Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Updated rules on preparedness for nuclear explosion

ready.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 188 posts

Re: Updated rules on preparedness for nuclear explosion

#161

Post by lamontcg »

creativeCak3 wrote: post #30

I am genuinely asking; how worried should we be? I'm really freaking out about this...

We have 70 years of precedent already.

When nuclear superpowers invade another country in a proxy war, the other superpower is allowed to send military aid without threat of nuclear retaliation.

If that wasn't the tacit agreement then WWIII would have already happened over Korea, Vietnam and Afghanistan at least.

Honestly its a good thing we've got Biden in power since he's old and mellow and chill and won't be trying to act tough and make shit worse.

Sounds like it is about to get really horrible for the people in Kyiv and Kharkiv though.

Re: Updated rules on preparedness for nuclear explosion

#162

Post by throwawaylinux »

spookthesunset wrote: post #93
throwawaylinux wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's lots of bits about COVID-19, and what I paraphrased came from the part about what to do after you have survived a nuclear explosion. I think the more likely explanation is simply that it was written by people in disaster management who have a myopic focus on the COVID-19 crisis and a vested interest in keeping COVID under their purview (i.e., to be seen as an ongoing disaster).

Whole new branches of government (and corporate governance) have now been created thanks to Covid—19. These new bureaucracies are getting money and the people getting those funds have a vested interest in continuing to get those funds.

Right. For some reason people get offended and lose their ability for rational thought if you mention this obvious fact though.

They'll rail against government corruption in the military industry, tobacco and alcohol, the healthcare industry (including the pharmaceutical industry pre-vaccines), private prisons, the energy industry. But mention that some government department or agency might have an interest in exaggerating or perpetuating the problem it is tasked with addressing, and suddenly everybody loses their minds.

Re: Updated rules on preparedness for nuclear explosion

#163

Post by zionic »

throwawaylinux wrote: post #153
whatshisface wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not the fault of the subs, it's the sleep deprived and overworked crews, and inexperienced and also sleep deprived officers manning them. Our ICBMs will work perfectly when they are accidentally launched.

Or it may be because the military has shrewdly shifted their priority from operational capability to ensuring peoples' feelings don't get hurt. Maybe the technology will work a little too perfectly so the generals will helpfully circumvent the civilian government and phone their friends in the CCP to warn them ahead of time so they won't feel offended.

The case you’re slyly referring to was pretty much treason.

Imagine if today a US general called Russia to let them know we wouldn’t launch nukes if the president asked.

It would be all you hear about on CNN.

Re: Updated rules on preparedness for nuclear explosion

#164

Post by zionic »

whatshisface wrote: post #132
esrauch wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The maximum tax bracket is 37%

It can get worse if you add in local taxes. (Another comment already said this but they used the word "midwit.")

An entirely relevant observation. The kinds of people that pretend the top tax bracket is 37.5% are the kinds of people that don’t understand payroll tax or sales tax.

Re: Updated rules on preparedness for nuclear explosion

#165

Post by bobsmooth »

ncallaway wrote: post #79
bobsmooth wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Either we all die or we don't[1], either way there's nothing you can do. I'm sure there's things you can be worried about that you can actually affect. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frAEmhqdLFs

That’s not quite true! If you live, a little prep will go a long way. Have an emergency kit (see ready.gov for a good checklist). If you survive, such a kit will help significantly in the immediate aftermath. It’s also a useful kit for a wide array of (more likely) natural disasters. After you’ve put together your kit, then I agree. You’ve done your prep, nothing else you can control about it, so don’t stress too muc…

I have no interest in living after society breaks down.

Re: Updated rules on preparedness for nuclear explosion

#166

Post by pbourke »

cbfrench wrote: post #52
kragen wrote: post #39

What the fuck, this has to be a parody: Be Safe AFTER Immediately after you are inside shelter, if you may have been outside after the fallout arrived. ... Engage virtually with your community through video and phone calls. Know that it’s normal to feel anxious or stressed. Take care of your body and talk to someone if you are feeling upset. Many people may already feel fear and anxiety about the coronavirus 2019 (CO…

I’m glad I can expect Zoom calls to remain a feature of the post-apocalypse landscape.

Apparently we will have all of the downsides of Armageddon without the bliss of its few upsides.

I’ll make sure to update JIRA ahead of standup the afternoon of the apocalypse.

Re: Updated rules on preparedness for nuclear explosion

#167

Post by pbourke »

znkynz wrote: post #83
titzer wrote: post #64

If you're warned of an imminent nuclear attack, be sure to move towards the expected epicenter of the blast. You'll want to be vaporized rather than cooked alive or suffer fatal radiation sickness (over the period of days or weeks). You'll want to be spared the horror of watching others die and society quickly unravel. You'll want to avoid being a burden on the non-existent safety net that won't survive. Watch "The D…

It it is absolutely not- sugar coated bullshit. You need to watch "Threads" - a British production from the 80s. Terrifying: https://archive.org/details/threads_201712

Because I am apparently a masochist, I watched Threads for the first time in the week leading up the the war. It lives up to its billing.

Re: Updated rules on preparedness for nuclear explosion

#168

Post by fastball »

Heyokamerican wrote: post #123
fastball wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US govt is literally adopting the dumbest takes on Twitter[1] as official policy. [1] https://twitter.com/DanaHoule/status/1496723469890949127

As far as I can tell, this person is not in government [1] and is not claiming to represent anyone but themselves. I don't understand how you conclude that their comment is US govt policy. [1] https://newrepublic.com/authors/dana-houle

The OP is the government policy... the tweet is a dumb take. Do you not see any overlap between the dumb take and the government policy?

Re: Updated rules on preparedness for nuclear explosion

#169

Post by fastball »

whatshisface wrote: post #117
fastball wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US govt is literally adopting the dumbest takes on Twitter[1] as official policy. [1] https://twitter.com/DanaHoule/status/1496723469890949127

That's not such a dumb take, diseases and wartime conditions go hand in hand.

Forest for the trees.

Re: Updated rules on preparedness for nuclear explosion

#170

Post by ncallaway »

bobsmooth wrote: post #165
ncallaway wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s not quite true! If you live, a little prep will go a long way. Have an emergency kit (see ready.gov for a good checklist). If you survive, such a kit will help significantly in the immediate aftermath. It’s also a useful kit for a wide array of (more likely) natural disasters. After you’ve put together your kit, then I agree. You’ve done your prep, nothing else you can control about it, so don’t stress too muc…

I have no interest in living after society breaks down.

Not every disaster will involve the break down of society. It's entirely possible that a nuclear strike won't end all life on earth.

I personally wouldn't be so quick to give up, but to each their own.

Post reply on HN