Slashdot Mirror


Radioactive Warning for Future Generations

tengu1sd writes "The Los Angeles Times discusses the problems with trying to leave a message for generations down the line. From the article: 'Symbols tend to lose their meaning over time. Exactly how and why Stonehenge was built, for instance, has long remained a mystery. Warnings, they argue, would be misunderstood or dismissed, the same way ancient grave robbers ignored curses inscribed on the tombs of Egyptian pharaohs to seize the riches inside. The curse of plutonium packs a painful penalty.'"

468 comments

  1. Simple solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just write it in every major language. Several languages have survived thousands of years through today, which is how the Rosetta Stone worked.

    1. Re:Simple solution by networkBoy · · Score: 5, Funny

      Na, just type:
      Warning, Lawyers buried here.

      No-one will ever dig it up.
      -nB

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    2. Re:Simple solution by jollyroger1210 · · Score: 0

      This would be handy in cars, software. etc. I learned to speak english as a language, not "symbolese".

      --
      Purple, because ice cream has no bones.
    3. Re:Simple solution by Scrameustache · · Score: 4, Informative
      Just write it in every major language. Several languages have survived thousands of years through today, which is how the Rosetta Stone worked.

      FTFA
      It would be surrounded by 48 granite or concrete markers, 32 outside the berm and 16 inside, each 25 feet high and weighing 105 tons, engraved with warnings in English, Spanish, Russian, French, Chinese, Arabic and Navajo, with room for future discoverers to add warnings in contemporary languages. Pictures would denote buried hazards and human faces of horror and revulsion.
      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

    4. Re:Simple solution by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

      Meh. I think we ought to just do a really thorough job of hiding it, with warnings inside the perimeter. Obvious warnings will just draw attention to the site.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    5. Re:Simple solution by Cylix · · Score: 1

      Gosh,

      Sounds like a pyramid....

      I want to investigate already!

      --
      "You should always go to other people's funerals; otherwise, they won't come to yours." -- Yogi Berra
    6. Re:Simple solution by spiritraveller · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I agree. If you put warnings all over the place, there will eventually be some crazy people who think it's just a big stash of treasure and go dig it up.

      As the FTA points out, people who robbed the pyramids in Egypt didn't pay any attention to the warnings about curses and such... we can't be sure that a potentially uneducated group of future beings will believe all that mumbo jumbo about radioactivity.

    7. Re:Simple solution by Preeminence · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I would suggest writing in not in major languages of today, but ancient languages that are still understood/studied. Latin, (Homeric) Greek, and Hebrew come to mind. Who knows if anyone will want to study Tom Clancy novels 10,000 years in the future, but if civilization still exists, they will still be studying the Bible, the Iliad, the Aeneid, etc.

    8. Re:Simple solution by Scrameustache · · Score: 1

      I want to investigate already!

      Boy, you'll like the following paragraphs of the article! : )

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

    9. Re:Simple solution by Firethorn · · Score: 3, Informative

      Do we really care about the grave-robbers and such? If we're trying to protect against the future equivalent, I'll note that most grave robbers were illiterate and did unmeasurable harm to archeology with their destruction. They'd note our warnings, however many languages we put them in, about as much as the historical ones paid to the egyptian writtings.

      For that matter, I can see scientists not leaving well enough alone and digging in there to find out what the horrible hazard is.

      Personally, I think that it's sad that we're this worried about the stuff and harming 'future generations'. Besides, most high-level waste is very recyclable, and what remains would be 'safe' radioactive wise within a thousand years. Warnings written in English, Spanish, Chinese(same written language, remember?), Japanese, Arabic, and Latin should be fairly easy to translate for longer than that. I'd throw Hebrew in there as it's seemed to survive well over time. Heck, we might just be making the Rosetta Stone of the future! On the other hand, Navajo? Isn't that pretty close to a dead language already?

      For that matter, if we bury it right, by the time anybody has the skills/technology to dig a half mile down into the earth they should be technologically advanced enough to know most of the hazards.

      Finally:
      A third plaque was pried off, perhaps as a souvenir. According to earlier visitors, it read, in plain English, "This site will remain dangerous for 24,000 years."

      This makes me think, but at what level of dangerous? Hiroshima and Nagasaki were rebuilt and are inhabited today. Would a society at a victorian technological level even have the average lifespan to notice minor radiation poisoning?

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    10. Re:Simple solution by Scrameustache · · Score: 4, Funny

      As the FTA points out, people who robbed the pyramids in Egypt didn't pay any attention to the warnings about curses

      Yeah, um, curses? Should I worry about black cats too?

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

    11. Re:Simple solution by smasm · · Score: 1

      Pictures would denote buried hazards and human faces of horror and revulsion.

      Wouldn't you want to know what repulsed those primitive humans so much?

    12. Re:Simple solution by sl4shd0rk · · Score: 1

      sounds like a sacrificial alter for foreskin removal.

      --
      Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
    13. Re:Simple solution by iced_773 · · Score: 1


      That may make sense to most people, but it might not be true. Catullus was quite unpopular in Roman times, looked down upon as an inferior poet, but today he is up there with Horace and Ovid. Maybe a couple thousand years from now, people will be studying Star Trek: Enterprise. It's hard to imagine now, but Catullus himself wouldn't have guessed he would survive twenty-one centuries.

    14. Re:Simple solution by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

      what's latin for "radioactive"?

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    15. Re:Simple solution by larry+bagina · · Score: 5, Funny

      addendum: Perhaps future archaelogists will be fascinated to learn that the ancient romans colonized north america and utilized nuclear power.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    16. Re:Simple solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Virus. It's a pretty general purpose word, generally meaning "poison", or other nasty stuff. If that's not enough for you, oh well. It's probably better not to be too specific.

    17. Re:Simple solution by NanoGradStudent · · Score: 1

      Where are mod points when I need some?

      --
      Just a little guy, y'know?
    18. Re:Simple solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
      It might help if there actually is a curse, which if triggered will be remembered for several generations.
      • Label it however is thought best.
      • Backfill the tunnel entrance with strong material.
      • Hide the tunnel entrance behind a huge native rock.
      • Next to the camouflaged tunnel, have a somewhat weaker barrier covering a tunnel into the mountain.
      • At the end of this tunnel, a series of chambers with sealed doors.
      • Each chamber has simpler and more dramatic warnings of death, with enough info that a scientific civilization would stop before going further.
      • Feel free to add Indiana Jones types of traps for further discouragement, and to continue to distract from further exploration of the rest of the mountain.
      • Breaching a chamber should require days of manual effort, to give time for word of findings to spread.
      • The next-to-the-last chamber would have deadly levels of radioactivity, using as long-lasting a source as is available.
      • If possible, the last chamber would have a nuclear bomb which would be triggered by the door opening (or by other traps in the room). This is a challenging device to engineer, as either there has to be enough fissionable material for it to remain viable for hundreds of years or it has to be a slow breeder which will make more fissionable material. The trap should be engineered so the key bomb components will slam together and if not exploded will disassemble (such as by sliding apart while falling into a pit) so as to not offer an example bomb.
    19. Re:Simple solution by slack_prad · · Score: 1, Interesting

      isn't sanskrit older and still understood/studied?

      --
      Sent from my desktop computer
    20. Re:Simple solution by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      "Warning, Lawyers buried here." No-one will ever dig it up.

      I wouldn't put it past SCO. Then again few would care if they accidentally took a uranium bath due to their stubburness.

    21. Re:Simple solution by zakezuke · · Score: 1

      what's latin for "radioactive"?

      Plutonium strenuus - toxicum radiare?

      --
      There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
    22. Re:Simple solution by flimflammer · · Score: 1

      Curses aren't supported by scientific methodology, but Radioactivity sure is. Any at some point in the future, everyone should still know what radioactivity is, if our poor planet is even alive by then.

    23. Re:Simple solution by darkmeridian · · Score: 2, Informative

      There are interesting considerations that have gone into the design of the warnings. For the Yucca Repository, the warning contains a disclaimer akin to, "No achievement of ours is worshipped here." The fear is that future generations will think we buried our treasure there, or set up some elaborate tomb like King Tut's. Future generations may understand the warning about sickness and death, but consider it a "curse" meant to dissuade grave robbers or the like. Perhaps they'll all be cavemen in the future if they cannot detect the radioactivity, but what if they've all moved to solar panels or fusion or some crazy, non-polluting technology we can never imagine? Furthermore, what if they don't have the equipment on an archeological dig, or some random guy who was digging a mine finds it and decides to go treasure hunting by himself? And the casks are meant to hide the radioactivity so you cannot detect it until you opened the cask? There are many bizarre things scientists have thought about when designing the cask. It's interesting to read about.

      --
      A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
    24. Re:Simple solution by Boronx · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't bet on it. I have not RTFA, but someone whose worked on this for Yucca mountain tells me the timescales they consider are on the order of tens of thousands of years, far older than any known language.

      Some other interesting assumptions they make are that the US government will survive as is for 100 years, and that the site will be controlled for 200 years.

    25. Re:Simple solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Last I knew the Navaho are very much alive and living in the area.

    26. Re:Simple solution by compro01 · · Score: 1

      well, even in the casks, the rooms that they store them in get pretty darn warm (in excess of 150 degrees F, IIRC), so even that would be enough to set off alarm bells in most people.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    27. Re:Simple solution by Ninjaesque+One · · Score: 1

      More like Latin, Greek, every single Germanic and Romantic language, Arabic, Hebrew, Afrikaans, all of the varied Native American languages, all of the various Mesoamerican languages, the varied African languages, including Egyptian and hieroglyphics, Esperanto, 1337, Quenya, Sindarin, Pig Latin, Cod-op, and so on. It will also serve as a decoder to our modern languages for historians to come, so add some speeches and such. We should also put in our forms of music, art, and what we name them and such.

      --
      Ninjas and pirates. How piquant.
    28. Re:Simple solution by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      "Yeah, um, curses? Should I worry about black cats too?"

      Do you think somebody not familiar with radioactivity is going to believe the "No, really, we mean it!" statements on the waste material any more than they would the warnings about curses and the like? "Liquify my internal organs? As if!"

    29. Re:Simple solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      why do you think we invented Geiger counters?
      as advanced as they will be,
      or i expect them to be,
      they better use Geiger counters.

    30. Re:Simple solution by Mikkeles · · Score: 1
      '"Pictures would denote buried hazards and human faces of horror and revulsion."'

      goats.cx would be better.

      --
      Great minds think alike; fools seldom differ.
    31. Re:Simple solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but the navaho aren't civlilized by any stretch of the imagination. I'm suprised they don't eat their own feces. One of the last surviving "religion" races, sure, but nothing to write home about.

    32. Re:Simple solution by Andrzej+Sawicki · · Score: 5, Funny
      So right. This reminded me of a Terry Pratchett quote:
      Some humans would do anything to see if it was possible to do it. If you put a large switch in some cave somewhere, with a sign on it saying "End-of-the-World Switch. PLEASE DO NOT TOUCH," the paint wouldn't even have time to dry.
    33. Re:Simple solution by m94mni · · Score: 1

      Heh, according to the Egypts, *you* obviously belong to the "uneducated". :-)

    34. Re:Simple solution by OlafMarzocchi · · Score: 1

      Not needed: let's assume these "people" will find the plutonium 500 years from now. Don't you think they will have small Geigers in the watch/phone/pda/brain implant?

      Come on...
      People will dig *looking for* plutonium/uranium/radioactive wastes in the next centuries... we are the only one that bury such energetic materials!

    35. Re:Simple solution by shmlco · · Score: 2, Interesting

      24,000 years is overkill. In about 1,000 years HLRW is about as dangerous as the original uranium ore from which it came.

      --
      Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
    36. Re:Simple solution by aix+tom · · Score: 1

      Hehehe... So any person finding it will think "Wow. that's interesting stuff. Let's dig further." ;-)

    37. Re:Simple solution by aix+tom · · Score: 1

      Dang.

      Now the alies which land here 13.314 years from now will die for shure, because they only learned German from Adolfs first television broadcast.

    38. Re:Simple solution by David+Horn · · Score: 2, Funny

      I pushed it. A little sign lit up saying, "Please do not push this button again."

      --
      PocketGamer.org - For the gamer on the go!
    39. Re:Simple solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its true no one remembers what stonehenge was for. But no one has every said "lets dig half a mile underneath and the see what's there" either.

    40. Re:Simple solution by ichigo+2.0 · · Score: 1

      Do you think somebody not familiar with radioactivity is going to believe the "No, really, we mean it!" statements on the waste material any more than they would the warnings about curses and the like? "Liquify my internal organs? As if!"

      One would think that after a few people try it and get their internal organs liquified, others would be encouraged to believe the warnings. OTOH, no one has died from egyptian curses, so it's not very surprising that graverobbers paid no heed to those.

    41. Re:Simple solution by Jesus_666 · · Score: 1

      As the FTA points out, people who robbed the pyramids in Egypt didn't pay any attention to the warnings about curses and such...

      And seriously, why should they? Text-mode UIs aren't that bad, you know...

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    42. Re:Simple solution by bhiestand · · Score: 0, Flamebait
      but if civilization still exists, they will still be studying the Bible...

      I sure hope not...

      I expect they'll be laughing at us for believing in one all-powerful all-perfect god. Maybe they'll believe in the Ancients from Stargate SG-1, maybe they'll believe in nature, maybe they'll have evolved beyond the need for religion, but I sure hope and expect we'll get over christianity by then...
      --
      SWM seeks new sig for a brief fling
    43. Re:Simple solution by bhiestand · · Score: 1
      24,000 years is overkill. In about 1,000 years HLRW is about as dangerous as the original uranium ore from which it came.

      Would it be possible to refine the waste in a couple of thousand years? :). I figure I could start a company now, buy it all and store it, then sell a shitload of uranium to the iranians or jihadis or whoever else needs it in only a few lifetimes (assuming good cloning tech to harvest some new organs as I need them...)

      But quite seriously, does this stuff ever get useful again? Is there any way we could use the heat generated to power turbines, or could we eventually re-refine the uranium? Obviously a lot would be lost, but I'm all about recycle/re-use and whatever that third one is...
      --
      SWM seeks new sig for a brief fling
    44. Re:Simple solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      "No culture has ever tried, self-consciously and scientifically, to design a symbol that would last 10,000 years and still be intelligible," said David B. Givens, an anthropologist who helped plan the nuclear-site warnings.

      Sure they did.

      But they failed, clearly.

    45. Re:Simple solution by nurb432 · · Score: 1

      In 300 years, that might only serve to cause people to be more curious what is down there.

