And of course nobody is interested in suing the offender (Cambridge Analytica), or its parent company that relaunched CA under different name, or the data source (Cambridge University). Because why go after the ones who took the data, falsely claimed deleting said data, etc. Wouldn't make the news, and they have too little money for lawyer fees.

The last time Facebook allowed academics to collect data, Cambridge University did just that and it was later used by Cambridge Analytica. Which caused no end of public outrage, targeted on Facebook itself: "how could you give our precious data to someone?!!1111"

So yes, Facebook tries to hide "something", user's data to be precise. Because people obviously can't be trusted to own consequences of their own actions.

Existing fission reactors go kaboom because they store 20 years worth of fuel in the active zone, with reactor working hard to burn it slowly. If something goes wrong, there is plenty of stored energy to release. And the fuel itself isn't exactly food-grade even without runaway reaction.

Fusion reactors only have a very small amount of fuel in the active zone at any given time, just like internal combustion engine. The rest is kept outside in the fuel tank. No way fusion fuel would fuse under non-stellar conditions: the reason we have fusion bomb for 60 years but nothing close to working fusion reactor is that hydrogen bomb has to use a nuke to ignite. The worst hazard from the fuel tank is chemical hydrogen-oxygen explosion: wouldn't like to be sitting on top of it, but nothing to worry about being 10 minutes walk away.

A politician could also move from incorrect position to incorrect position. The fact of moving doesn't make any of the positions right.

Zuckerberg gets to decide, of course. This is what Biden and Trump and all others agree about. No politician would mind Mark deciding what's true and what's false as long as he decides in their favor.

I'd definitely oppose dumping a shipload of bentonite clay into the sea for no good reason. I'm not very concerned with burying a few barrels of it 50 feet deep into the ground.

Being regulated says very little about actual harmful effects. It is often a government's way of making sure drilling companies do not leave piles and lakes of the stuff behind them.

> Eat a big bowl of drilling fluid, tell me how you feel in the morning.

Eat a big bowl of pure seafloor sand, tell me how you feel in the morning.

I can also suggest some 100% organic non-GMO plants and mushrooms, which will prove way more dangerous than drilling fluid.

So now a length of metal pipe and some water mixed with clay and other minerals (also known as a drilling fluid) are buried 50 feet under the seafloor.

People put the pipe into the ground and filled it with water. I noticed the public works department doing the same thing in the middle of the city a week ago. I'm sorry, why is it even worth mentioning?

And you trust Zuckerberg to decide when the claim is proven to be true or false beyond the reasonable doubt, or whatever bar he chooses to adopt? You put a lot of trust Into him.

Okay, who is going to be first to call Linus entitled, privileged and non-inclusive to the disadvantaged contributors with worse hardware? /sarcasm

The only hard part is step 2. You can use any standard-issue keyboard, just adding another layout to the software. And fonts are not that hard to create if you don't care much about ugliness. Then any Unicode-compatible website will support your language right away.

Actually, I wonder how many of these "missing languages" have writing at all. Maybe item "0" in your list should be "create a writing system for the language". If one picks up latin1 as a character set, the rest is not necessary.

I’m a bit tired of repeating myself, so I’ll limit this comment to the single point.

MOX fuel is ”Mixed OXide”. It is not a mix of pure metals, it is a mix of uranium oxide and plutonium oxide. Nuclear reactions in this fuel convert part of the uranium to plutonium, but it STAYS OXIDIZED. You can heat plutonium oxide to whatever temperature you want, but it would not catch fire because it already connected to all the oxygen it could use.

I have to call bullshit again and again.

First, you literally wrote ”plutonium fire that wipes out all human life in the northern hemisphere. Feel free to take it back, but do not pretend you didn’t say it. This is exactly what you said.

Second, nuclear fuel uses uranium oxide as a fissile material. Sometimes plutonium oxide added to it, and some plutonium is produced from uranium oxide during the work cycle. Again, do not hesitate to prove me wrong, but all plutonium in the fuel is already oxidized and unlikely to catch fire.

Third, get your numbers consistent, and if at all possible, get them right too. Was it ”1400 spent fuel rods”? Or was it ”4000 tons initially, 1400 tons now of spent fuel”? One rod doesn't weigh one metric ton, it is about the size and weight of the metal stick. The link you provided says there were 566 _assemblies_, which is ~140 tons assuming 250 kilos per assembly. Wikipedia says there were 854 tons of fuel in all 4 reactors and spent fuel pools combined, 104 of them in the unit 3 pool. I wonder if this is pure fuel weight or gross weight.

Forth, a few micrograms of plutonium is not a fatal dose. It is associated with an increased risk of cancer, which is not a definition of ”fatal”, or LD50, or anything like this.

And fifth, plutonium only makes ~1% of the fuel. fix your math, please.

Would you mind reposting your claim, only using correct amounts of materials, working chemistry and your actual idea of the consequences to the human race? Something more specific than jumping from total annihilation to vague ”it has potential”.

Iâ(TM)m sorry, but I have to call bullshit on your âextinction eventâ scare.

WNA estimates that Chernobyl threw away 5% of its 200 tons of nuclear fuel, 10 tons. Plus some radioactive byproducts, gases, etc. The exclusion zone around the site is 30 km in radius, and it is quite far from being a wasteland. Life is abundant there. Some people refused to leave their homes - and many of them are still alive.

Fukushimaâ(TM)s 1400 fuel rods of 200 kg each weigh 280 tons. Let's assume it is 200 tons of nuclear fuel, 20x times the amount of Chernobyl event. 20 Chernobyl exclusion zones wouldn't come close to covering even Japan itself.
And even if fallout will magically distribute evenly around the northern hemisphere, it is one metric ton per million square kilometers or one gram per square kilometer. Very far from wiping out entire human life.

Wait, what? Chernobyl and Fukushima were near misses, not terrible disasters? While I agree about not being so terrible, could you elaborate on how they could go worse?