3 ms·

The idea behind nuclear power isn't "cost-effectiveness", you fucking idiot. It's about staying away from energy resources that fuck up our planet and our atmos

by tubbo 14y ago

The idea behind nuclear power isn't "cost-effectiveness", you fucking idiot. It's about staying away from energy resources that fuck up our planet and our atmosphere. This world's thirst for energy has gone far beyond the capabilities of oil, gas and coal to provide without seriously damaging our planets infrastructure. Nuclear accidents can be prevented with proper care and maintenence, whereas "the moment we stop being able to produce oil" (whatever you want to call it) is GOING TO HAPPEN at some point, and we've seen the horrible effects of coal and gas on our ozone already. Regardless of your views on nuclear power this article is a load of BULLSHIT and I wish I could vote things down on HN.

tzaman 14y ago
You could vote things down if you behaved properly ;)
- CWuestefeld 14y ago
  While the parent post wasn't behaving properly -- not adding anything to a rational debate -- it's not true that he could vote things down. Newbies can't down-vote comments, it's true. But there is no down-vote for articles themselves.
zithtar 14y ago
By my cursory look at the first page of your comments, 60% are either down voted below 0 or contain multiple obscenities. Perhaps if you could form a coherent though that wasn't littered with obscenities you wouldn't get down voted into oblivion.
Roboprog 14y ago
I feel your pain, but apparently the exact form of your response was considered rude. Rephrase and repost? (hint: replace "bullshit" with "nonsense" - people are less offended by that, and it means pretty much the same thing; etc) Picture oneself readings ones' comment aloud on the BBC :-) "The author apparently seems to have missed the likelihood that current resources may be nearing a depletion curve in the near future, and is rather dismissive of the environmental damage attributed to these sources. One must wonder if he is perhaps seriously short sighted." Something like that (feel free to add just a bit of acid, for flavor, at the very end)

by tubbo 14y ago

tzaman 14y ago

You could vote things down if you behaved properly ;)

CWuestefeld 14y ago
While the parent post wasn't behaving properly -- not adding anything to a rational debate -- it's not true that he could vote things down. Newbies can't down-vote comments, it's true. But there is no down-vote for articles themselves.

zithtar 14y ago

By my cursory look at the first page of your comments, 60% are either down voted below 0 or contain multiple obscenities. Perhaps if you could form a coherent though that wasn't littered with obscenities you wouldn't get down voted into oblivion.

Roboprog 14y ago

I feel your pain, but apparently the exact form of your response was considered rude. Rephrase and repost? (hint: replace "bullshit" with "nonsense" - people are less offended by that, and it means pretty much the same thing; etc) Picture oneself readings ones' comment aloud on the BBC :-) "The author apparently seems to have missed the likelihood that current resources may be nearing a depletion curve in the near future, and is rather dismissive of the environmental damage attributed to these sources. One must wonder if he is perhaps seriously short sighted." Something like that (feel free to add just a bit of acid, for flavor, at the very end)