      We have no idea what the world will be like in 300 years.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    46. Re:Simple solution by Millenniumman · · Score: 1

      Why not write it in ancient and modern languages? It is very unlikely that in the future an average person accidentally stumbling upon one of these burial sites will be able to read Latin or Greek.

      --
      Stupidity is like nuclear power, it can be used for good or evil. And you don't want to get any on you.
    47. Re:Simple solution by Millenniumman · · Score: 1

      Quenya and Sindarin? Then they'll think there were once elves here.

      --
      Stupidity is like nuclear power, it can be used for good or evil. And you don't want to get any on you.
    48. Re:Simple solution by Millenniumman · · Score: 1

      Do we really want them to know what the danger is? What if a violent dictator or a terrorist comes upon them? Can't we just signal that it is dangerous?

      --
      Stupidity is like nuclear power, it can be used for good or evil. And you don't want to get any on you.
    49. Re:Simple solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then you know, there's nothing that we can do really. Someone will die. They didn't listen. They were greedy. So what.

    50. Re:Simple solution by corngrower · · Score: 1

      Heck, no need to write in every major language, just write it in Spanish.

    51. Re:Simple solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Better yet, a big picture of a skull and crossbones. Anybody in any time period should be able to figure that out. If they can't, perhaps it's better that they die.

    52. Re:Simple solution by EZLeeAmused · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but do we really want people dancing on that spot either?

      --
      Some see the vessel as half full; others see it as half-empty; We pour it out on the floor and laugh
    53. Re:Simple solution by Firethorn · · Score: 3, Informative

      Would it be possible to refine the waste in a couple of thousand years? :). I figure I could start a company now, buy it all and store it, then sell a shitload of uranium to the iranians or jihadis or whoever else needs it in only a few lifetimes (assuming good cloning tech to harvest some new organs as I need them...)

      Try 90%+ recyclable, depending upon the reactor you took it out of and what you're looking to put it into. Also, no need to wait a thosand years, 40-60 seems to be enough. The problem you run into is that it's so radioactive when it first comes out of the reactor that handling it safely is difficult. So you move it just enough to place it into a containment pool. After spending a decade or two in that, it's something like 1% as radioactive as when it came out. Some point after that, you stick it in a cask to free up your pool, as it's now not generating enough heat to need active cooling/monitoring. After 20-40 years in that, you crack the cask and recycle the now relativly cool materials without the need for extreme radiation measures.

      At least, that's what Bush is looking at doing.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    54. Re:Simple solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Explain to me the difference between 'dying of a curse' and 'dying from radiation poisoning'?

      What if the mummification process included adding a bit of plague to the wrappings? Then for 20 years or so, that 'curse' may have had a real bite to it. We imagine we would have a hard time knowing, without actually looking for it, and then only in tombs that were sealed completely until the day we decided to test.

      Context is important; Most of us thing our GP's generation was.. a bit backwards. So 20 generations from now, or 200, or after society arises once again from the ashes of oblivion... our warnings may mean no more to them than that of the threat of a curse. And if they are post technological, they may even worshop the site, possibly sending their enemies into the death zone as a ritual sacrifice to the gods.

      Cheerful thoughts for the day.

    55. Re:Simple solution by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      Sorry, the 24,000 year quote came from a nearby underground nuclear detonation test point, and the plaque stolen read 'this site will remain...'. Obviously not that dangerous...

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    56. Re:Simple solution by ecuador_gr · · Score: 1

      Greek has already survived over 2500 years. It is definatelly gonna be at least recognized in another 10000 years:

      -Hey, what are these markings here?
      -Hmm, looks like Greek to me!

    57. Re:Simple solution by TemporalBeing · · Score: 1
      I pushed it. A little sign lit up saying, "Please do not push this button again."
      So I did...
      --
      Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
    58. Re:Simple solution by theonetruekeebler · · Score: 1
      One of the contengencies they're trying to plan for is the total destruction of civilization. On the timescale they're discussing, it's very probably there will be another Dark Age, durhing which history is forgotten, old languages are known only a handful of preservationists, and one continent doesn't even know the other one exists.

      To say nothing of the consequence of climate shift. 24,000 years is enough time for an ice age to come and go, dragging every familiar weather pattern with it. It's time enough for the site to become a desert with 100MPH winds sandblasting the text off of every exposed surface for months at a time.

      In the face of such conditions, written language may be unable to bear any message at all.

      --
      This is not my sandwich.
    59. Re:Simple solution by ultranova · · Score: 1

      Just write it in every major language. Several languages have survived thousands of years through today, which is how the Rosetta Stone worked.

      I have a better idea. Decorate the doorway with grinning human skulls. To the best of my knowledge, there has never been any culture on Earth to which the message would have been the least bit unclear.

      Of course they may simply ignore the warning, but there's nothing we can do about that.

      Or simply bury the plutonium a hundred meters deep into the bedrock and fill the tunnel with a mixture of concrete and granite sand, with occasional layers of solid steel for good measure; any civilization that can get to it should be able to detect the radioactivity long before actually encountering dangerous levels of it.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    60. Re:Simple solution by Mistshadow2k4 · · Score: 1

      Lol. On a more serious note, they should have pictures of humans with their throats cut and hearts torn out. As gruesome as that sounds, it would be horrific enough that even aliens or an intelligent furture species should be able to understand it.

      --
      I dream of a better world... one in which chickens can cross roads without their motives being questioned.
    61. Re:Simple solution by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 1
      Just write it in every major language. Several languages have survived thousands of years through today, which is how the Rosetta Stone worked.

      Which spins off another idea. The last decent Rosetta stone made in recent years was fired off into space aboard Pioneer 10.

      How would we go about deliberately making a disaster-proof Rosetta stone for future generations, one whose sole purpose was to provide many languges in one place -- a key to future archaeologists? Wouldn't this be a good thing? I suspect it would need more than just side-by-side script, it would need to be readable beyond the use-by date of most paper, parchment and electronics.

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
    62. Re:Simple solution by Mistshadow2k4 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not only are you wrong about Navaho (and it's no the only thriving Native Americna language, to the astonishing ignorance of other Americans), but i'ts very unwise to take for granted that a language that is "unpopular" or whatever now will be dead a millenium or longer in the future. I'm certain most people in the Middle East 3500 years ago were sure Hebrew would be a dead language long before now.

      --
      I dream of a better world... one in which chickens can cross roads without their motives being questioned.
    63. Re:Simple solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      sanskrit isnt real fucknut

    64. Re:Simple solution by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      I apologize for the comment about the native american language. If it's fairly common in the local area, include it. Blame the thought on my public school education.

      The only concern I'd have remaining is that the written form of it is very recent, according to this site

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    65. Re:Simple solution by Yartrebo · · Score: 1

      Pretty stupid assumption. Any country can fall any day, with absolutely no warning. The US in particular seems to be going down the path of Imperial Rome and Nazi Germany, and if that is the case, there is a good chance of a collapse in the coming decade or so.

    66. Re:Simple solution by zippthorne · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If it's releasing energy, then it still has energy to release. It's useful. In fact, it hasn't even given up anywhere near the majority of what it has to give. It's just that it's higher-hanging fruit, so right now it seems more economical to store the waste until the low-hanging fruit is exhausted (plain-ol regularly enriched uranium) and reprocess it later when either a) we've run out of the "easy" stuff or b) the cost (research AND marginal) turns it into low-hanging fruit again.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    67. Re:Simple solution by Fastolfe · · Score: 1

      I have a better idea. Decorate the doorway with grinning human skulls. To the best of my knowledge, there has never been any culture on Earth to which the message would have been the least bit unclear.

      You mean like in the catacombs of old Europe? They're quite a tourist attraction nowadays.

    68. Re:Simple solution by sjames · · Score: 1

      That's why the suggestion to make sure lesser amounts are encountered before the main storage. Enough to kill anyone who ignores the 'curse' but not enough to cause widespread harm. Once the first couple of expeditions die in such an unusual way (unusual if you don't know about radiation), the warnings will be taken seriously.

    69. Re:Simple solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hebrew was a dead language. Then, the Jews reincarnated it because it was the language of their religion.

      Navaho isn't the language of any major religion, and will die long before Japanese or German or Portuguese or Italian or Afrikaans will, to name a few which were not on the list. There are plenty of other languages which have larger speech communities as well.

      I'd hazard a guess that most Navaho-speakers also speak either English or Spanish.

    70. Re:Simple solution by emilper · · Score: 1

      wouldn't it be much easier and efficient to have well indexed archives documenting what is buried there and how long will it be dangerous? It's not like we expect the civilization to collapse ... in 50 years the radioactive waste dumps might be mined for ... radioactive material.

  2. granite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    granite contains uranium so is long-lived radioactive.
    important message would last as long as the medium holding it.

  3. Very Easy Solution. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Write it in English.

    If civilization ever devolves to the point where English is no longer recognized/understood, then guess what?

    The cavemen who have replaced us won't be our problem to deal with. We'll all be happily dead.

    Seriously, if such a warning is ever needed, to hell with Humanity 2.0. I can see it now:

    Ogg (sipping a skull full of blood): Me say, is nice of other human to warn us of glowy shiny.

    Eck (nodding his head before picking something out of his hair and eating it): Mmmm. Yes, is pity they stupid and bash selves.

    Ogg and Eck: Ahahahahaha!

    Well, screw you, future savages - may you all wilt and die from radiation poisoning.

    1. Re:Very Easy Solution. by Preeminence · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The idea is to preserve humanity at all costs. As far as we know, Earth is the only home for intelligent life - and, perhaps, life at all - in the universe. Is that true? Probably not. But we don't know. I believe the the prospect of a lifeless Earth and, thus, universe (if the waste somehow made it to the ocean, that is possible) is unnerving, and so these steps are taken. Additionally, we don't know if the people of the future will be "cavemen" or not. Suppose civilzation is forced to move underground? They could be just as civilized as, say, 18th century Europe (no ready access to electricity would result in some societal devolution), but still plenty intelligent in other areas like math or psychology. They just wouldn't have access to sophisticated enough tools to detect radiation. The heart of the project is that we don't know what life will be like in 10,000, but we're damn sure going to try to protect it.

    2. Re:Very Easy Solution. by oudzeeman · · Score: 5, Funny
      Thats right - in 10,000 years English will be unchanged!

      Hwæt! We Gardena in geardagum, eodcyninga, rym gefrunon hu ða æelingas ellen fremedon.

    3. Re:Very Easy Solution. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Beowulf?

    4. Re:Very Easy Solution. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Good for you, you can recite Beowulf.

      Oh - wait, you've proved my point. English may change, but the knowledge to decipher it isn't likely to disappear.

      Try to keep in mind that there's almost certainly never going to be another 'Dark Ages'. The world's population is a damned sight higher, and the idea that every last person who understands English is just going to disappear off the face of the planet is ludicrous, at best.

      We have no Library of Alexandria to burn to the ground - in the US alone, we have libraries in every moderately sized town. Not to mention countless brick and mortar stores. And college campuses. And elementary schools.

      And let's not forget the Internet(tm). While reading it on the Internet doesn't make it true, there's a hell of a lot of knowledge that's scattered across the world.

      So, where is Rome, that it might fall and plunge the world into the damnable darkness? Rome no longer exists, and that weakpoint of our civilization has been condemned with her.

    5. Re:Very Easy Solution. by BobNET · · Score: 5, Funny
      Hwæt! We Gardena in geardagum, eodcyninga, rym gefrunon hu ða æelingas ellen fremedon.

      Imagine a Beowulf cluster of these!

    6. Re:Very Easy Solution. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yet, that knowledge is being erased from the public mind. As more and more people believe that sticking their head in the sand will protect them, these books are being removed from the public, or worse, never published in the first place.

      And all because it would be absoutely horrible if a terrorist were able to get their hands on anything to do with radiation.

    7. Re:Very Easy Solution. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This wastes time and money that could be used to save the lives of real contemporary human beings. The number of people that would die from exposure to radioactive waste stored within ceramics in an artificially created cavern deep underneath of a mountain is going to be in the terms of tens of people. After they realize that people are dying, presuming of course that the concept of radiation escapes them for whatever reason, they'll stop going there after about a month because in less than two weeks everyone that goes there will be dead. You might as well put up signs at landfills warning future generations of natural gas deposits. Those will kill them too if they just randomly unearth one.

    8. Re:Very Easy Solution. by wafflemonger · · Score: 1

      How much of that change happened between 1000 and 1500? How much happened between 1500 and 2000? The difference? Wide spead literacy. Can a literate English speaker understand Shakespeare? The biggest change is in the standardazation of spelling. There are a few phrases and words that have changed meaning, or were culture specific to his time, but we do recongnize it as modern English. English in 2500 will be even more similar to contemporary English than Shakespeare is to us.
      Yes in 10000 years English will be very different, but not nearly as different as Proto-Anglo-Saxon is to us.

    9. Re:Very Easy Solution. by iced_773 · · Score: 1


      Perhaps you should examine the Star Trek:TNG episode "Thine Own Self". This shows how a civilization might handle radioactive material. The stuff may get passed around as different curious people try to analyze it, and everyone gets radiation poisoning.

    10. Re:Very Easy Solution. by Mikachu · · Score: 1

      Oh come on, that's ridiculous. Rome ruled much of the civilized world for years, and 2000 years later, the language is dead.

    11. Re:Very Easy Solution. by nrlightfoot · · Score: 1

      seriously, English is likely to change very little in the next 10,000 years. The reason languages changed so rapidly in the past was that not that they were learned orally, and there were very few written rules as to the usage of the language. In the last 200-300 years though, we've started to educate almost everybody about the proper usage of English and the rules are written down clearly and are easily accessible. If you go back and read something from 300 years ago, you will find that it is still quite readable, though they do tend to be a bit more verbose and like to use more complicated words than most of the writtings of today do. For example, and sentence from "AN ESSAY CONCERNING HUMANE UNDERSTANDING" by Locke: "This discontinued way of writing may have occasioned, besides others, two contrary faults, viz., that too little and too much may be said in it." I think that with widespread education of people in the rules of grammar there shouldn't be much more difference between today's english and english 10,000 years from now than there is between today's english and the english of about 500 years ago. Unless of course we stop widespread education in english grammar, in which case all bets are off.

      --
      what sig?
    12. Re:Very Easy Solution. by Jesapoo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Are you kidding me? A CITY? You do realise that we have enough nuclear weapons to wipe out every living thing on this planet, right? Destroying a civilisation nowadays doesn't require the destruction of a city by a marauding army. That's far too much effort...

