Roman revival… most anything with arches, pillars, ashlar, obvious lentils, a strong sturdy feel.

But also high tech / structural expressionism.

(Uniklinikum Aachen, Germany)

The internal explosive may malfunction from an external stimuli, such as a massive bomb detonation near it.

One-point safety sets cutoffs for how much yield can be produced from a malfunction. That’s for countries experienced with nukes who had time to fix their catastrophic failures.

Considering there’s many ways to design nukes, different countries have different technological capabilities, the answer isn’t a squeaky clean “No.” when someone asks if nukes can explode when bombed. Answers should have more gradation. And they shouldn’t imply a nuke in Iran wouldn’t catastrophically fail because sophisticated designs from countries allowed to have nukes have ironed out the wrinkles. Iran is smart and capable like any other country but they’re being badly stressed and their context is different than the traditional nuclear powers.

That’s just a sterile, academic way of looking at the benefits of diversity. If you have multiple leaders with different solutions to issues then you are more likely to have a leader that was closest to the mark. For a professor that sure was a shithead way of expressing a simple idea.

Yes. The people in this thread are wrong. Bombing a nuke can set it off, just not fully.

A nuke may require many precise detonations to function as intended. When everything goes right it will release it’s full power.

When an external explosion hits the nuke, only some material should activate, causing a relatively tiny explosion. Shouldn’t be any real fallout.

This assumes the designers specifically made the nuke to not go off from one explosion. There’s no rule that says you need to make nukes safe. People shouldn’t dismiss a partial detonation of a nuke like it’s nothing.

Edit: look up “one-point safety.” Safer nukes are designed so very little happens when there’s eg an explosion. If nukes didn’t go off when bombed this wouldn’t be a thing.

The daily beast doesn’t care about you.

The daily beast doesn’t care about us.

I thought talk of nukes was to make invasion seem like a good and sane alternative. That, or it was news corporations gleefully picking up some nonsense and shouting it from the rooftops hoping for some clicks.

They are flying jets, using drones, and even small explosives. The homes of these scientists were severely damaged. The richest countries of the world are backing Israel.

Is this just Israel putting out propaganda? These scientists thought they were safe at home. Sinister! Super secret weapon that blows up apartment buildings. Sounds revolutionary!

Look, there’s people who host videos that we must watch at any cost. But not really any cost, because we don’t feel we should pay, or watch ads… or anything, really. But we deserve to watch these videos. It’s our right. We’re entitled damn it!

So we’re going to barge into this place and watch videos while blocking ads. We’re going to use tools to watch through the windows. We’re going to smuggle content out of the building.

Because we need these videos. We’ll modify our browsers, install new apps, change our habits, fight pointless fights, get accounts terminated…

But we’re not going to pay a dime. It’s not like Youtube means anything to us. Gross! We’d just leave if there was no choice. We’d just go to… somewhere else. These guys don’t have a hold on us.

What is he trying to say? How can something be weird and unique but also consumed by millions of people as a popular product?

If he thinks riding a dragon in modern Tokyo to fight a big naked statue is weird and unique, he’s probably sad that the world has moved on from holding up sporks and going “lol random XD!”

The markets can’t sell Weird™ to the masses. Now there’s no “weird” people making super high budget art. Terrible!

Each man knows what’s coming to him. He just goes and gets it.

https://youtu.be/WK-SI9OrbfE

At least when it’s a tight-knit community, there’s not really any logistics. Everyone knows everyone, including the cheats and liars and deadbeats. If someone takes you up on a bet and they win they’ll come get their money, guaranteed.

Werckmeister Harmonies (while it has a plot, it comes at you slowly)

Hard to be a God (2013) (the most minimal of plots in a sense)

The Greasy Strangler (closest movie on the list to Napoleon Dynamite in feel)

The Lighthouse (2019)

All Quiet on the Western Front (1930)

Stalker

Waterworld? At least that’s the impression I got as a kid.

My list is kinda a specific interpretation of ‘slow and with minimal plot.’

So the guy who runs the AI intelligence corporation thinks the West is morally superior to the degree that more amoral, barbarous countries like China and Russia and Iran have some advantage over us.

Like it’s just sensitive and soft westerners fighting against robotic Asians and Russians. Iranians are so evil compared to us: they’re willing to use nukes!

How can they have exceptions? The furher designated these people as murderers, rapists, and MS13 gang members. But some are allowed to stay to pick nuts?

Nah I’m just playing. They just sense what words you can say to get what you want.

I’m sure if we ever start fixing the country, every little thing we do will be “fascism” and all the republicunts will become the biggest antifa fans ever, with little clothes and stickers and flags.

Look guys, if the people who go around blaming Jews for trying to replace white people say Free Palestine is antisemitic, who are we to argue? I never knew space lasers could be so Jewish until the authorities on antisemitism enlightened me. Was it not a nutcase conservative who taught you the power of a few parenthesis? They’re the experts here.

I thought browser back button hijacking was something you weren’t allowed to do. Seems like most news corporations that get posted to Lemmy have to take me to ads or more stories instead of letting me go back. I guess on federated stuff you’re expected to have a slicker setup than a mostly stock android.

I can’t stop thinking of the contrast between charged-up Americans willing to fight, kill, and die in a shitty battlefield for our freedoms but when our freedoms are being destroyed as the main attraction these guys are nowhere.

If I thought that way about YouTube, why not just be a sovcit about laws in general? I don’t want to cherry pick philosophy. Let’s go all in on technicalities and loopholes and definitions and wording. Life is a video game where X leads to Y because that’s the rules. YouTube is merely answering requests, and I’m merely watching a curated selection of data. They have a TOS but I never agreed to it. For I’m not a user or customer, but a Netizen, and we have rights.

The married father of two used “joebidennnn69” and several other user names to exchange 220 obscene files

accused of distributing more than 200 files of child pornography online while using the screen name “joebidennnn69,” federal prosecutors alleged

Circus shit. Dude used multiple names but the headline is Biden and they even have a picture of him. Plus this rag hijacks my back button so it’s harder to come back to Lemmy on my phone.

Also:

May allegedly kept several videos of himself on trips to Colombia engaging in sex with three women who appeared to be underage and were paid, a DHS official testified.

Underageeeddd woomeennn

But I don’t have adblockers installed and I still get told to turn my blocker off. I have no extensions and YouTube randomly stops my video to tell me I’m doing it wrong.

Edit: I guess this is the result when dealing with the kind of users who refuse to watch ads, but also can’t fuck off like decent human beings. Just millions of people who will climb your fence, pick your locks, smash your window, because they deserve to watch content, but they won’t pay or watch ads.

JK Rowling sounds like an incredibly talented author. Most people just massage things into place. Reuse tropes. But you’re saying she baked her worldview into practically every sentence?

If I see ugliness in the world, I might express it as I see it. I don’t have to think something is right for me to include it in a story. Do you think I’m special? Am I the only person capable of writing things that I don’t necessarily support? Everyone else is forced to include things they personally would vote for. If you write about slavery, that means you love slavery. Is it weird that I’m capable of being against slavery, yet it’s possible for me to include it in stories? Should I be using this power?

I didn’t realize Rowling was one of the best authors. I thought she just reused things without really thinking. I never knew it was 100% meticulous and so… thought out. I don’t think even Tolkien can be said to inject so much meaning into every single page.