- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
cross-posted from: https://sh.itjust.works/post/48838029
Today, in things I’d read on a fading screen in a half destroyed building in a Fallout game…
cross-posted from: https://sh.itjust.works/post/48838029
Today, in things I’d read on a fading screen in a half destroyed building in a Fallout game…
“Weapons grade” is actually more stable and less prone to blowing up without constant management, who knew?
Nothing-burger.
Isn’t it also more prone to violently explode under appropriate management?
It’s okay, they are using ChatGPT.
…okay, we’re definitely in danger of a dirty bomb.
Apparently, the opposite is the case. Funny story, when making a bomb, blowing up during construction, storage, or delivery to the target is an un-desirable trait.
I think they meant “isn’t it also much better at blowing up when you want it to?”
… but its not? Literally, the “harder” part about making a bomb with reactor-grade material is keeping it from blowing-up prematurely, while still getting maximum yeild at boom-boom time.
A less-advanced nation might get a lesser explosion out of a “safer”(doesn’t explode until its supposed to) bomb with reactor-grade material, but its still going to be a massive, nuclear explosion, and the unspent fuel creates additional radio-active fallout.
Apparently, civilized-countries’ worst nightmare regarding weapons-grade plutonium is that those that “shouldn’t” have “the bomb” could build them and then be able to shelve them for a later, legitimate threat. Oh, and not being able to cry “they built a dirty bomb!!” if such were ever used.