      A Biological Weapon is accidentally released. In an attempt to protect the population, nuclear weapons are fired at supposed infection hot-spots. Anarchy errpupts as the deaths from this plague start killing all over the world, spread by the rapidity of travel as allowed by jumbo-jets. The Bio-agent and bombs kill all but 0.01% of the population of the planet and make 75% of the survivors sterile. Remaining Food crops are destroyed as nuclear winter sets in. Simply finding sufficient food is an almost impossible task.

      Do you really think keeping the internet running or teaching your kids to read is as important as finding food for them?

      It does not take a huge ammount of time for an abandoned house to start to crumble. It does not take long for the freshly unprotected contents of a crumbling house to be destroyed by the environment. It works the same with Library buildings and books.

      Language standardisation is largely due to modern communications. Assume the UK and Ireland, the USA and Canada, and Australia and New Zealand, are each cut off from one another - the three major English Speaking parts of the world. Without communications to keep the language similar, local dialogues will develop resulting in harsh accenting. With illiteracy ubiquitous, English turns into Engrish, Australish and Redneck. The written word is no longer recognised. Technology falls back to the dark ages.

      Not quite so ludicrous

    13. Re:Very Easy Solution. by Chosen+Reject · · Score: 1

      '/o0z 4r3 t3h 5uxxorzz. 3n9lihs w1l 4l\/\/4jz b3 t3h 54|\/|ezz!!!one! E|\|9l15h 9r4m|\/|3rrz FTW!!!1!!onehundredeleven!

      --
      Stop Global Warming!
      Just say no to irreversible processes!
    14. Re:Very Easy Solution. by ozmanjusri · · Score: 1
      The cavemen who have replaced us won't be our problem to deal with.

      Yeah, don't bother labelling it at all. Any descendants this era has will have to been radiation-hardened just to have survived Condoleezza Rice's presidency.

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    15. Re:Very Easy Solution. by conJunk · · Score: 1

      thanks! i haven't laughed out loud at that joke in a *long* time :)

    16. Re:Very Easy Solution. by wile_e_wonka · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What am I learning in law school then? And it's on our currency!

      I can tell any Roman "E pluribus unim" and "res ipsa loquitur." "Caveat emptor" "contra referendum"

      Yeah, I'm fluent. I just can't say anything useful.

    17. Re:Very Easy Solution. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All I get of that is...

      Lo! Praise the prowess of the people kings...

      My old english is a bit rusty.

    18. Re:Very Easy Solution. by iminplaya · · Score: 1
      --
      What?
    19. Re:Very Easy Solution. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I've got a much simpler way for society to collapse: run out of oil.

      Without oil we have mass starvation, inability to continue with modern medicine, transportation significantly reduced, and we have lost much of the pre-industrial cultural knowledge that would hold society together. Oh, we'll probably settle on a much more primitive level of society, but a dark ages is a-coming, eventually. Isa people gonna die? You bet.

    20. Re:Very Easy Solution. by Chowderbags · · Score: 1

      Don't even have to look in fiction, just read up on the Goiânia accident. People were impressed by it's pretty blue light and didn't question what it was. Several people died and many more received a significant dose of radiation from the material passed around, and that was just from some radioactive cesium chloride. I hope future generations of humans are smart enough that people will recognize that anything giving off a strange glow probably isn't safe, but humans being as they are, I would expect that people will be just as impressed by "pretty glowy metals"!

    21. Re:Very Easy Solution. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, I will rely on a piece of fiction to illuminate how an enormous cavern full of radioactive material "hotter" than a uranium mine stored in special ceramics will ravage the entire populous. This isn't like having a mildly radioactive hockey puck that slowly causes cancer. You're practically inviting people to move inside the closed reactor at Three Mile Island. The behavior you're describing more adequately describes how man has dealt with such materials as lead, asbestos, and mercury over thousands of years. Which you'll notice that while harmful, hasn't caused the end of civilization. If you want to see how people really behave with radiation, take a look at the initial craze for abuses of x-ray machines and the speed with which the population noticed it killed them and withered their limbs.

    22. Re:Very Easy Solution. by rcw-home · · Score: 1
      I would expect that people will be just as impressed by "pretty glowy metals"!

      The half-life on anything that glows is a heck of a lot less than 10000 years. The Cesium-137 involved in that accident has a half-life of 30 years and would therefore give off just .0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000006 % of the radiation it is giving off today in 10000 years.

    23. Re:Very Easy Solution. by Chowderbags · · Score: 1

      And people in future societies won't be able to either find or create radioactive isotopes of Cesium-137? I was pointing out that most people would see something glowing and think "oh, pretty", not nessicarily "oh, dangerous".

    24. Re:Very Easy Solution. by compro01 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      its not that English will no longer exist, its that it will change so significantly, that what we've written will no longer be recognised.

      compare old English (around year 1000) to modern English. a good deal of change. then multiply that change by a factor of about 15.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    25. Re:Very Easy Solution. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
      You do realise that we have enough nuclear weapons to wipe out every living thing on this planet, right?


      No we don't. There are plenty of organisms that live in areas which are effectively impossible to disrupt or contaminate with nuclear weapons, and which are resilient to nuclear winter. There are even some extremophiles which would enjoy a nuclear winter, and lots of the poor anaerobes all but wiped out by oxygen-producing plants and algae would be glad to see the end of viable chloroplasts.

      (Unfortunately there are sporulating species which might carry chloroplast germ lines through a nuclear winter... so the revenge of the plants -- much more successful at wiping out almost all other life forms on the planet in the Archaean eon than we could ever dream of being today -- could occur at some point in the distant future).

      Moreover, if the nanobes/nanobacteria actually turn out to be self-replicating living organisms, even boiling off the oceans and atmosphere likely wouldn't eliminate them all.

      Come back when you invent a weapon that can completely vaporize the planet. Anything short of that is a doomsday weapon only in the eyes (or analogs) of fragile surface dwelling creatures like us, and it's hubris to suggest otherwise.

    26. Re:Very Easy Solution. by ccmay · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I believe the the prospect of a lifeless Earth and, thus, universe (if the waste somehow made it to the ocean, that is possible) is unnerving, and so these steps are taken.

      If you think a few thousand tons of radioactive waste could kill all the life on Earth, when diluted in the waters of all the world's oceans, then you have left the realm of reason.

      -ccm

      --
      Too much Law; not enough Order.
    27. Re:Very Easy Solution. by ccmay · · Score: 1
      You do realise that we have enough nuclear weapons to wipe out every living thing on this planet, right?

      That's total horse pucky. Wrong by many orders of magnitude.

      -ccm

      --
      Too much Law; not enough Order.
    28. Re:Very Easy Solution. by ccmay · · Score: 1
      No we don't. There are plenty of organisms that live in areas which are effectively impossible to disrupt or contaminate with nuclear weapons, and which are resilient to nuclear winter.

      Never mind the anaerobes. The notion that all our bombs together could wipe out mammalian life, or even Mankind itself, is laughable enviro-hysteria. Of course millions or maybe billions would die, but billions more would survive. Nuclear winter? Pooh! Our ancestors survived the Ice Ages with animal skins and wooden spears. To think that modern man in his teeming billions wouldn't do likewise is to misunderstand the very nature of life.

      -ccm

      --
      Too much Law; not enough Order.
    29. Re:Very Easy Solution. by aussie_a · · Score: 1

      English from 1,000 years ago is translatable (I believe no current language has existed for 10,000 years). If they're not complete morons, they'll have the ability to translate current English.

    30. Re:Very Easy Solution. by Jesapoo · · Score: 1

      OK, I appologise for my hyperbole. I got caught up in nuke frenzy ;) I accept that, should nuclear strikes be called, then portions of the population in remote locations would bear little immediate brunt and the chance of a saturation pattern that would cover the maximum ammount of landmass possible would never be called for nor co-ordinated successfully.

      Of course, the P and GP posts refute the nukes-wipe-out-everything part of the story, but in my post I talked merely about *portions* of the world being nuked - they don't touch on the rather scary idea of a dangerous bio-weapon going wild.

      The basic point still stands - between bio-weapons and nukes and all sorts of other natural and un-natural things that could go wrong, we have the capacity to REALLY screw things up for ourselves, and if things go absolutely tits-up, I think our ancestors would probably have more important things to think about than remembering how to translate ancient greek

    31. Re:Very Easy Solution. by ichigo+2.0 · · Score: 1

      Hwæt! We Gardena in geardagum, eodcyninga, rym gefrunon hu ða æelingas ellen fremedon.

      Interesting Perl script.

    32. Re:Very Easy Solution. by FireFury03 · · Score: 1

      In the last 200-300 years though, we've started to educate almost everybody about the proper usage of English

      Clearly you haven't used IRC recently... :)
      (Or SMS for that matter... or listened to popular music...)

    33. Re:Very Easy Solution. by user24 · · Score: 1

      "most people would see something glowing and think "oh, pretty", not nessicarily "oh, dangerous"."

      of course. The only reason we think of glowing things as dangerous is because we didn't in th past and people died of radiation poisoning...

    34. Re:Very Easy Solution. by bhiestand · · Score: 1
      Oh come on, that's ridiculous. Rome ruled much of the civilized world for years, and 2000 years later, the language is dead.

      If by "civilized world" you mean the small portion of it we like to call PART of europe, northern africa (along the coast, not all that far inland), and a small piece of the middle east, then sure, they ruled the whole world! We're talking a landmass about 2/3 the size of the United States, with 1/5-1/2 the population (estimates vary).

      They collapsed for various reasons, and were surrounded by people who spoke different languages. It's not like the navajo, chinese, inca, and japanese spoke latin natively. We do have that situation now, though, where children throughout the world are learning english as their first language or simultaneously with their native language.

      So, let's compare... A billion english speakers scattered throughout the globe in every country with a few more in orbit compared to 50-120 million romans (of which many probably spoke survival-level latin, if any) concentrated within 500 miles of the coasts of the mediterranean and black seas, with the exception of britain (south of Hadrian's wall).

      The Romans could've been eliminated by a single meteorite and the majority of the planets' occupants wouldn't have noticed.

      At this point in time, english will likely live on forever, but it may undergo some radical changes and/or localization in the event of catastrophe.

      All of that being said, a language being "dead" doesn't mean nobody knows it anymore. A language being "dead" simply means that people no longer learn it as their native language, and it's stopped evolving. Many "dead" language are still in use and well-known because of their religious, literary, or legal functions.
      --
      SWM seeks new sig for a brief fling
    35. Re:Very Easy Solution. by riots · · Score: 1

      What extraordinary hubris. It may be news to you but we're not the first civilisation that has thought it would last forever, but we've only been going in the present form for maybe 500 years if you take the Rennaissance as a starting point. The ancient Egyptians did pretty well but even they only lasted for 3000, and remember things change a lot faster now then they did back then. In just 1000 years quite likely everyone will speak dialects of Chinese rather than English, let alone 9000 years after that.

    36. Re:Very Easy Solution. by Minwee · · Score: 2, Funny
      And if that doesn't work, write it in VERY... SLOW... AND... LOUD... ENGLISH.

      EVERYBODY can understand that.

    37. Re:Very Easy Solution. by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      A collection of common terms does not a language make, as you point out yourself. There are plenty of words and phrases in common english that are derived from French, German, Nordish, Celtic et al but in no way could I hold anything close to a conversation with anyone speaking those languages.

    38. Re:Very Easy Solution. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Any decent-sized hurricane releases more energy than all the nuclear weapons ever built.

    39. Re:Very Easy Solution. by cowscows · · Score: 1

      So why don't the future generations just update our radioactive warnings to keep pace with changes in the language. While english from 400 years ago is in some ways different, I can still understand the majority of it with very little specific education in that area. I don't think it's too much to ask someone to check in on a warning label every 100 years or so and make sure it still makes sense.

      --

      One time I threw a brick at a duck.

    40. Re:Very Easy Solution. by zakezuke · · Score: 1

      Try to keep in mind that there's almost certainly never going to be another 'Dark Ages'. The world's population is a damned sight higher, and the idea that every last person who understands English is just going to disappear off the face of the planet is ludicrous, at best.

      The problem is living 5000 years into the future my only reference to pre 25th century english is on a damn DRM disc and the small Redmond who made it company doesn't know how to unlock it anymore.

      Besides, it doesn't take a fall of a civilization for a language to become irrevicably altered. Look what happened to English when the French had control over England. With a strong enough cultural influence... let's say I don't know... living in an age where the furthest distance between any given person on planet earth is is a few hundrad milliseconds... it wouldn't be too far fetched in 1000 years for 21st century English to look like Beowulf.

      --
      There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
    41. Re:Very Easy Solution. by 4D6963 · · Score: 1
      in 10,000 years English will be unchanged!

      Write it in Latin then, in 10,000 years, Latin will be unchanged, since it's a dead language.

      --
      You just got troll'd!
    42. Re:Very Easy Solution. by 4D6963 · · Score: 1
      we've only been going in the present form for maybe 500 years if you take the Rennaissance as a starting point.

      Why on Earth would you want to take the rennaissance as a starting point? You're American maybe, that's why? I'm Europeean, so I'd rather take some point in antiquity.

      --
      You just got troll'd!
    43. Re:Very Easy Solution. by Xaositecte · · Score: 2, Informative

      We're at the point, Right now where drying up of even %50-60 of oil reserves worldwide would still be endurable.

      We in America would enter one hell of a recession, people would die from starvation or a lack of medical supplies, but civilization as a whole would endure.

    44. Re:Very Easy Solution. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      (I'm the GP.)

      they don't touch on the rather scary idea of a dangerous bio-weapon going wild
      ...because that is even sillier. Bio-weapons are even less likely to cause massive cross-species damage. At best, you have a very human-specific live pathogen that approaches 100% lethality (like Ebola Zaire) and figure out a delivery mechanism that allows it to spread efficiently or which approaches universally contagious but only fatal in the low double digits of percentages. Societies have survived outbreaks of both types, and animal populations with little recourse to modern medicine have managed to rebound.

      The most successful attack on a society would probably be of the second type, and based on pathogens which attack food supplies -- crops, mainly -- rather than humans. However, as your parent noted, this would not come close to making humans extinct, let alone all mammals or all life altogether. It wouldn't do much good for people in cities, though.

