4 ms·

Again, this isn’t intrinsic to the technology, we could be nuclear reactors on time and on budget if we decided to.

oneshtein 3y ago
Then Russians will blow up a dam, so the reactor will run out of water for cooling and then run away into a Red Forest. OR climate change will make a water pond dry, so you cannot even start the reactor. OR terrorists will capture a reactor and mine it. OR massive change in water weight due to climate change will create a massive earthquake.
- cpursley 3y ago
  Nuke plant aside, why would the Russians blow the main water supply to Crimea after only recently getting it back flowing? Or flood out the "Russian" side (their claim, not mine) of the area including their own troops? Especially when they could have just opened the gates. Guess I'm not understanding the logic or advantage here.
  - chrysler 3y ago
    Not only have Russians flooded cities, they are also firing artillery into flooded areas to hamper rescue efforts: https://twitter.com/bayraktar_1love/status/1666784578747396098 https://twitter.com/bayraktar_1love/status/16667845787473960... If your mental model of the world sees Russia as a normal functional country instead of a terrorist state capable, willing and engaged in unrestricted warfare against civilians, then of course you'll find yourself in situations where you "don't understand" what's going on.
  - thx-2718 3y ago
    Distraction. Flooding. Can point fingers at Ukraine. Delays the counter offensive. The operation is disinformation. They know that the world news will report "both sides blame the other" and that's all they need. Russia has clearly demonstrated over the last year that their soldiers are disposable.
  - oneshtein 3y ago
    It's not possible to defend Crimea from land attacks, as demonstrated multiple times in history. Russians lost the hope to keep Crimea in their hands.
epistasis 3y ago
If we could decide to do that, what precise changes could we make? I ask because I want nuclear to succeed, but see no path for what you say is possible. And I don't know a single person in the industry, or who is familiar with the failures, that sees the route to producing nuclear as cheaply as, say, China.

Then Russians will blow up a dam, so the reactor will run out of water for cooling and then run away into a Red Forest. OR climate change will make a water pond dry, so you cannot even start the reactor. OR terrorists will capture a reactor and mine it. OR massive change in water weight due to climate change will create a massive earthquake.

cpursley 3y ago
Nuke plant aside, why would the Russians blow the main water supply to Crimea after only recently getting it back flowing? Or flood out the "Russian" side (their claim, not mine) of the area including their own troops? Especially when they could have just opened the gates. Guess I'm not understanding the logic or advantage here.
- chrysler 3y ago
  Not only have Russians flooded cities, they are also firing artillery into flooded areas to hamper rescue efforts: https://twitter.com/bayraktar_1love/status/1666784578747396098 https://twitter.com/bayraktar_1love/status/16667845787473960... If your mental model of the world sees Russia as a normal functional country instead of a terrorist state capable, willing and engaged in unrestricted warfare against civilians, then of course you'll find yourself in situations where you "don't understand" what's going on.
- thx-2718 3y ago
  Distraction. Flooding. Can point fingers at Ukraine. Delays the counter offensive. The operation is disinformation. They know that the world news will report "both sides blame the other" and that's all they need. Russia has clearly demonstrated over the last year that their soldiers are disposable.
- oneshtein 3y ago
  It's not possible to defend Crimea from land attacks, as demonstrated multiple times in history. Russians lost the hope to keep Crimea in their hands.

epistasis 3y ago

If we could decide to do that, what precise changes could we make? I ask because I want nuclear to succeed, but see no path for what you say is possible. And I don't know a single person in the industry, or who is familiar with the failures, that sees the route to producing nuclear as cheaply as, say, China.