echodot

joined 2 years ago
[–] echodot@feddit.uk 7 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

You're thinking of fusion bombs. They're absolutely not zero radiation they just don't release as much as you would expect given these size of the explosion. But they absolutely do release radiation.

Much of the destruction from fusion bombs comes from the implosion rather than the explosion. Not that the initial explosion isn't highly also destructive. In an airbus situation it basically picks things off the ground and flings them into the air that several times the speed of sound. Any oil rig that is already in place is going to get violently ripped out of the ground along with a lot of the underground piping. At the very least that is going to cause a massive leak and probably catch fire. The last time a gas fire like that happened the Russians actually had to use a nuke to put it out.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 9 points 11 hours ago

No I don't. I'm sure C suite executive think that's the case, but every time they've tried it they've always had to back pedal and hire the human staff back.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 1 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

I'm still not convinced that this doesn't happen to a lesser extent even now.

Seriously call someone and then send them an email and then just see how long it takes for the message to arrive. I've sent emails that have taken up to 3 minutes to get to their destination.

What's going on, did it get lost on route, was it we way laid by highway bandits, how can it possibly take that long?

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 3 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Could be worse.

Could have been "gamers dessert Intel in droves"

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 6 points 11 hours ago

I've always thought it's a super weird place for them to have a fab just in general. It's never been the most politically stable part of the world and surely you don't want your several billion dollar infrastructure getting blown up, so why would you put it somewhere where that's more likely?

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 8 points 12 hours ago

Which of the 16 pixels in that image do you find odd

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 3 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah but what community are you in? After all, everything's relative.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 6 points 12 hours ago (5 children)

No one's getting drunk off one glass of whisky. So drinking one glass of whisky is not indicative of any psychological problem.

That's like asking somebody if they're sad because they had one bowl of ice cream.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 8 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (2 children)

I'd love to know what you are actually trying to achieve.

Hey Grandma want to get blown up, it's the hot new trend.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 2 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Maybe that's why I don't like coffee. Maybe I just keep getting given instant.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 3 points 12 hours ago

Yeah we are too. But for some strange reason the policy I deleted from my account appears to have been deleted from my account. Goodness knows how that happened.

It's so stupid though we have some SAP modules that actually require Internet Explorer because they're super duper old and have never been updated. So there are quite a few users that don't actually have to follow that policy.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 2 points 13 hours ago

Don't worry you won't be able to it's never getting released.

 

When you reveal a spoiler the black rectangles go away and it then renders the text in white, but on a white background (light coloured theme) The text renders is exactly the same colour as the background and so you can not see it unless you highlight the post, this renders the background of the post as light grey and there is just about enough contrast difference to now read the text.

When spoiler text is revealed it should render in the same colour as normal text. I'm not sure why it's white.

See images below for demonstration.

spoiler text is hidden

spoiler text has been revealed but is invisible

text post is highlighted and now you can see the spoiler text rendered in white

view more: next ›