"Google wants to kill the URL"


"People have a really hard time understanding URLs" is not a good enough reason to get rid of URLs

To this day, I refuse to use an AMP specific webpage as it breaks the open web. When I'm presented with an AMP link, I edit the URL to remove that component so I get the full page. "Safe" URLs will similarly cater to Google interests and I will not be using it

If other vendors go along with this, I'll write my own browser if I have to


@cypnk "People have a really hard time understanding URLs"

Well, fuck, people have a really hard time understanding nuclear physics. Let's get rid of all the nuclear research and nuclear power stations and go back to coal and oil.

Oh, wait... Someone IS actually proposing exactly that.

@drequivalent @cypnk nuclear research in suitably contained facilities is ok. But nuclear power stations never should have been set up, and need to go ASAP. They were created to refine fissionable materials for bombs, generating electricity was just an excuse, as became clear when Iran starting developing them. There is still no safe way to dispose of the radioactive waste they churn out. Plants have a useful life of about 50 years, and then need to be contained for 1000s of years.

@drequivalent @cypnk basically, they're the most stupidly dangerous way of boiling water anyone ever came up with. They're ecocidal steam age technology that doesn't belong in the 21st century.

@strypey @cypnk Nuclear power is actually the cleanest and cheapest source of energy available to date.
Although, I must admit that there are safety concerns, but that's purely thanks to the fact that cold war was needed to be kept cold, and then ever power-hungry military industrial complex took hold of nuclear research.
There were two projects for fission reactors in the 1950s: light water reactors (typical for today, using Uranium cycle) and molten salt reactors. And while both were successful at generating power (Oak Ridge molten salt testbed, for example ran for five years producing around 7.5 MW), US Military tipped the scale in favor of light water reactors, because this type of reactors were able to breed Plutonium which was needed for nuclear weapon programme.
Now, MSRs look awesome. They are a lot safer, you can't breed weapons-grade material on them, they run use Thorium-Uranium cycle (Th is abundant compared to U), and they also can burn a lot of BS after LWRs. Google them.

@drequivalent @cypnk yeah I've been down the thorium/ molten salt rabbit hole. They still produce waste and decommissioned plants that need containment for 1000s of years. There are people working on how to make signs durable enough to warn future civilizations of the danger, in iconography they can read. Imagine if the pyramids had been nuclear power plants and all the hieroglyphs said "stay the fuck away from this!"

@drequivalent @cypnk Molten salt solar towers are more more efficient and produce no radioactive waste. Thorium is still not sustainable technology, it's a red herring being pushed by PR companies working for Big Nuclear to keep their dying business alive. The future of electricity is distributed generation from diverse, renewable sources, as close as possible to the point-of-use.

@strypey @cypnk Looks cool. Wouldn't work everywhere or always, but looks cool. How much does one produce on average?

Sign in to participate in the conversation

Русская нода социальной сети "Мастодонт", части Fediverse - всемирной федерации социальных сетей. Зона общения, свободная от рекламы и шпионажа, теперь и в России.