      Non-living bioweapons are simply not toxic enough in low concentrations -- living things would simply adapt to the toxins diffused into their environment as another selection pressure, and evolve around it. Sure, some species wouldn't be able to adapt, and would go extinct. However, non-living bioweapons are not scary as long-term threat because they cannot self-replicate, and are not long-term stable.

      we have the capacity to REALLY screw things up for ourselves


      Yes, that's probably true, in the sense of destroying modern city economies. Killing billions outright or through the collapse of the food system is feasible.

      I think our ancestors would probably have more important things to think about


      Our ancestors are, generally speaking, mostly dead.

      Remembering greek and latin is a chore for our descendants, yes? We don't seem to do it very well, except in academic circles.
    45. Re:Very Easy Solution. by jounihat · · Score: 1

      "Try to keep in mind that there's almost certainly never going to be another 'Dark Ages'."

      Famous last words.

    46. Re:Very Easy Solution. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is one! I even heard it was originally built by hand...on PAPER!

    47. Re:Very Easy Solution. by yndrd1984 · · Score: 1
      2000 years from now:

      [New language] won't become extinct the way English did. English was only spoken by a billion people who could barely make it to the moon. But now that humans have colonized the solar system, and a few are at Alpha Centauri, and have a trillion people speaking [new language]! How could it possibly go extinct?

      Seriously - Latin was the official language of a quarter of the population of the human race for several generations, and it died off without a meteor strike. Do you really think that English will be taught in China (etc.) if the US stops being a hyperpower? French was the international language for quite a while, and English supplanted it fairly quickly.

      English will probably influence the evolution of language for a long time, but to say that it will be here forever is pure hubris.

    48. Re:Very Easy Solution. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oooh that was good...

    49. Re:Very Easy Solution. by bhiestand · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I didn't mean to say it will be here forever. I'm just trying to say that it won't go completely dead any time in the near future even if the US is nearly wiped out.

      Of course it could happen, but I would bet my money on english surviving for quite a while.

      --
      SWM seeks new sig for a brief fling
    50. Re:Very Easy Solution. by Burning1 · · Score: 1

      I was going to ask about the possibility of a World War 3. Then I realized that if WW3 happened, burried nuclear waste would be the least of our worries.

    51. Re:Very Easy Solution. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cobalt 60 poisoning (and other fun metals that your body likes to absorb) would likely kill all human life on the planet within a decade, after a nuclear exchange of any significance. Lighting off ten-thousand 1 to 20 mega-tonne bombs over a period of four or five hours would probably do a pretty good job of cooking humanity as well. It would NOT take out infrastructure on any significant scale though (some bridges, a couple of major cities; many small towns wouldn't be affected though).

      It has been hypothisized, by deadly serious scientists, that one single bomb designed with the intent to irradiate certain metals (Cobalt amoungst them) could potentially kill all humans (and most other higher life) on the planet. It's called a 'salted bomb'. Personally I doubt that just ONE bomb would kill off all humanity; however, ten bombs placed in such a mannor as to ensure 'proper' coverage (taking into account wind patterns, etc) would probably do it.

      The wiki article completely misses the point, in that the longer half life, lower mol. weight metals would be 'desirable' (for a doomsday weapon) as plants will incorporate them into their growth, and then higher life will eat the plants (or the animal that ate the plant, etc). Cobalt 60 takes the place of nickel, if I recall correctly.

      A few micro-grams of radioactive cobalt, incorporated into the body itself, is more than enough to kill you within a few years.

      To believe, even for a moment, that even a single human would survive an all-out nuclear exchange, and its after-effects, is hubris beyond measure. To presume to laugh at the potential for desctruction shows an ignorance beyond description.

      The libraries, however, would survive. Many of them anyway. But really, who cares? I'm sure any aliens will have a geiger counter.

    52. Re:Very Easy Solution. by Jesapoo · · Score: 1

      whoops, indeed you are right about that dead-ness... please exuse the time-travelling in my post there :P

    53. Re:Very Easy Solution. by FluffyWithTeeth · · Score: 1

      Okay, you just made my day, that was fucking hilarious.

    54. Re:Very Easy Solution. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, if we wiped out every living human with nuclear weapons, we won't exactly have to worry about them getting into nuclear waste, now would we?

    55. Re:Very Easy Solution. by Zaatxe · · Score: 1

      We don't have to worry... in less than 50 years cell phones and watches will have Geiger counters in it...

      Like Doc Brown said in Back to the Future, "I'm sure in 1985 plutonium is available at every corner drugstore, but in 1955 it's a little hard to come by."

      --
      So say we all
    56. Re:Very Easy Solution. by JollyFinn · · Score: 1

      Accidents do happen and things are forgotten.

      --
      Emacs is good operating system, but it has one flaw: Its text editor could be better.
    57. Re:Very Easy Solution. by ultranova · · Score: 1

      I believe the the prospect of a lifeless Earth and, thus, universe (if the waste somehow made it to the ocean, that is possible) is unnerving, and so these steps are taken.

      Now you are being just silly. There is no way all life on this planet would just die if radioactive waste would get loose. Even we humans wouldn't die. This isn't about preserving life or the human race, this is about stopping a lot of people from dying miserable deaths.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    58. Re:Very Easy Solution. by Zangief · · Score: 1

      Do you realize that most nuclear weapons were pointed to major cities and strategical points?

      It is not like they had planned to nuke every square meter of the earth uniformally.

    59. Re:Very Easy Solution. by riots · · Score: 1

      I'm British. The reason I picked the Rennaissance is because that was when the relative chaos of the middle ages ended and our much of our current worldview began to be established. But if you prefer we could use the ancient Greeks as a starting point - that still only takes us back 2500 years which is nowhere near 10000.

    60. Re:Very Easy Solution. by Fire+Dragon · · Score: 1

      Try to keep in mind that there's almost certainly never going to be another 'Dark Ages'.

      And this is secured be teaching creatism in schools instead of those misleading Darwing teachings that insulted the true god.

      Certainly we won't be burning people as witches and burning their books, we are civilizied enough to know who are unpatriotic and we deal with them.

    61. Re:Very Easy Solution. by Chowderbags · · Score: 1

      Or because things that are a very eerie shade of any color in nature should generally be avoided. For example, poison dart frogs.

    62. Re:Very Easy Solution. by 4D6963 · · Score: 1
      that still only takes us back 2500 years which is nowhere near 10000

      That's right, but if you rather take for example the Chinese civilisation, that's more like 6,000 years, which is getting closer to 10,000 years ;-). But you're right, our situation is less stable now, and for example since we are living the 6th mass instinction that we provoked by ourselves, we might instinct ourselves as well.

      --
      You just got troll'd!
    63. Re:Very Easy Solution. by riots · · Score: 1

      Well then there won't be a problem I guess! Unless we're worried about the visiting extra-terrestrials coming to look at the mess we made...

    64. Re:Very Easy Solution. by user24 · · Score: 1

      but again, that's only learned through experience; we don't have any kind of natural fear of bright/gaudy colours, as far as I'm aware.

    65. Re:Very Easy Solution. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're pretending to know more than you do, so don't go accusing others of ignorance beyond description.

      You exaggerate the sustained killing power of salted bombs - as in, by orders of magnitude.

      It would be in theory possible to make enough salted bombs to kill off all of humanity (not immediately, but by killing off enough of the ecosystems around the globe that higher life would be unsustainable). Barring some sort of self-sustaining community (which gets more and more possible as time goes by). But nobody with the resources to do that *without being detected and stopped* would *want* to do that.

      In summary: possible in theory, but exceedingly unlikely.

    66. Re:Very Easy Solution. by mgabrys_sf · · Score: 1

      TDP mothafuckas: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_depolymerizat ion

      The only reason the price per barrel is high now is because the waste fodder to fuel it was jacked up by the providers. A few nice govt mandates would fix that - for instance - start running a clean hog / cattle / chicken plant and stop fouling the water, or get taxed to the max.

      Oil from the ground is going away yes - and about time the tankers stopped sailing too.

    67. Re:Very Easy Solution. by Chowderbags · · Score: 1

      The bright coloration evolved as a way to warn possible preditors, so obviously there can be instinctual responses to certain colorations.

  4. Just post it on the internet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Then future generations can look it up on the wayback machine.

    1. Re:Just post it on the internet by Bomarc · · Score: 1

      Google management: Well, we had to drop something...

    2. Re:Just post it on the internet by Yehooti · · Score: 1

      Guess the problem here is the volatility of our current archival methods. The 'best' methods we have today of storing significant amounts of data will be unrecoverable after thousands of years. Chiseling basic information into stones may survive.

    3. Re:Just post it on the internet by PhrostyMcByte · · Score: 1

      Zip it up and put it on kazaa as "Olsen Twins Nude.zip" - that'll keep it in circulation for a while, I bet.

    4. Re:Just post it on the internet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In future generations, the internet will come prepackaged into the bios rom of every motherboard you buy, and no one will ever bother to look through it all to see what we thought on matters, but it will be there should anyone ever want to search through myspace entries from the 20th century or read game reviews about games that nobodies played in 2000 years (of course, all games will also come packaged into new computers alongside the internet).

  5. translation error by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Universal Translator error code #7

    The language you requested is available only to registered members.

  6. Why bother? by solafide · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    By the time English is no longer understood or the signs are no longer understood, if civilization exists, they will figure it out on their own pretty quickly, while if civilization doesn't, who cares?

  7. Well, what's the problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Why not make a hard-to-break-into storage fascility (secure as in 60-foot concrete walls & 3-foot glass-encased steel plating for the containers)?

    Then if 10,000 years from now the civilization is dead, and the surviving humans are at the level of chimps, they will not be able to get into a secure bunker.

    If the future humans HAVE the technology to break in, we can surely assume they would have Geiger counters, etc., and know better than play in the radioactive waste

    1. Re:Well, what's the problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      60-foot concrete walls and glass encased steel plating can be broken into with stone age tools -- all it would require is the will of the tool wielders to do so.

    2. Re:Well, what's the problem? by thePig · · Score: 1

      time can destroy anything.
      if mountains can be created or destroyed, if rivers can change directions or disappear altogether, if seas can come up and engulf evverything, what chance does a 60ft wall of concrete have?

      --
      rajmohan_h@yahoo.com
    3. Re:Well, what's the problem? by Stalinbulldog · · Score: 1

      Even a mountain cannot stand the test of time, things open and shift, in fact assuming the counters are anywhere near the waste in 10k years is pretty absured, just shove it over on haileys comet ;}

  8. Solution + another Question by David_Shultz · · Score: 2, Interesting

    In response to the problem of symbols losing their meaning: haven't any of these people read "Contact"? Use prime numbers -it doesn't matter what language you speak, prime numbers are the same to everyone!

    In response to the problem itself (how to warn future generations about a dangerous radioactive stockpile underground) why are we so concerned about future generations 100,000 years from now, and not even concerned with our own well-being? Get on the global warming problem and curbing nuke proliferation before worrying about what happens a thousand years from now when mole men try to dig into our plutonium piles.

    1. Re:Solution + another Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In response to the problem of symbols losing their meaning: haven't any of these people read "Contact"? Use prime numbers -it doesn't matter what language you speak, prime numbers are the same to everyone!

      Are you kidding? I can't tell.

      If I give you the sequence 43, 7, 23, 119, what does that mean? A short story? A warning? A name? Prime numbers aren't a language, they have no inherent semantics.

    2. Re:Solution + another Question by rgmoore · · Score: 1
      In response to the problem of symbols losing their meaning: haven't any of these people read "Contact"? Use prime numbers -it doesn't matter what language you speak, prime numbers are the same to everyone!

      That's great if the only message you want to send is "this is a deliberate message, not a random chance". The big pillars with pictures and writing on them will be just as effective in that role. If you can come up with an effective, universal way of saying "Danger! Do not enter!" using nothing but prime numbers, I'm sure that the government would be happy to pay you good money for it.

      --

      There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.

    3. Re:Solution + another Question by Dankling · · Score: 1

      Im not going to attack your idea, but moreso your message. you dont want us to focus on the ploutonium problem, which would surely affect the future of mankind. but you do want us to focus on the global warming problem, which affects the future of mankind but not presently. im a little confused if whether u want us to fix problems of the now or problems 100, 1000, or 100000 years from now

      --
      Slash-for-Thought
    4. Re:Solution + another Question by ccmay · · Score: 2, Interesting
      If you can come up with an effective, universal way of saying "Danger! Do not enter!" using nothing but prime numbers, I'm sure that the government would be happy to pay you good money for it.

      That's barely more than trivial. Any integer can be represented as a sum of prime numbers. Actually, never mind the prime numbers. Choose integers which represent the electron shell configuration of the dangerous elements hidden within. Chisel groups of deep dots corresponding in number to those integers, on big slabs of granite, over the top of the shaft. Even better, put the atomic weight(s) last so that they know what isotopes they are dealing with.

      For uranium:

      2 - 8 - 8 - 18 - 18 - 32 - 6 - 235 - 238

      -ccm

      --
      Too much Law; not enough Order.
    5. Re:Solution + another Question by LupusCanis · · Score: 1

      Because naturally, in the event of a cataclysmic event destroying civilisation as we know it, the Mendelevian table will be more popular than ever! And of course, the fact that not everyone knows the periodic table, not everyone who knows it knows uranium's atomic number and pretty much everyone who does wouldn't really think to add up prime numbers and then cross-check it against a periodic table ... is all pretty trivial really.

  9. Tourist signs by dotslashdot · · Score: 5, Funny

    Today's warning sign is tomorrow's tourist attraction. If anything, the warning signs will attract tourists, exposing them to more radiation. "Hey lookie here FuturoBillyBob, these ancient symbols must lead to treasure, because no ancient symbol would ever be a warning, right?" This will inevitably lead to naturally selecting out curious tourists who will die out from radiation poisoning and not pass on the curious gene. The "Where's Waldo" series will plummet in sales, causing its publisher to go out of business, reducing the sales of red and white horizontally striped sweaters, thick glasses, blue pants and brown shoes as well as stocking hats, unleashing an economic chain reaction leading to a global economic collapse that will start nuclear war, resulting in the annihilation of mankind. So don't mess this up, LA!

    1. Re:Tourist signs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Simple solution to that. Build it at a cyclopean scale, in a way that totally defies euclidean geometry. Make it out of big blocks of obsidian, with lots of spiky bits pointing outwards. In other words make it look really, really evil and disturbing and people won't want to go near it.

      Except for heavy metal bands filming music videos. The easy way to solve that is to carve hello kitty as all over it.

      10,000 years from now, people will think that its the tomb of the ancient evil that is Hello Kitty, and will do their best to keep from disturbing it.

