at anytime a bigger war could break out.
Welcome back to the late 1970s / early 1980s I grew up in.
We just learned to live with it- maybe move to a big city for a better chance at instant vaporization.
Meanwhile in 1984: When Doves Cry you might as well Jump, and when the 99 Red Balloons Float by you'll be sitting pretty in this dust that was a city.
The problem with those DoE jobs even back then was that the science and reality of the situation was completely overwhelmed by the politics, the NIMBYs. Director or whatever he was making me the offer to work under him was telling me, in 1990, that construction of new nuclear generation facilities would be restarting "very soon" with the new improved passive safety designs, etc. He's right: that absolutely should have happened, it's the only rational way forward - phase out the old plants at the end of their design lifetimes and replace them with new, better, safer tech. Instead, what we got for the next 30+ years was no new construction, and limping the old plants along with rehab service life extensions because that was politically feasible.
I don't think 30 years of frustrated screaming into a hurricane of irrational objections would have been a better career path.
At least it seems to be about power generation and not weapons.
Yet another reason I am so glad I turned down those DoE job offers in the 80s.
Visio is an outdated spreadsheet name, in English.
Visio is the new video conferencing software, in French.
France leads the world, it is up to everyone else to worry about conflict with France, not the other way around. /s
That's what they're best at avoiding. Even more remarkable is their ability to look in the mirror and see only the best in themselves.
Anyone who introduces himself using words like moderate and humble is telling his audience how to think, that they should not think for themselves, just accept what he says as the truth.
No, I thought they ate butterflies and sunshine.
Conversion of rain forest to grazing land has been a sickening thing to watch for the past 40 years - it's got an up-front massive incentive through sale of the old growth hardwoods, then they turn around and make residual continuing income off of the grazing instead of letting the forest regrow.
But, then again, that's pretty much what happened to most of the continental US's forests in the 1800s. We're starting to replant commercial tree farms, but those are monoculture biodiversity deserts.
Checking the year of manufacture of my daily driver laptop.... 2018. It's fine, it works well, does everything I need, just like it did 8 years ago when it was an "average" new laptop.
Oh, it's also running Linux, I don't know what would have happened if I left Windows on it - that got dumped in 2018 too.
My brother lived with our grandmother, and I think they were mostly lazy - didn't like to cook / shop for groceries. Neither one of them really got health problems from that, though my brother did gain a bit of weight.
Great grandmother (reportedly, never met her in person) was mean spirited and feisty to the end.
Nothing happens in isolation... Producing a little less meat shouldn't cause additional harm, but shutting down a lot of meat production all at once would cause a lot of harm - starting with people who make their living both directly and indirectly from the industry, and if you shut down enough of it all at once you'd be disrupting enough of the supply chain that even people who just consume the food are going to run into problems.
We should strive to do better, but avoid arguments like "STOP ALL X NOW!" - it's overreaching, and would be counterproductive if you actually achieved it.
I wish everybody would get more "precise with their language" instead of running around spouting "zero harm" "absolutely no suffering" and such things, because people who say that often enough start to really believe it - instead of having a second of thought.
The 90s and the naughts were actually a pretty good time... we did too little to ensure that continued, in so so many ways.