Because you need to measure what happens when it goes off. You donâ(TM)t just want to find out if big boom happens, you want to find out what the properties of that boom were and if they match your modelling. Just finding out if one nuke goes boom tells you if one nuke is in working condition. Measuring everything you can about that detonation tells you if the entire arsenal works.

The problem is that Ukraine couldnâ(TM)t maintain nuclear weapons anyway. Giving them up was partly done because having a bunch of aging nuclear weapons hanging around in unguarded, unmaintained facilities is a terrible plan, and because guarding and maintaining facilities is expensive.

Why would âoeSoviet nukesâ get returned to Russia? Russia was only one Soviet republic, just like Ukraine was, or are you saying g that everyone was equal except some were more equal than others?

âoeTaken overâ - meaning actually got a democratically elected government, instead of a Russian stooge government.

Because thatâ(TM)s literally what nuclear weapons testing means.

Russia has had multiple failed nuclear tests recently, either with the bomb failing to detonate, or the launch system failing. Neither has convinced anyone that itâ(TM)s worth the risk that a few of them might work.

Given that the US has had other methods of making sure that its nukes are functional for decades, and doesnâ(TM)t have the massive problem with maintainence money getting funnelled into the wallets of oligarchs that Russia has, Iâ(TM)d be very surprised if we saw any failed tests.

Desirable to an extent, untilâ¦

1. You realise that thereâ(TM)sa bunch of people out there with legitimate expertise but no formal qualifications. Think, people like everyday astronaut, who has no formal engineering or rocketry education, but whose videos are always well researched and cited.
2. Politics can oh so easily become a âoeseriousâ topic. No degree from the places we approve of? No talking about how shot our policies are!

I know, but these people have done so much damage. I find it unforgivable!

This is, in fact, Exxon's deadly serious and completely vile attempt at a SovCit rationale, only with actual lawyers rather than gibbering fuckwits from the internet wittering on about the right to travel

UK public companies absolutely are obligated to report on leadership compensation. There is also a "statutory requirement for UK listed companies with more than 250 employees to disclose annually the ratio of their CEO’s pay to the median, lower quartile and upper quartile pay of their UK employees."

Stupid slashdot not supporting non-English scripts. Here's the quote in English instead: "It is not your duty to finish the work; but neither are you at liberty to neglect it"

To some extent we all do, and we are all human and all hypocrites. But, as the sages said " ."

We can, as a species, choose to kick ourselves in the balls *one less time* today than we did yesterday, and one less time than that tomorrow. We don't *have to* kick ourselves in the balls a thousand times a day, and doing it slightly less is still better, even if it's not as good as stopping entirely overnight.

That's why I drive an EV, use active and public transport a lot, turn lights off, use a green energy supplier, eat veggie more often than not, etc. Are there other aspects of my life where I could do more to decarbonise? Sure? Is it bad that I don't do them? Yes. Does that mean I shouldn't do the things I am doing to lower the carbon intensity of my life? No, Trailer Trash, it does not. Do my bad actions mean that we should ignore the systemic governance issues that make it harder for individuals to choose low-carbon intensity actions and easier to choose high-carbon intensity actions, like not building sidewalks in so many US conurbations? No, Trailer Trash, they do not. And do my bad actions mean that we should give Exxon's leadership, staff and owners a free pass to fuck up the planet as much as they wish. No, Trailer Trash, they do not.

None of this is very hard to understand if you just devote the tiniest amount of time to actively thinking rather than fucking about with pointless rhetorical gotchas.

The only thing that's ever worth saying to you is that you're an odious prick who writes reams of shite cosplaying as a reasoning human when you're anything but. I have long since given up reading what you spew as I know it's a complete waste of time. You'll happily see the planet become uninhabitable for your own disgusting reasons and I think it's despicable behaviour

Slashdot posted this already.

The effort by Exxon here is tied to their efforts to undermine all GHG reporting. They've allied with others such as EY and Santander and BGIP to try to create an alternative reporting structure that enables them to disclaim all responsibility for Scope 2 and 3 emissions, ie the actual use of the products they extract. They want to limit themselves to having to be responsible only for the carbon associated with the creation of the product. They are absolutely grotesque and I despise them for doing this.

https://sustainabilitymag.com/...

Top flight management consulting (McKinsey, Bain, BCG, Booz) involves large amounts of persuading clients to do stuff that they are often reluctant to do. You don't do that simply through a compelling argument, you build relationships that last for years, sometimes decades. You become a trusted advisor. AI just cannot do all of that. It can provide trustable advice, but that isn't the same thing, at all.

I once worked on a study that involved improving access to primary care clinics across an impoverished part of a major city. Most of my time was spent in doctors' offices, watching what was happening, listening to people, building a solution that would have their enthusiastic support when they implemented it. It involved multiple workshops where we had various crucial moments on which the project hinged -- a practice manager standing up and talking in impassioned terms about the moral imperative for changing to do better by their patients, and changing the energy in the room, for example. This was not the sort of thing that could be done by AI, ever, in my view.