Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by aeternus 2513 days ago
Seems like they are trying too hard, and actually made the message more cryptic than it needs to be.

Why not say "nuclear" or "radiation"? It seems very unlikely that the entire species will completely forget about the concept of nuclear radiation.

3 comments

This exercise is more talking to ourselves than the future. It is a sort of design fiction[1], attempting to cope with the concept of consequences that last much longer than the initiating actors' whole civilization.

That it isn't fiction is what gives it salience, and the requisite paternalistic 'talking down' to a pre-technical future aspect provides emotional and/or moralistic flavor, if you like that sort of thing.

Eventually, it turns into bike-shedding scary apocalyptic artworks.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_fiction

Also on point, if they have forgotten about the concept of nuclear radiation then discovering a nuclear waste dump will be a massive boon and cause for celebration. When we zoom out enough to see entire civilisations at once, a few people dying just isn't an issue; it is routine. We try our best to keep everyone healthy, but at the end of the day the benefits of progress outway handfuls of dead astronauts, scientists, explorers and early colonists.

We don't sit around moping that Marie Curie & co died doing research, everyone involved gets recognised for helping to usher in a new age of scientific progress.

This is HN and nuclear energy byproduct. There is no danger to worry about. Future cave men are more likely to die cutting themselves on discarded solar panels in landfills!
People from a few 100 years ago would not know what that means, even if they were capable of reading modern english.