5 ms·

These guys are about to be super wrong when a couple decades from now governments realize there's a ton of extremely valuable unburned nuclear fuel, ready to be

These guys are about to be super wrong when a couple decades from now governments realize there's a ton of extremely valuable unburned nuclear fuel, ready to be reprocessed, conveniently located in a storage facility.

ifdefdebug 3y ago
[flagged]
- flir 3y ago
  It's going to be sealed deep underground in solid, stable rock. If future generations dig it up again, it's probably because they want it?
brap 3y ago
Yeah, I feel like it's super pretentious to think that your solution will actually last 100,000 years into the future. If you work in tech you know that 99% of the stuff you build wouldn't (or shouldn't) last another 5 years. Most likely in the next few decades they'll figure out how to make it useful or at least not be a problem anymore. Designing something to last 100, 200 years, alright... but 100,000? We probably won't even be here, on Earth. Waste of time.
- fasterik 3y ago
  What makes you say we "probably" won't be here on Earth in 100,000 years? We were here for the past 2,000,000 years. This also ignores the possibility that someone other than "us" will discover what we leave behind. > If you work in tech you know that 99% of the stuff you build wouldn't (or shouldn't) last another 5 years. We have technologies that have survived for thousands of years (agriculture, writing, etc.) This statement is completely myopic and absurd.
  - Proziam 3y ago
    It took less than one human lifespan to go from the first powered flight to a man landing on the moon. I see no reason for humans to be stuck on Earth for 100,000 years at our current rate of invention and growth. If "we" are here, or "something else" arrives at that time they are likely so advanced that the topic of communicating nuclear risks to them is rather pointless.
    - fasterik 3y ago
      Well, the closest potentially habitable planets outside the solar system are lightyears away. Even if we master space travel, I don't see a reason why at least some humans wouldn't stay on Earth, unless it becomes truly uninhabitable. Of course this is speculation about the far future and technologies that don't yet exist, so it's hard to predict what would be likely in that scenario. >If "we" are here, or "something else" arrives at that time they are likely so advanced that the topic of communicating nuclear risks to them is rather pointless. I can think of at least two scenarios where that's not true: (1) human civilization collapses between now and then, and (2) humans go extinct and intelligence evolves in some other species. I'm sure there are other possibilities as well.
tomjakubowski 3y ago
What will they be wrong about?
ChristianGeek 3y ago
Yep, the author gives humans a lot of undeserved credit for not doing stupid things.

ifdefdebug 3y ago

[flagged]

flir 3y ago
It's going to be sealed deep underground in solid, stable rock. If future generations dig it up again, it's probably because they want it?

brap 3y ago

Yeah, I feel like it's super pretentious to think that your solution will actually last 100,000 years into the future. If you work in tech you know that 99% of the stuff you build wouldn't (or shouldn't) last another 5 years. Most likely in the next few decades they'll figure out how to make it useful or at least not be a problem anymore. Designing something to last 100, 200 years, alright... but 100,000? We probably won't even be here, on Earth. Waste of time.

fasterik 3y ago
What makes you say we "probably" won't be here on Earth in 100,000 years? We were here for the past 2,000,000 years. This also ignores the possibility that someone other than "us" will discover what we leave behind. > If you work in tech you know that 99% of the stuff you build wouldn't (or shouldn't) last another 5 years. We have technologies that have survived for thousands of years (agriculture, writing, etc.) This statement is completely myopic and absurd.
- Proziam 3y ago
  It took less than one human lifespan to go from the first powered flight to a man landing on the moon. I see no reason for humans to be stuck on Earth for 100,000 years at our current rate of invention and growth. If "we" are here, or "something else" arrives at that time they are likely so advanced that the topic of communicating nuclear risks to them is rather pointless.
  - fasterik 3y ago
    Well, the closest potentially habitable planets outside the solar system are lightyears away. Even if we master space travel, I don't see a reason why at least some humans wouldn't stay on Earth, unless it becomes truly uninhabitable. Of course this is speculation about the far future and technologies that don't yet exist, so it's hard to predict what would be likely in that scenario. >If "we" are here, or "something else" arrives at that time they are likely so advanced that the topic of communicating nuclear risks to them is rather pointless. I can think of at least two scenarios where that's not true: (1) human civilization collapses between now and then, and (2) humans go extinct and intelligence evolves in some other species. I'm sure there are other possibilities as well.

tomjakubowski 3y ago

What will they be wrong about?

ChristianGeek 3y ago

Yep, the author gives humans a lot of undeserved credit for not doing stupid things.