    2. Re:Tourist signs by 4D6963 · · Score: 1
      Today's warning sign is tomorrow's tourist attraction.

      Reminds me slightly of something that stroke me when I saw it in a documentary on TV. It was an arab tomb, with written on it the wishes of the buried guy, a few thousand years ago (idk precisely, but I'm pretty sure it was way over 2,000 years ago), and in this text the buried guy was asking nicely not to ever be moved away, or such. I'm pretty sure this saved the guy from ending up in a museum or something.

      Today's warning sign will be tomorrow's archeologist's attraction, and if they can figure out the warning they'll pay attention, although I'm sure it won't prevent them from examining in a safe manner what they've been warned against.

      --
      You just got troll'd!
  10. Well, to crib an idea from Larry Niven ... by ScrewMaster · · Score: 5, Funny

    just make a huge pile of glowing, long-lived nuclear waste, and surround it with a high stone fence. Put signs on that barrier in every language known to Mankind that say "if you cross this fence you will die". Undoubtedly, some people will cross that fence. Niven called this effect "Evolution in action" and that's certainly the case. However, after a few years, the growing pile of radioactive skeletons would serve as a graphic example to future generations about the dangers of radioactive waste, while simultaneously cleaning the gene pool.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    1. Re:Well, to crib an idea from Larry Niven ... by gumbi+west · · Score: 1
      and when it rains?

      By which I mean that (and this may shock you) the ground is not water proof.

    2. Re:Well, to crib an idea from Larry Niven ... by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      {sigh} it was a joke, son. See The Roentgen Standard.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    3. Re:Well, to crib an idea from Larry Niven ... by geobeck · · Score: 1
      ...the growing pile of radioactive skeletons would serve as a graphic example to future generations about the dangers of radioactive waste, while simultaneously cleaning the gene pool.

      ...making the builder of the edifice the "gene pool boy". Which would be a bad epitaph to carve on the structure because future generations would keep breaking in looking for all the pr0n starring "Gene the pool boy."

      --
      Find environmentally and socially responsible products on http://buy-right.net
    4. Re:Well, to crib an idea from Larry Niven ... by Forbman · · Score: 1

      No, better would be to create a bit of a mythology about the place, including perhaps an occaisional sacrifice of a lucky virgin by the Silver Priests, perhaps by locking the victim into a room with an open portal to the radiation, where we can collectively watch them succumb to acute radiation sickness. Or use it for capital punishment, whatever (hopefully the RIAA/MPAA/Business Software Alliance will be fed to it first).

      This will also require some sort of thought-police enforcers to keep people from wondering about it, elimination of historical information about the place (except that which supports the belief system around it), etc.

      Look, native Hawaiians *still* respect Pele...

    5. Re:Well, to crib an idea from Larry Niven ... by Old+Man+Kensey · · Score: 1
      Forbman wrote:

      Look, native Hawaiians *still* respect Pele...

      Pele's not a static pile of stuff. Occasionally she comes knocking at your door.

      --
      -- Old Man Kensey
    6. Re:Well, to crib an idea from Larry Niven ... by optimusNauta · · Score: 1

      You know. That isn't such a bad idea. Why not surround the site with a load of skeletons. That would keep people away. What do they do with the skeletons of those folks who donate their bodies to science anyway? It's perfect.

  11. Tell noone by ColaMan · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Leave it unmarked and buried deep in an area that has no mineral deposits or anything worth mining. No-one will know, so no-one will want to go snooping for treasure. To get to it, you'll have to know that something's there in the first place. To dig that far you'll need tech. If you've got the tech to drop a shaft down 1000ft, well, you'll have all the gear necessary (and normally, on-hand)to detect radioactivity.

    --

    You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
    There is a lot of hype here.
    1. Re:Tell noone by x1n933k · · Score: 1
      I would disagree...

      The earth does its own thing. Changes it face etc etc...Before you know it you've got a giant lead box poking out of a mountain. Or better yet, how to you both protect the surrounding area without drawing attention to it, leave it in the ground to leak everywhere way down the road.

      I like how slashdot-er think! *mutter*

      [J]

    2. Re:Tell noone by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      Ever hear of prospecting? If we ever collapse, records lost, languages changed, etc... On the way back up they'll be looking everywhere for resources, just like us. In doing that, they're likely to eventually survey the region. They'll detect unusual formations if they're at all advanced beyond the 'dig a shaft and hope' stage.

      You can only hope that, like you said, if they're advanced enough to dig down a thousand feet, they're also advanced enough to know about radioactivity(and pay it mind). For that matter, if they're digging 1kf shafts, there's plenty of places that they can encounter natural radiation that's nearly as dangerous, radon for one big example.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    3. Re:Tell noone by ColaMan · · Score: 1

      I work underground in a workshop repairing mining gear. At the level of this workshop (600m) the rock strata is approximately 60-70 million years old. It's not going anywhere in the human timescale. In geological timescales, it's actually going very slowly down.

      Bury it deep somewhere geologically stable in the centre of a large continent and erase all surface features. Again, anyone smart enough to find it then (eg, by subsurface mapping) is smart enough to deal with it. If not, well geez, we tried our best.

      --

      You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
      There is a lot of hype here.
    4. Re:Tell noone by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      there's plenty of places that they can encounter natural radiation that's nearly as dangerous, radon for one big example.

      Yes. Or coal.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  12. The monumental task of warning future generations by mxpengin · · Score: 4, Informative

    An article about the same topic here . Its foccused on the repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada.

    --
    "We all know Linux is great...it does infinite loops in 5 seconds." -- Linus
  13. Plutoium Pack by TrevorB · · Score: 1

    The curse of plutonium packs a painful penalty.

    And probably makes more sense millenia to come than the English phrase:

    "Do not install this software, 'Duke Nuke 'em Forever', under any circumstances!"

  14. This isn't an Ask Slashdot! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...but I'm sure they'll consider your suggestion for a beowulf cluster of self replicating NetBSD nanobots.

  15. there should be additional deterrants by artifex2004 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There need to be additional deterrants, in case whoever finds the site later is too stupid, too greedy, or too malevolent to keep away from the site.

    This may sound cruel, but I really think some attractively shiny sealed containers with neurotoxins or simple, stable, chemical poisons should be added in another layer under the surface. Perhaps they already plan to do this, and just don't want to make the information public. But would you rather a few people die on the surface, reinforcing the idea that the site is full of death, or let those people dig down and extract some of that waste, before expiring and leaving it out in the open on the surface, later? That would surely end up having a more catastrophic effect on local life.

    1. Re:there should be additional deterrants by natrius · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This may sound cruel, but I really think some attractively shiny sealed containers with neurotoxins or simple, stable, chemical poisons should be added in another layer under the surface.

      "The people who built this put so much effort into deterring people from entering it. There must be something valuable inside."

    2. Re:there should be additional deterrants by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      Not really. From what I'm getting, you'd only have a few hundred deaths, worst case, if they dig up the stufff and make jewelry out of it a few thousand years from now.

      Knowing ancient Victorian customs, they'd be killing themselves one way or another. Mercury Enemas aren't too healthy either.

      I use Victorian because I don't remember any other societies that were capable of reacing the waste, and stupid/ignorant enough to play with it.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    3. Re:there should be additional deterrants by Forbman · · Score: 1

      Well, one needs to somehow create a mythology about the place, or develop something that will eventually turn into a mythology about it. If the content of the core texts of Judaism/Christianity existed for a couple thousand years at least as oral stories until they were finally written down, well...

      I'm thinking that although modern communications equipment allows us to communicate not only near-instantaneously, but also collossal amounts of data, that our collective consciousness of information over time has also shrunk. We can't even remember the lessons or signs of quagmire wars from 30-40 years ago (neohawks who think that their new smart ways of waging war are enough to conquer a bunch of knuckle-dragging idiots...Robert McNamarra was Kennedy's Rumsfeld), and forgetting or dismissing the things that led to success just 15 years ago in the same area...

    4. Re:there should be additional deterrants by m94mni · · Score: 1

      Why not build a complete maze full of traps?

      That would be something for future Indiana Jones to conquer.

  16. Defend against the Psychlos! by Lazbien · · Score: 1

    But if we don't leave warnings and such, how will humanity be held in suspense when the Psychlos decide to let a few rag-tag slaves lead by Johnny Goodboy run free for a few days? And really, you folks in the DoD, make sure that you leave the flight simulators for the F-16s plugged in kplzthx.

  17. Stupid by Quaoar · · Score: 1

    Does anyone else think it's stupid to bury a huge super-structure around this site? I mean, if I were from the future, that would make me want to explore the place MORE. I think just keeping it as small and as simple as possible is the best solution.

    --
    I'll form my OWN solar system! With blackjack! And hookers!
  18. What warning is needed? by NotQuiteReal · · Score: 4, Funny

    If civilization has deteriorated to the point that the future critters no longer have the technology to detect the danger, maybe a good old fashioned dose of mutation will kick-start them back on the path!

    --
    This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
    1. Re:What warning is needed? by MindStalker · · Score: 1

      If civilization has deteriorated to the point that the future critters no longer have the technology to detect the danger
      Thats why I'm not worried about this. This stuff is going to be buried VERY deep, so in effect any civilization advanced enough to dig it up should be advanced enough to know whats in it, especially if you put basic atomic symbols and math on it.

    2. Re:What warning is needed? by Gax · · Score: 1

      If civilization has deteriorated to the point that the future critters no longer have the technology to detect the danger, maybe a good old fashioned dose of mutation will kick-start them back on the path!

      Good idea. Three heads are better than one!

  19. Well, a bit late. by radiotyler · · Score: 1

    The third arm that they sprout will serve as a good warning. A bit after the fact though.

    --
    hi mom!
  20. A cantilcle for leibowitz by goombah99 · · Score: 2, Informative

    If you never read A canticle for Leibowitz, well you need to, it's part of any liberal education. In any case what is the most enduring instituion bar none. Religion. Start a religious order that protects the sites.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:A cantilcle for leibowitz by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      In any case what is the most enduring instituion bar none. Religion. Start a religious order that protects the sites.

      The problem is that in 3,000 years the people will start trying to re-intepret the original religious texts and give them meanings that didn't exist before and will suddenly believe that the heaping pile of radioactive goo was actually gift from their creator to which they are to spread to all mankind. Then we're screwed.

    2. Re:A cantilcle for leibowitz by lastchance_000 · · Score: 1

      You mean, THEY'RE screwed. In which case, screw 'em!

    3. Re:A cantilcle for leibowitz by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is that in 3,000 years the people will start trying to re-intepret the original religious texts and give them meanings that didn't exist before...

      "Senkon, Senkon, deuhu rhea."

      That was the sentance the humans on one planet were gathering around the altar to say, once a week, for as long as they had been alive. Long story short, they were the survivors of a Intestellar ship that crashed on that planet :mumble: years ago, and were just following as best they could after the original survivors, who woudl gather around the communications console and call mayday: "Cen[tral] Con[trol]. do you read?"

      That's taken from a short sci-fi story (from an Asimov's or Analog magazine). It's true that the original meaning of things can get lost, quite easily.

    4. Re:A cantilcle for leibowitz by iamlucky13 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's not quite the story. It wasn't an order that survived but the church. In Canticle for Leibowitz the Catholic church survived a nuclear holocaust and an ensuing uprising against all technology. While some clung to hope, most started destroying any technology they found in a desperate effort to prevent the same thing from ever happening again. Humanity would've been completely back in the stone age but for a Catholic engineer dedicating his life to preserving it. It's pretty much all lost anyway, and the book follows the course of humanity trying to re-achieve the modern world based on what he was able to rescue, long after he and everyone else who understood it was dead. It often presents situations that suppose how a person not familiar with a technology might react. For example, when some monks who had studied Leibowitz's documents figured out how to make a light bulb, one of their brothers was scandalized that they were messing with devilish powers, while others recognized that there was some impressive knowledge that had long been lost.

      It's not a decidedly Catholic book, although the author was a member of the church and some issues like euthanasia and seperation of church and state enter into the story line. The Catholic chuch has maintained Apostolic succession for 2,000 years and is basically independent of political boundaries, so if any entity seems capable of enduring a nuclear war, the Catholic church is it, and it is a fitting structure for the plot to make use of.

      The church did not exist in the book for the purpose of preserving the works. The church was there, as it was before the war, to try to understand and bring humanity closer to God. One order of the church was founded on the idea that preserving the technology of the past could aid in that, just like Mother Theresa's Sister's of Charity was founded for providing care to the poor.

      A big tunnel filled with stuff that makes people sick hardly seems like something that could effectively inspire a religious devotion. At the very least, it would make a poor premise for a religion and an rather uninspiring reason to maintain an order. I think merely attempting to maintain the message that the stuff in the tunnel should be left alone (with further details for any potentially advanced civillization) is going to be the safest way to handle this.

      Away from the fictional side of things, while I think some measures should be taken to make it clear that the waste is a hazard, I doubt it will be a problem. First of all, I don't believe a massive collapse of civillization and loss of scientific knowledge will happen. We're unaware of anything like that happening in our past (discounting myths like Atlantis). Secondly, this isn't going to be easily accessible. The Yucca Mountain proposal places the waste something like 1000 feet down. It's also all in a very hard and chemically stable ceramic form, encased in concrete and steel. It will be hard for anybody dumb to get to and get out of the tunnel. Finally, it would not be the first time mankind has discovered harmful things. Bubonic plague comes to mind as one thing we handled in our history.

    5. Re:A cantilcle for leibowitz by bogjobber · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Very good post, I just have a couple of things to add.

      First of all, I don't believe a massive collapse of civillization and loss of scientific knowledge will happen. We're unaware of anything like that happening in our past (discounting myths like Atlantis).

      When the western part of the Roman Empire collapsed, it definitely could be considered a massive collapse of civilization and loss of knowledge. It took Europeans over a thousand years to recover even a portion of what was lost. Obviously this wasn't something that was on the scale of what you're talking about, but with our advanced technology it is possible.

      Secondly, this isn't going to be easily accessible. The Yucca Mountain proposal places the waste something like 1000 feet down. It's also all in a very hard and chemically stable ceramic form, encased in concrete and steel.

      This is kind of a tangent, but this is one thing people sometimes have a hard time thinking about. Sure, we can ensure that Yucca Mountain is stable for the present, but we really have a hard time thinking on a geological time scale. Yucca Mountain is a freaking volcano! It is in a (relatively) geologically unstable area. Ten thousand years ago, it was under a huge lake. How can we ensure that people thousands of years in the future know where our radioactive dumps are? What happens if hundreds or thousands of years down the line, the volcano becomes active again and spews radioactive material into the atmosphere? Or what if the region becomes less arid, and the radioactive material is leaked into the water table. That is why I have a problem with designating some place as a radioactive dump and pretty much throwing all the shit we can in there (especially since I used to live near there).

