XYZinferno

Yeah wtf, the OP is just an asshole Thanks for catching that, and kudos for the “power drunk mod” for not bending

It’s strange to think that when modeling the conditions under which our solar system was created, it in part models everything humanity ever has been and (perhaps) everything humanity ever will be.

To my knowledge, these privacy laws prevent corporations from holding onto your data after you have requested to delete it. Lemmy is not a corporation, and there is no single entity that holds onto all of your data. That’s just a tradeoff of being decentralized.

Might be because of Threads, and Meta seeking to use ActivityPub themselves.

I don’t disagree with you though; I don’t think the fedi is big enough at the moment to register as more than a blip on their radar, as you said.

LMAO

I work with C# daily and even I didn’t realize I made a pun there xD

Maybe it’s just embedded in my subconscious at this point…

Godot is a good example of a free and well-developed open source game engine. It’ll probably see a sharp rise in adoption following this controversy from Unity.

It’s still bad for their profit margins when their stocks fall by 8% in one day, when major indie developers announce they’ll be moving their current projects off of Unity and future developers are deterred from using their software in the first place.

Whether they care about money or care about public relations, their shooting themselves in the foot on both counts.

I don’t see the Tokaimura nuclear accidents (which led to the aforementioned death of Hisashi Ouchi) as a reason to dismiss nuclear energy. Even if this is bait as @CADmonkey@lemmy.world mentioned, I want to make it clear that wasn’t my intention behind bringing up Ouchi’s death, and shouldn’t be twisted into a case against nuclear energy as a whole.

The Tokaimura accident of 1999 was the result of improper safety, due to the facility failing to install the necessary alarms should criticality occur, and cost-cutting by having workers mix uranium in steel drums instead of proper vats that would control the rate at which it’s mixed (which would have prevented criticality). In essence, had the proper safety measures been followed, the incident would not have occurred. The same can be said for most nuclear disasters, especially the famous Chernobyl disaster.

A compiled list of nuclear incidents (which also includes events aside from nuclear reactors) can be found here:

It’s evident that nuclear incidents, especially those pertaining to reactors, are incredibly uncommon, and this is the result of strict safety protocols that cannot be shirked, as well as an extreme number of fail-safes in the event of a malfunction. The most recent major nuclear event- The Fukushima Disaster, required an earthquake, tsunami, compounded with human error- extraordinary circumstances that not only are extremely rare, but have been learned from too.

If the reason to ban nuclear energy is due to a small handful of disasters like these, then logic dictates that this should be expanded to a myriad of products. How about pesticides, due to the Bhopal Disaster? How about getting rid of dams, due to the1975 Banqiao Dam Failure, that led to thousands of deaths?

The truth of the matter is that much of the large scale infrastructure that we rely on, especially in industry and energy production, can fail on extremely rare occasions, and lead to tremendous loss of life. But through strict safety measures, training, and human ingenuity, the threat of disaster is minuscule.

TL;DR: Singling out nuclear energy as a problem when the same concerns can be raised for any industry is hypocritical, and just the result of fear-mongering. It is safe.

I’d have to agree with this one, and the most painful example of this that I can think of is Hisashi Ouchi, otherwise known as the most irradiated man in history.

While I’m no fan of the big tech hegemony, I am more than okay with multiple groups doing the same thing, or trying to iterate on the same concept.

Take Reddit and Lemmy for instance. Both are designed and structured similarly, with Lemmy iterating on Reddit. I wouldn’t consider it a bad thing, and I think they’re distinguishable enough from each other. It’s competition and alternatives like this that prevent one company or platform from dominating one “concept”

Take YouTube for example. None of the alternatives have nearly as much of a following, and I would be happy with someone “copying” YouTube and iterating on the concept to make it better and fix the major grievances. Whether it’s PeerTube or otherwise