.com/#10000
- shepherdjerred 5y agohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amn3kn0XPLQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amn3kn0XPLQ
- yongjik 5y agoAh I see the Missionaria Protectiva doing its noble work ...
- loa_in_ 5y agoAs I said, it's not our fault.
- dudus 5y agoIsn't this something they write on nuclear waste sites?
- Bytewave81 5y agoIt's an example message proposed in a 1993 report from Sadina National Laboratories[1]. I doubt it's actually been legitimately written or used anywhere, but it's one of many such long-term messages intended to communicate danger thousands of years into the future, when the dangers of radioactive waste or even the prevailing language of the time may not be known. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-time_nuclear_waste_warning_messages#Message https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-time_nuclear_waste_warnin...
- lmkg 5y agoMore than that. Nuclear waste that stays radioactive for ten thousand years has an interesting design problem: how do you create a warning that people will understand after that much time has passed? A committee was created to study this problem, and one of the outcomes was formulating what message should be communicated. The above is that message. The next step is figuring how to communicate that message in a language-agnostic and culture-agonistic medium.
- ballenf 5y agoThe future will bring technology to harvest more energy or otherwise neutralize the waste. I believe that future will come long before warnings in today's languages become unintelligible. If there's some kind of apocalypse where science gets a hard reset, then sealed up nuclear waste is probably very low on the list of realistic and dangerous threats.
- anyfoo 5y ago> The future will bring technology to harvest more energy or otherwise neutralize the waste. Optimistic. My turn: The future will bring technology to make spiders talk to cats. Prove me wrong! > If there's some kind of apocalypse where science gets a hard reset, then sealed up nuclear waste is probably very low on the list of realistic and dangerous threats. Nuclear waste might be relatively low in the immediate time frame after a science-resetting apocalypse, but the societies emerging afterwards will probably appreciate having a warning before they build their new settlements and water wells on a nuclear waste site. Especially if that nominally sealed site seeps out radioactive sludge due to critical containment failure only long after the settlement was established.
- db48x 5y agoThis. What we currently call “nuclear waste” is just a fuel for a type of nuclear reactor that we could build, but haven’t yet built due to over–regulation of the nuclear industry. If we had extracted all of the energy from it then it wouldn’t be radioactive any more, and if we had reactors for doing that then we wouldn’t need to store anything.
- MaxBarraclough 5y agoTrue to its claim of dishonour, that isn't even a legal function identifier in standard C, on account of the leading double underscores. https://stackoverflow.com/a/228797/ https://stackoverflow.com/a/228797/