    6. Re:A cantilcle for leibowitz by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      A big tunnel filled with stuff that makes people sick hardly seems like something that could effectively inspire a religious devotion.

      "Cast the heretic in the Pit of Despair! Watch the gods sicken him!"

      Of course, this has to happen soon while the most radioactive stuff is still toxic. The dirty lab coats won't be particularly dangerous. And if we're mostly burying the fuel which was only been used once then there will just be some shiny jewelry which might kill in 30 years (which won't matter if people only live 30 years as they recently did).

    7. Re:A cantilcle for leibowitz by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll
      Start a religious order that protects the sites.
      We already have one - radical environmentalism. They created "superfund sites" to ensure that cleanup standards are so strict that each one becomes a financial and logistical quagmire, diverting resources from other, more useful areas. I'm sure they're adaptable to this need.

      Posted anonymously due to members of said religious order who are rich in mod points but poor in their sense of humor.
    8. Re:A cantilcle for leibowitz by CRCulver · · Score: 2, Insightful

      When the western part of the Roman Empire collapsed, it definitely could be considered a massive collapse of civilization and loss of knowledge. It took Europeans over a thousand years to recover even a portion of what was lost.

      Quite wrong. Modern historians have been striving for half a century now to correct the urban myth of a "Dark Ages". Not much changed at all after the fall of the Western Roman Empire.

    9. Re:A cantilcle for leibowitz by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Humanity would've been completely back in the stone age but for a Catholic engineer dedicating his life to preserving it."
      It is VERY strongly implied in the book that Leibowitz was jewish, not catholic. Not that that invalidates anything else you said...

    10. Re:A cantilcle for leibowitz by rohan972 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The problem is that in 3,000 years the people will start trying to re-intepret the original religious texts and give them meanings that didn't exist before...

      You accidentaly added three zeros to that number. And you spelt days wrong.

    11. Re:A cantilcle for leibowitz by Wonko+the+Sane · · Score: 1

      What happens if hundreds or thousands of years down the line, the volcano becomes active again and spews radioactive material into the atmosphere?

      Every time a volcano erupts it releases radioactive material into the air. What do you think keeps all that magma hot?

    12. Re:A cantilcle for leibowitz by ElephanTS · · Score: 1

      It's been 20 years since I read it but didn't they end up using the bomb in the end - 2000 years after 'our' time used it?

      --
      spoonerize "magic trackpad"
    13. Re:A cantilcle for leibowitz by iamlucky13 · · Score: 1
      It is VERY strongly implied in the book that Leibowitz was jewish, not catholic. Not that that invalidates anything else you said...
      My bad...the AC is right. It's been a couple years since I read, so I might have lapsed on a few of the details. It's stlil a great read.
    14. Re:A cantilcle for leibowitz by TemporalBeing · · Score: 1
      When the western part of the Roman Empire collapsed, it definitely could be considered a massive collapse of civilization and loss of knowledge. It took Europeans over a thousand years to recover even a portion of what was lost.

      Quite wrong. Modern historians have been striving for half a century now to correct the urban myth of a "Dark Ages". Not much changed at all after the fall of the Western Roman Empire.
      However, there is still a good deal of lost technology from the "Middle East"/Roman Empire area - namely how much of the monuments were built. We still can't figure it out, though there have been a good number of attempts in recent years. Granted, that's still not on the scale the original parent (gp? ggp?) was referring, but it has happened.
      --
      Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
    15. Re:A cantilcle for leibowitz by starseeker · · Score: 1

      First of all, I don't believe a massive collapse of civillization and loss of scientific knowledge will happen. We're unaware of anything like that happening in our past (discounting myths like Atlantis).

      I would argue the Middle Ages were exactly that, just on a smaller scale. (e.g. the "Dark Ages.") We lucked out that some things got preserved in India and Asia, but if it had been up to just Europe it wouldn't have been at all pretty.

      --
      "I object to doing things that computers can do." -- Olin Shivers, lispers.org
    16. Re:A cantilcle for leibowitz by galdosdi · · Score: 1

      "First of all, I don't believe a massive collapse of civillization and loss of scientific knowledge will happen. We're unaware of anything like that happening in our past" Of course, that may be because this is the first time we've had a rise of civilisation and gain of scientific knowledge, in the first place (as far as we know). This is only the first chance we've had.

    17. Re:A cantilcle for leibowitz by LupusCanis · · Score: 1

      That's a rather broad definition of a religious order you have there. You do know that fanaticism can exist with something that's NOT a religion, don't you?

  21. If we created it... by m85476585 · · Score: 1

    Why can't we destroy it? We enriched the fuel from natural sources that weren't harming anyone, so how hard could it be to get it back to the way we found it?

    1. Re:If we created it... by soupdevil · · Score: 1

      Why isn't there a "dumb beyond belief" rating on slashdot?

    2. Re:If we created it... by ajwitte · · Score: 2, Informative

      how hard could it be to get it back to the way we found it?

      Not especially hard.

      But it would require further research and the building of new reactors. Unfortunately the public seem to be scared of all things "nuclear" so politically, it wouldn't go over well. It is my suspicion (I'd like to see a survey to support or refute this) that the general public, in the US anyway, would rather just bury the existing waste and forget about nuclear power altogether because they see it as something dangerous and scary.

      --
      chown -R us ~you/base
    3. Re:If we created it... by Silver+Gryphon · · Score: 1

      Because then nobody would have good karma.

      What goes around comes a-whoa! look at my hand!-round...

    4. Re:If we created it... by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Well, that's only because they don't see that there's any benefit to atomic power, and as you say are operating based upon emotion rather than any real grasp of the risk vs. benefit ratio. That will change however, when the electric bills start to inch up to the point where gasoline seems positively cheap, when every State in the Union is instituting rolling blackouts to conserve fossil fuels, when refrigerating our food becomes impractical because electricity is too unreliable ... we may (I say, may) come to our senses regarding nuclear. Trust me, when the lights start going out people will accept any solution to keep them on for a while longer (people get pragmatic fast when the shit hits the fan for real.)

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  22. Plutonium is fuel, not waste by Zobeid · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The problem with our current reactors is that they only "burn" a small fraction of their nuclear fuel and leave the rest as waste. With reprocessing and more advanced reactor designs, it's possible to extract far more energy and leave behind waste that's not dangerous for anywhere near as long.

    The highly radioactive stuff we're struggling to "entomb forever" at Yucca Mountain is probably the same stuff we'll be scrambling to dig up and use as fuel 50 years from now.

    1. Re:Plutonium is fuel, not waste by linuxguy1454 · · Score: 2

      Your last comment is very close to the likely truth. 95% of nuclear "waste" can be processed into useful power plant fuel. But the whole nuclear field has been attacked for so long by the greenies, the politicians are afraid to be associated with anything so sensible.

    2. Re:Plutonium is fuel, not waste by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      That may be true for fuel, but the big problem with radioactive waste are other things that have been activated/contaminated, such as in a clean-up process. Fuel rods you may be able to reprocess, but what do you do with, say, a mop used to clean up a spill of water from the reactor pool? Or the container that held the water/reactor/etc. to begin with, for that matter?

    3. Re:Plutonium is fuel, not waste by ductonius · · Score: 1

      That stuff is only counted as waste since it could possibly, in a one in a hundred million shot be contaminated with a miniscule ammount of something slighly dangerous.

      It's like at hospitals where they do PET scans they have to make radioactive flourine. The glove they handle the stuff with are counted as radioactive waste, but what do they do with them? They incierate then (in a closed container) and put the ash in the municipal dump because they're really not that dangerous.

      The nuclear industry is facidious about keeping radioactive things away from people. The internal radiation detectors they use can be set off by a rain-soaked umbrella, since rain absorbs ambient radon gas as it falls.

      The mop heads and rubber gloves you talk about are only waste as a precaution. It's this attention to detail that has allowed the nuclear industry in the West to run for fifty years with only a single major incident (which only served to prove that the fail-safe design actually worked).

    4. Re:Plutonium is fuel, not waste by dbIII · · Score: 1
      With reprocessing and more advanced reactor designs, it's possible to extract far more energy and leave behind waste that's not dangerous for anywhere near as long.
      It depends on the objective - if it's to reprocess Superphoenix showed us it can be done (at very high financial cost) but the existing facilities have been built to produce electricity or weapons grade materials (or a compromise between both, in the case of the 1950's style white elephants that make up most of the US and UK nuclear power facilities).

      As for the more advanced reactor designs - the same factors that make pebble bed a safer system make it a disappointment if you want to generate electricity (small unit size so you don't get an economy of scale), but accelerated thorium reactors may be the cheaper things that can also work with radioactive waste mixed into the fuel. Someone who knows more can elaborate.

    5. Re:Plutonium is fuel, not waste by zerus · · Score: 1

      You're referring to low level waste. Water around a spent fuel pool is monitored and deionized constantly to keep it clean of contaminants that might get irradiated and create a health hazard, so there isn't a lot of associated activity with it, which is why it is called low level waste. Low level waste is sent to a processing/storage facility where it sits until the activity monitors drop to EPA's (or equivalent's) allowable levels, time scale less than 5 years usually. After that the stuff can be thrown in the garbage or recycled. Depending on the type of reactor, the water never leaves the core (PWR) or can leave the core (BWR). In the case that it does leave the core, the big issues are tritium (12 yr hl), nitrogen-16 (~14 minutes), and a few other short lived nuclides. Sites actively monitor material outputs, such as water, to make sure tritium levels are not exceeding the EPA limits. In the case of a few BWR's that have exceeded the limits, they have to go back and figure out where and how to fix it so that it doesn't happen. In any case, tritium has a biological half life of less than 5 days, so humans get a very tiny dose ( 1mSv) from a few mCi ingested. Other material such as structural supports for fuel bundles and cladding are stored with the fuel in the pool (of course) and in the dry storage after enough time has elapsed. The long term view, for Yucca (or any other geologic repository for that matter), is to store all of the material in a vitrified (borated glass) form. This means they would break all the waste down in either an acid or crusher and mix with molten glass to add a neutron absorbing, solid material around the waste to prevent any criticality accidents since we can't fight off the stigma that plutonium is evil. With this kind of long term waste storage, it would be a few thousand years before the radioactivity levels drop to that of natural uranium (cutoff for safe material is uranium ore). With large scale reprocessing using PUREX (Pu-Uranium-Extraction) and a few fast reactors the long term storage activity level drops from many thousands of years to around 300 years, if we do it right that is. That help?

    6. Re:Plutonium is fuel, not waste by 4D6963 · · Score: 1
      The highly radioactive stuff we're struggling to "entomb forever" at Yucca Mountain is probably the same stuff we'll be scrambling to dig up and use as fuel 50 years from now.

      I think we'll rather dig it up to throw it in a hole drilled down to the radioactive core of Earth and let it melt down with the rest of the radioactive stuff we got a few hundreds of miles under our feet. That would be like burying much deeper, except that no one cloud ever find it.

      --
      You just got troll'd!
    7. Re:Plutonium is fuel, not waste by spongman · · Score: 1

      wait, highly radioactie substances (ie the dangerous ones) have short half-lives, right? so, either civiliztion is destroyed quickly in a catastrophy (man-made or otherwise) or the highly radioactive stuff will have already decayed. the stuff that will last a long time is the weakly radioactive stuff, which probably isn't much more dangerous than the existing natural sources of radioactiviy (sub-terranean radon gas, uranium deposits, etc...) also, i figure if we continue to advance at the current rate, we'll have an easy way to send most of this stuff into the sun in a few hundred years.

  23. Just a thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pack the place full of bones- either human ones (ick), or concrete/other long lasting (but otherwise useless) material imitations. And not pretty, display quantity skeletons- make them broken, burnt, chewed on, etc. In huge piles/surrounding the casks. Sort of an unmistakable message saying "bad things here".

    If anything finds em in the far future and DOESN'T recognise savaged human remains (and assuming they don't know how to make a geiger counter), well, they are on their own...

    RdT.

  24. Geiger Counters? by Mr.+Flibble · · Score: 1

    One would think that with the prevalance of technology today, that the availablity of a Geiger counter or dosimeter would be a fairly common device in the future...

    If not, then I think it likely that, oh, we have probably nuked ourselves back into the stone or iron age, and knowledge of radioactivity will be fairly moot, not to mention its omnipresence in such a scenario...

    Either way, I think it is a far better idea to use Nuclear waste as FUEL in a nuclear reactor, as opposed to just waste... But then that idea just makes too much sense, so we have to consider marking toxic sites...

    --
    Try to hack my 31337 firewall!
    1. Re:Geiger Counters? by dfries · · Score: 1
      "use Nuclear waste as FUEL in a nuclear reactor"

      Let's see, nuclear reactors produce nuclear waste, which you want to put back into the nuclear reactors? Is that kind of like hooking up your car's exhaust pipe to the fuel tank? Sure you could probably recover some uranium from the reactor waste, but at some point it just isn't worth it.

      I guess they assume Geiger counters will vanish. Seems like they should put a bunch of Geiger counters in argon in gold cases and hope a few survive, that and modify them to run off of solar cells. Between plans to build them and what remains of the devices (even if none survive) with any luck they will be able to build them and figure out what the danger is.

    2. Re:Geiger Counters? by Mr.+Flibble · · Score: 1

      Let's see, nuclear reactors produce nuclear waste, which you want to put back into the nuclear reactors? Is that kind of like hooking up your car's exhaust pipe to the fuel tank? Sure you could probably recover some uranium from the reactor waste, but at some point it just isn't worth it.

      The fuel need not be Uranium - it can be Thorium, Plutonium or many other radioactive materials. With a Breeder reactor http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breeder_reactor
      The waste becomes the fuel. Much of nuclear "waste" can in fact be used as fuel in a reactor. And after it "steps down" a few notches in the periodic table, it also generally has a much shorter half-life than previous materials. This process greatly reduces the remaining amounts of nuclear waste.

      --
      Try to hack my 31337 firewall!
  25. Solved. by llZENll · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Skull and crossed bones.

    1. Re:Solved. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OOOOOO, pirate treasure! Quick, pass the shovel matey :)

    2. Re:Solved. by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      I was thinking along the same lines. The universal warning to all Humans is to see a skull or full skeleton in view. It denotes a universal message of death! Better yet, just carve out images in stone of mass human suffering (hands grasping around the throat , vomiting...etc).

