CEO/Principal Consultant at INNOQ, he/him, software architect, RESTafarian, conference tourist. Works at innoq.com. Fediverse: @stilkov@innoq.social

Germany
Joined April 2007
Filter
Exclude
Time range
-
Near
Replying to @ChristinGorman
Not sure how a track record in the past (about which people can’t agree) is relevant to future risk. Also, other alternatives have much less risk, and a much better track record
1
Replying to @ChristinGorman
I don’t think labeling something “FUD” is appropriate if there are legitimate reasons for for fear, consequences are uncertain, and doubts are justified
1
Replying to @ChristinGorman
I don’t think you have addressed my point. You think the risk is acceptable, I don’t think it is. I’d much rather rely on renewable energy sources.
1
He needs to be called Kevlin and I know the perfect Godfather
1
5
And again: Show me the insurance company willing to insure the risk of failure and it might change my mind
2
Replying to @ChristinGorman
You’re still comparing it to fossil fuel, and it seems to be a case of risks with different impacts and probabilities. The numbers for Chernobyl and Fukushima are debatable, the risk of entire areas becoming depopulated and uninhabitable is pretty much exclusive to nuclear power
1
Replying to @ChristinGorman
I understand why there are good reasons to prefer nuclear power to fossil fuel-based power. I think nuclear power is too dangerous to be a reasonable replacement. This is more related to the risk of catastrophic failures than the waste problem.
2
But surely the solution can’t be to repeat the same mistake for nuclear power?
1
Replying to @ChristinGorman
Completely agree regarding the real cost of fossil fuels being wrongly distributed
1
Replying to @ChristinGorman
My main problem with nuclear power has always been the incalculable risk, as evidenced by the fact that no insurance company will insure it. I don’t think anyone is less emotional and more rational about potential death than they are
2
1
3
Replying to @LeaVerou
My favorite story of this kind (in Germany): Italian restaurant, some very small kids were noisy, some older (German) guests complained to the (Italian) owner who went ballistic and almost threw them out. Everyone else was smiling and slow-clapping :)
4
Replying to @saarw
OK, I agree that the communication on Twitter could have been much better
1
Replying to @mtnygard @MaineC
Maybe, and that would nicely shift the blame to somebody else, but I’m sure I was guilty of this in good old RT times, too
1
Replying to @saarw
No, this is more like accusing research that shows Twitter’s bias of bias
1
1
Replying to @saarw
It seems I was wrong and the paper actually says the opposite of what everyone, including me, assumed
1
1
It’s a very simple rule that shouldn’t be hard to follow: Never amplify other people’s outrage, not even indirectly, unless you’ve personally checked the source. Even then, better check twice. I keep falling into this trap, and get mad at myself for doing so.
2
24
3
97
Replying to @hillelogram
We all deserve it, so please rage ahead
2
It seems I was wrong
What utter bullshit
1
8
And of course people are still liking my tweet while I write this.
1
Yet I still felt I had done my due diligence as I re-read it (the thread) multiple times, and waited for a few hours before tweeting. And still messed up.
1
1
1