      Of course, I like the idea of constructing gigantic walls out of millions of skulls!

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    3. Re:Solved. by Bemopolis · · Score: 3, Funny

      Just label it something no self-respecting American would go near, like "Health Food", or "Books".

      As for any other nationalities, screw them. That's what they get for winning the war against us and occupying Yucca Mountain.

      Bemopolis

      --
      "I guess the moral of the story is, don't paint your airship with rocket fuel." -- Addison Bain
    4. Re:Solved. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A Yale secret society?

    5. Re:Solved. by ShyGuy91284 · · Score: 1

      I concur. Although I was thinking of something more along the lines of an image of people dying, or maybe a godzilla-esque monster being shown killing humans...

      --
      In undeveloped countries, the consumer controls the market. In capitalist America, the market controls you.
    6. Re:Solved. by MadUndergrad · · Score: 1

      I concur. In addition to warnings, or instead of warning, make the place shit-yourself scary. Images and statues of horrific things, death, skulls, people suffering, freakish monsters. These are things everyone can understand. Get some ILM modelmakers or somesuch working on it. Combined with the death to anyone who goes in, 10000 years down the line, people will still know never to go near it, regardless of their language.

    7. Re:Solved. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Clearly you mean "Mr. Yuk".

  26. Look at human psychology by Rekolitus · · Score: 1

    I think the best solution would be to examine human psychology as we know it and see what symbols will create the most appropriate 'instinctive' reaction.

    For example, does the letter 'X' or the 'Radioactive' symbol evoke a more instinctive sense of forbidding?

    1. Re:Look at human psychology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Umm, X = "dig here" in all the good (and some of the bad) stories I've heard.

  27. To whom may dig here by hedley · · Score: 4, Funny

    I am Nobutu Bangari and I am in posession of a large consignment of gold
    that my people left me some time ago. you are free to dig here to find it but
    as a token of good faith I ask that you remit to my swiss bank account a small
    fee that we will reimburse to you once the bullion is secured by you.

    etc

    Just translate that and no-one would dare bother digging.

    Hedley

    1. Re:To whom may dig here by iminplaya · · Score: 1

      This would be the more likely scenario.

      --
      What?
  28. Statues by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Create a GIANT statue out of stainless steel(hard to move/destroy), one for each of the 4 compass points. Make it of a man with a shield in one hand and an open palm in the stop gesture, point the shield at the mountain, point the palm away. Place it around the mountain. inlay around the base with messages in hopes that one makes it and that they may get the gist of theyre shielding against the mountain.

  29. Just post it on slashdot by bunions · · Score: 4, Funny

    It'll be reposted about every year, just like this 'news' item.

    --
    there is no need to sign your posts. this isn't usenet. your username is right there above your post. stop it.
  30. In the not so distant future... by TCQuad · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Skull and crossed bones.

    Cool! Pirate treasure!

    1. Re:In the not so distant future... by Alsee · · Score: 1

      Buried MP3s?

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  31. ALL CAPS by hahiss · · Score: 1


    Why don't they just type it out in ALL CAPS? (After all, doesn't yelling your language to foreigners work?):

    HEY, THIS IS RADIOACTIVE!

    --
    "Every decent man is ashamed of the government he lives under." - H.L. Mencken
  32. Really old idea by davidc · · Score: 1

    ... which has been around for ages: e.g. was on the table in 1991 Probably originates much earlier.

    News?? ???

    1. Re:Really old idea by Stormwatch · · Score: 1

      Olds for nerds, stuff that will still matter after ten thousand years.

    2. Re:Really old idea by Maow · · Score: 1
      ... which has been around for ages: e.g. was on the table in 1991 Probably originates much earlier.

      News?? ???

      I think the news part was that the first repository is now open. I re-scanned TFA, and while it wasn't explicitly stated (that I saw on re-examination), I think it's newly opened.

      From TFA:

      The Energy Department predicted such a problem when it began planning for the $9-billion waste dump, dubbed WIPP, in 1974 and for a similar repository in Nevada at Yucca Mountain, near Las Vegas. That site has not yet been opened.

      On a side note, how far would $9 billion (for this site alone) go in eradicating the toxic waste if spent instead towards research in fusion or Integral Fast Reactor?

      rb

  33. Seems simple enough to me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just surround the place with skeletons. Start out with a bunch of animal skeletons, then as you get closer in, throw in some fake human ones. Nobody is going to mistake that one, no matter how stupid people become. Anybody who wanders in after that knew what they were getting into, even if they know no language.

    Better than attracting all the intellectuals to try to decipher the mystery writing on the ancient temple. Duh. "Hmmm, it says we're going to die... great. Let's go tell the oth...erk."

    Granted, it has the minor short-term side-effect of creeping the hell out of the poor folk that have to work there now.

  34. will work just as well by Foobar+of+Borg · · Score: 1
    The curse of plutonium packs a painful penalty.

    Well, I'm sure a bunch of poison darts, spike gates coming out of the walls, and a large, rolling, crushing boulder would do the trick, too.

  35. icons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    pictures of death by radiation should work. especially if there are no traps to make people think that it is a curse... first looter will go down and word will spread. Hell, it will probably be a rosetta stone in it's action!

  36. One thought by edwardpickman · · Score: 0

    How about a dinosaur with it's legs straight up in the air? If they are still aware that the dinosaurs died out it should give them pause.

  37. I know! by r00t · · Score: 1

    We could use a radioactive marker.

  38. Really necessary? by imemyself · · Score: 1

    What's really the big deal here? I mean, assuming that for some reason the people living in those areas "forget" they are not supposed to dig stuff up by the radioactive waste dump over a few generatinos, and assuming that some people way in the future try to, I would think that that civilization would figure out rather quickly that they shouldn't have dug stuff up there when some of their people start to die gruesomely. If civilization has regressed so much that they wouldn't have any geiger counters or any knowledge of radiation, then I would assume that some massive, world wide catastrophe has occured - in which case, who cares if ten or twenty more people die. I think there are more significant, and more urgent problems for people to focus on. Like maybe, how to reduce the amount of radioactive waste in the first place. Or how to use fusion to generate large amounts of energy without tons of radioactive waste.

    --
    Every time you post an article on Slashdot, I kill a server. Think of the servers!
    1. Re:Really necessary? by setirw · · Score: 1

      I mean, assuming that for some reason the people living in those areas "forget" they are not supposed to dig stuff up by the radioactive waste dump over a few generatino

      "A few generations" is not equivalent to the half life of plutonium.

      If civilization has regressed so much that they wouldn't have any geiger counters or any knowledge of radiation

      Despite the possession of radiation detection devices, future generations would not think to employ them when beginning to dig at the site.

      I would think that that civilization would figure out rather quickly that they shouldn't have dug stuff up there when some of their people start to die gruesomely.

      But by then, it would be too late, as alpha particles (etc...) will already be escaping the burial site.

      --
      This message printed on 100% post-consumer recycled electrons.
  39. Vitrification by Ucklak · · Score: 1

    Just make a bunch of glass logs out of the stuff and build moon/mars habitats out of it.
    Stamp on the logs the radioactive icon with a clock icon and a date.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitrification
    http://www.geomelt.com/

    --
    if you steal from one source, that is plagiarism, if you steal from many, well, that's just research.
    1. Re:Vitrification by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      With vitrification of radio active materials, do they mix it with lead? The idea would be no matter how many times you crack the glass into pieces, radio activity would be very very minimal.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    2. Re:Vitrification by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 1

      Neither the radioactive icon or the clock symbol may mean anything in the future. They're cultural references... we're not born with the knowledge of what they mean. Archaeologists might figure out that the numbers are numbers, maybe even that they are a date and time, but the radioactive symbol would only be figured out by trial and ERROR.

  40. They'll learn by bl00d6789 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Since there is no language or system of symbols which is instinctively understood by humans, coming up with a symbol or something to write on a sign that a generation of people with no knowledge of our civilization would understand is a lost cause.

    The best solution is to just use a well defined symbol, such as the nuclear hazard symbol we use now, and plaster it all over the place. The first time it's encountered, it won't mean anything. But after the 5th guy dies soon after building his hut near one of those signs, the rest would catch on, and the symbol would develop meaning within their civilization. This is how humanity has always learned what is safe and not safe, and where good and bad places to live exist.

  41. I'd opt for something cheaper. by jd · · Score: 1

    Just leave the radioactive waste in the open, add something that attracts animals, and let the future civilizations figure it out from the three-headed buffalo in the region.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    1. Re:I'd opt for something cheaper. by TDRighteo · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well, Sir James Lovelock (of "Gaia Theory" fame) has suggested the best way to preserve regions of high biodiversity (such as rainforests) is to do just that. The developers wouldn't touch the land (just imagine trying to sell it!) and the critters will only have slightly reduced lifespans - something that they are unlikely to appreciate or care about. Chernobyl is his example of just how well this works.

      Of course, this is hardly a long term solution to waste management, as the only reason why it works as a deterant is that people know what it is, and that in a post-apocalyptic world these regions may very well be the best sources of food in the region.

    2. Re:I'd opt for something cheaper. by aevan · · Score: 1

      Hmmm... actually running with something similar...
      Warning: workers for PETA, stop reading.

      Screw it, keep reading, like i care :P

      If this place is dug up, it won't be instantly, it will be incrementally as they dig deeper into it. Be it primatives chipping away, ancient treasure thieves, a modern or even future civilisation, they'll start from the outside and head inward (disregarding teleportation/whatever).

      So leave 'hints'. Have chambers just inside the perimeter, but not past the major safeguards. Expose animals* to extremely high lethal doses of radiation, sheer overkill. Place the corpses in the chamber with a small amount of the radioactive material, labeled with your 'warning'. On the inner wall of the chamber, in a much larger size, have that same warning.

      Mysterious dead and a 'sick chamber' where they feel ill should spook primatives. More advanced scientifically cultures should be able to get the hint something is amiss. Our level of technology or beyond shouldn't even need the hint. If they still refuse to stop, well...it's beyond our control and responsibility.

      *could also use death row convicts in lieu of animals

    3. Re:I'd opt for something cheaper. by jd · · Score: 1

      Lawyers would be more of a deterrent than animals, but it is unclear whether the radiation would kill them or simply enhance their undead superpowers.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    4. Re:I'd opt for something cheaper. by amRadioHed · · Score: 1

      And as a bonus, all the radioactivity will lead to even more biodiversity!

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    5. Re:I'd opt for something cheaper. by ponos · · Score: 1
      Just leave the radioactive waste in the open, add something that attracts animals, and let the future civilizations figure it out from the three-headed buffalo in the region.
      Interestingly enough, the radioactive site of Chernobyl is now full of (seemingly normal!) wild life. It seems that, in a peculiar sense, man is a greater threat to the environment than radio active waste. That being said, a population can survive a very high ambient level of radio activity if its members manage to have children before they die of cancer. This is not hard to do for many mammals.

      P.

  42. Radioactive mutant zombies? Pfff! by Scrameustache · · Score: 2, Funny

    Meh. I think we ought to just do a really thorough job of hiding it, with warnings inside the perimeter. Obvious warnings will just draw attention to the site.

    I say we build a necropolis there.

    What says "deadly danger" more than a bunch of stiffs?

    --

    You can't take the sky from me...

    1. Re:Radioactive mutant zombies? Pfff! by ExKoopaTroopa · · Score: 1

      What says "deadly danger" more than a bunch of stiffs?

      But according to Indiana Jones, Allan Quatermain, Lara Croft et al ,
      What says "hidden treasure" more than a bunch of stiffs?

      --
      Don't Tell Me What I Can't Do!
  43. Brainstorming about WIPP in 10,000 years... by Etcetera · · Score: 2, Informative

    Actually, there's a lot more interesting information in the abstract of the report that actually generated that data sheet.

    Take a look at excepts from the Expert Judgement on Markers to Deter Inadvertent Human Intrusion into the Waste Isolation Pilot Plan for more comprehensive details on how they came up with these concepts, and the team(s) of multi-disciplinary researchers/scientists who worked on them.

    If nothing else, I was reminded of other (fictional) mutli-disciplinary teams brainstorming about far-off civilizations temporally or spatially. Eg, from Sphere or some other novel...

  44. before and after pics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you know, some symbols should be pretty obvious. invent some way of preserving images for a long time, then, make a giant billboard with a before and after picture, underneath the before picture make an image of a regular area. underneath the after picture, a picture of the area (buildings if you got any) of the waste.

    then. before picture = health person.
    after picture = horribly mutated dead person.

    problem solved.

    1. Re:before and after pics by Xaositecte · · Score: 1

      OMG! Something in here turns horribly mutated dead people into normal healthy living ones! We're saved, excavate it as fast as possible!

  45. Still quite effective by suso · · Score: 1

    Yes, I was thinking the same thing. Not sure how long this has been used, but putting a skull and cross bones on something like a bottle or a barrel is still quite effective at warning people.

    1. Re:Still quite effective by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      Well, part of the issue of course is how do you convince them it's serious.

      For example, today, if you saw a chest with a skull and crossbones on it, your first reaction wouldn't be "danger" it would be "treasure!" You'd open that up as fast as possible to see all the doubloons, triploons, and quadrooploons.

      It's the tricky part of this. Anything you protect that much must be valuable--otherwise, why would you go to such lengths to protect it?

  46. Good idea. One problem. by jd · · Score: 3, Interesting
    BNFL really F'ed up the whole reprocessing idea at Windscale, err, Selafield, by occasionally "accidently" dumping radioactive waste into the Irish Sea (which is now the most radioactive in the world). The sea spray contains measurable levels of plutonium. Cancer levels are something like 100 times background levels. A burst pipe contaminated so much of the infrastructure of THORP that it is unclear if it can ever be made safe. And this is the center that was taking radioactive waste from nuclear power stations across the globe, on account of nobody else wanting something like that in their backyard.


    Nuclear reprocessing is a must. At the current rate of development and fuel use, uranium ore will run out 25+ years before we are due to have a commercially viable fusion reactor, never mind enough such reactors that fission reactors can all be replaced. Well, either reprocessing is a must, or we need to invest an order of magnitude more in fusion research, but Governments don't like funding speculative research much and the decades of fuel we currently have will outlast the career of any politician currently with sufficient influence to actually bring about radical funding programs.


    However, if we do have reprocessing, it absolutely needs to be far better managed than BNFL can do. Oh, and don't get Group 4 to carry the nuclear fuel, either. They tend to lose things a lot.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    1. Re:Good idea. One problem. by Dravik · · Score: 1

      Might I point out that we were supposed to run out of food in the late 70's, run out of oil in the late 70's, early 80's, early 90's, and right about now. As the fuel runs low it will cost more so people will invest more in other fuel. Governments don't need to pay for the research as long as they get out of the way.

      --
      The purpose of language is communication, If the idea is clear the grammar ain't important
    2. Re:Good idea. One problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At the current rate of development and fuel use, uranium ore will run out 25+ years before we are due to have a commercially viable fusion reactor,

      Where did you get that idea? There are enormous uranium deposits in Canada, Africa, and many, many other places. While nuclear power does have many problems, uranium shortages isn't one of them.

    3. Re:Good idea. One problem. by hankwang · · Score: 1
      Cancer levels are something like 100 times background levels.

      Since normally something like 1 in 4 persons will get some form of cancer during their life, this number cannot be true, unless you are only referring to certain rare types of cancer.

      I googled for you and found:

      • Childhood leukaemia around processing plants such as Sellafield was claimed to have increased by a factor 14. [ref]
      • The normal incidence rate for above disease is about 50 per million children per year [PDF], i.e. a very small number. Ten times a small number is still a small number and the numbers are still debated for only having a marginal statistical significance (how many children live in the neighborhood of Sellafield?)
      • Sellafield used to -deliberately- dump radioactive waste directly into the sea. (ref). I suppose this is not the case in modern reprocessing plants.
  47. Future Fallen... by Firethorn · · Score: 1

    If you're advanced enough mathematically to understand them, which 'Mad Max' types are often not. You don't need to know what prime numbers are to dig or drill.

    We're talking about a warning system that hopefully would be understood by everyone from the Native Americans to the Mongol hordes, to Victorian adventurers over a span of 10,000 years.

    Unfortuantely, history shows us that looters just think that warning = hidden treasure.

    I think that a better solution would be putting the effort towards making sure we don't fall in the first place. Even if we do, the worst damage that's likely to happen is a town gets poisoned. Maybe some of the upper crust from handling or making jewelry out of the stuff. Then again, the upper crust tended to do things like dose themselves with mercury and have bloodletting done, so I don't think it'd make a huge difference anyways, if they fall that far back.

    --
    I don't read AC A human right
  48. It's a hopeless cause. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unless human nature fundamentally changes I don't see how any warning given by the people of today will be heeded by the archaeologists of tomorrow. We certainly have no problem opening tombs and graves that are clearly marked as such (with grave, forebodding warnings) from cultures just hundreds of years old (and in fact we make heroes of the people who do it, like Lara Croft and Indiana Jones.) Why should we think a culture thousands of years from now won't see our radiation sign or skull and crossbones as anything but crude religious superstition?

  49. keep it simple by Hellasboy · · Score: 1

    Languages change and symbols are open to interpretation.

    The answer? Show what happens to those who cross into the area. Showing signs of a dead body encircling an area, while morbid, does get a point across. Vlad the impaler impaled his enemies in front of his castle/region and i'm sure people of many languages got the hint without a single written word.

    But what if a future intelligent species doesn't look like a current human? Show a skeleton. Any type of semi-intelligent species would know how a body looks after it's been dead for a while. A picture of a skeleton implies death.

    --

    "Tread softly because you tread on my dreams"
    1. Re:keep it simple by Prof.Phreak · · Score: 1

      Don't archiologists dig up graves? Do you really think they'll stop if they see representations of skeletons? I'd imagine that would drive them to dig in the first place.

      --

      "If anything can go wrong, it will." - Murphy

  50. weapon technology artifact by tilminator · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Future governments might consider it a deposit of weapon technology for them to use if it is too deadly. Don't make the warning sign attractive.

    --
    -- up-modding policy: make a good point, write self-contained.
  51. Religion by el_munkie · · Score: 1

    According to the professor in my Radioactive Waste Management class, one of the methods for propagating the "Stay the hell away from Yucca Mountain" message for the 100,000 years of its projected duty cycle was to start a religion whose main tenet is to avoid the area. The rationale was that since religions are good at propagating information over spans of time when language, culture, and the like change drastically, it could effectively communicate this information to subsequent generations. It was, of course, dismissed as a possible plan of action. I wish I could find a link to substantiate this....

    1. Re:Religion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We'll show dem heathens! We'll not only not stay away from their "holy mountain", we'll build a temple in it! Ha, that'll show em...

  52. Re-read Contact. by jd · · Score: 1
    The prime numbers were just an indicator for the TV clip (did the aliens ever ask the MPAA for permission?) which, in turn, was an indicator for the Message which, in turn, carried the primer within the polarity.


    The message was also coded from first principles, starting with true = true and true != false. A messgae of that kind long enough to talk about radioactive waste would be too long to be useful or have much chance of surviving. A better method would be to have a diagram of the periodic table, highlighting the elements present. Even if the periodic table itself is unknown in the future, it contains enough basic information (mass, name, charge, valency, etc) that any advanced civilization descended from an existing human civilization should be able to interpret it sufficiently to at least be on guard.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  53. denoting danger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    just put a windows logo on it....by the people will have figured out what that means

  54. Use a skull, DOH! by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That's the UNIVERSAL symbol of death. And engraved depictions of people and bones, and stuff.

    1. Re:Use a skull, DOH! by Finn61 · · Score: 1

      Skulls and bones might be ok for now but in the future when we lazy humans have advanced to the stage where we have discarded our cumbersome skeletons it will just confuse us.

      --
      "Looking good Vern."
    2. Re:Use a skull, DOH! by Chowderbags · · Score: 1

      By the time we're able to do that, a bit of radiation poisoning will be the least of our worries.

    3. Re:Use a skull, DOH! by Rufty · · Score: 1

      Right, so I carve a skull and crossed bones. Buried tresure, anyone???

      --
      Red to red, black to black. Switch it on, but stand well back.
    4. Re:Use a skull, DOH! by BigFoot48 · · Score: 1

      As that area will be part of Mexico by then, the celebration of the Day of the Dead will be have a new headquarters.

    5. Re:Use a skull, DOH! by ultranova · · Score: 1

      Skulls and bones might be ok for now but in the future when we lazy humans have advanced to the stage where we have discarded our cumbersome skeletons it will just confuse us.

      Usually it is considered progress - in both personal as well as the evolution of species - to gain a spine instead of losing it.

      But to each his own.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    6. Re:Use a skull, DOH! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's actually not as universal as one might think. The skull and crossbones has already failed cross-culturally in modern times, I believe.

  55. Just lose it, and no one will dig there by strangedays · · Score: 1

    Check out: http://www.nsc.org/ehc/wipp/manage.htm

    I visited the WIPP site a few years ago, part of a project I was running. Got a ride down in the tiny salt excavation shaft. Open sided cage, ya gotta wear lots of protective gear and be careful or you can lose skin as the strata zip past. Then I was given a fascinating tour of the underground tunnels and storage areas on a sort of golf buggy for WIPP DOE guys.

    I still have a sealed packet of rock salt I chipped out of a tunnel wall (well away from the areas with waste. Interestingly the web site URL printed on the handouts I got is now unreachable. So, yep, I guess even government stuff just gets lost over time.

    WIPP is a fascinating place, a government salt mine, where they dont want the salt. they can;t even sell it, The excavated permian age rock salt is piled up around the place.

    The place operates pretty much as advertized, oh I am sure there's stuff they don't tell us about, but hey, its a government right!

    The tunnels are quiet and cool, well ventilated, and extensive, the place is big. The rock salt creeps under the pressure, its 2,150 feet down. The salt moves even as they fill areas in, the movement over several years is detectable. It messes up the structures, and is, well, creepy. I have no doubt that waste buried there will be crushed and sealed in tight.

    I beleive the DOE made an excellent choice for disposal of TRU waste, the people that work there were freindly and had that south western laid back thang. Very cool.

    I left with the impression that once sealed in, nothing will ever get back into the environment, accidentally at least.

    But what if someone drills? Ok, here's a crazy thought.

    One thing that gets to you if you go there, is how isolated and non-descript the area is. We don't bury waste in beautiful places. Its a 40 minute ride out from Carlsbad, to no-where, (at least to a city guy like me).

    If you have never been out that way, its hard to believe just how much empty wasteland there is. It does have a bizarre desert beauty, but lets face it, there's a lot of boring scrub nothing too. So... what, I wonder are the odds of anyone drilling there if we just hid it. Yep, I mean the whole WIPP site, removed down to say 6 feet. take it off the maps, make it a non - place.

    Then... Sure, place a layer of hard concrete and warnings under the surface, Icons decals, cartoons, large rectangular monoliths, whatever, but hidden Then return the surface area to boring nondescript scrub desert.

    Wouldnt it be forgotten eventually? If its forgotten, and thus left alone, isn't that what we want anyway? Sounds crazy, maybe, but there's a lot of boring looking places where no one ever digs, why not make this just one more patch of salty scrub?

    --
    There is no god; get over it already! Never exchange a walk on part in the war, for a lead role in a cage.
    1. Re:Just lose it, and no one will dig there by vix86 · · Score: 1

      One thing that gets to you if you go there, is how isolated and non-descript the area is. We don't bury waste in beautiful places. Its a 40 minute ride out from Carlsbad, to no-where, (at least to a city guy like me).

      I think one thing a lot of people forget about the land over time is that it changes. Who is to say that a desert now won't have forests growing on it 10,000 years in the future, due to a change in climate? I don't think we can rely on how the land appears to us now to be some kind of deterrent in the future.

  56. Mauve by An.+(Coward) · · Score: 1

    Just paint it mauve, the universal symbol for danger.

  57. Spikes by MrEcho.net · · Score: 1

    Small to Large blood red very sharp spikes.

  58. Lorem ipsum dolor... by davecrusoe · · Score: 1

    Surely, the warning should read:

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Praesent lacus felis, adipiscing vel, tincidunt vitae, tincidunt eget, velit. Curabitur ut urna nec neque sollicitudin tincidunt. Vestibulum urna. Aliquam dictum malesuada justo. Mauris pretium porta mauris. Phasellus porta, ante non convallis viverra, nulla erat blandit eros, non iaculis odio dolor sed nisl. Phasellus vitae lectus sed nunc gravida pretium. Proin blandit. Ut placerat nisl vitae nisl. Praesent erat. Fusce ultricies. Maecenas dapibus libero in dui. Nunc urna lacus, volutpat ut, porta aliquet, semper nec, purus. Nunc lectus.

    Sed lorem. Mauris dui. Donec ut purus sit amet urna molestie placerat. Integer laoreet. Fusce velit. Vivamus at massa. In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Vestibulum bibendum. Vestibulum ante ipsum primis in faucibus orci luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia Curae; Integer felis nibh, semper non, ultrices et, facilisis nec, nulla. Vestibulum ante ipsum primis in faucibus orci luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia Curae; Etiam fringilla ipsum nec dolor. Sed sit amet dui eu nisi viverra aliquam.



    CURAE; ETIAM FRINGILLA IPSUM NEC DOLOR!!!

    enough said?

    1. Re:Lorem ipsum dolor... by paisleyboxers · · Score: 1

      Not being enough of a geek .. i have no clue what this 'test' means :(

    2. Re:Lorem ipsum dolor... by compro01 · · Score: 1

      latin?

      well, it has been in use for a long time (not nearly as long as the time spans we're trying to plan for here).

      i personally think the current idea (toss everything at the wall and hope something sticks) is about the surest method we can find.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    3. Re:Lorem ipsum dolor... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It isn't latin, it means nothing.

  59. Take the Gamble by logicnazi · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Look their are two possible scenarios we need to worry about.

    In the first scenario we continue our impressive technological progress and civilization does not collapse. In this case simple messages in major world languages and records in other places around the country plus the radioactivity itself will be more than enough to pass this information on to a civilization unimagineably more technically adept than we are. Likely this civilization will have found a much better solution for radioactive disposal (or will just want to reprocess the waste) but even if not we can count on them to be better able to solve the problem of warning people away thatn we are.

    In short if we expect civilization to continue to progress we don't need to make warnings that will last for more than 500 years and english will accomplish that.

    On the other hand if civilization does collapse and humanity returns to primitive existance it seems a bit silly to worry about this radioactive waste. If societal collapse is a serious worry then we should be putting this effort into caching technology and information to help rebuild civilization not making sure future cave-men avoid cancer. The harm from radioactivity is bad and sucks but it doesn't even register compared to the harms and loss of lifespan from global collapse of civilization. Heck, while some people might die discovering the mysterious deadly waves might even help civilization to rediscover scientific knowledge.

    Overall I think a lot of this buisness is just silly. Before going and wasting all this time trying to communicate the danger first figure out in what scenarios it will be important to do that and then ask if in those scenarios these sort of warnings really are the most productive thing we can do to help.

    --

    If you liked this thought maybe you would find my blog nice too:

    1. Re:Take the Gamble by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was going to say something along those lines. Furthermore, as we have seen 20 years after Chernobyl, the really strong emitters of radiation have the shortest half lives. Sure, we're going to keep Chernobyl sealed off for quite a long time, because in modern society, the average person lives long enough so that cancer is a major killer. If future generations don't have the tech to detect radiation, then cancer won't be a major concern for them anyways. At the worst, people will discover the area is 'cursed' after a decade or two and avoid it.

  60. also the biohazard symbol... by YesIAmAScript · · Score: 1

    The people who came up with the biohazard symbol also tackled similar problems. How to convey danger properly without words. I think they did a pretty good job. Any human or near-human being will see the pointy biohazard symbol as indicating danger, unlike the classic radioactivity symbol.

    --
    http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
    1. Re:also the biohazard symbol... by Kangburra · · Score: 1
      biohazard symbol

      Erm, no, the first time I saw it, I though ooh, pretty. OMG PONIES!!!!
      --
      Common sense is not so common
  61. Space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    waste + sun = problem solved

    1. Re:Space by compro01 · · Score: 1

      actually a good idea, but the problem is that we don't really have a safe/reliable way of getting it off this rock. what are the odds of a rocket failing? 1/70? and our rockets aren't able to lift that much relative to how much waste we have built up, so is we send up 7000 rockets, 100 of them will fail in some way and dump the waste back down, and in the case of the rocket spontaneously exploding (which isn't that uncommon), spreading said waste over a large area, likely in water, which would result in Very Bad Things.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
  62. The proper solution ... by constantnormal · · Score: 1

    ... is not to stockpile the radioactive wastes, but to recycle them!

    Bury them in a subduction zone, deep in the ocean. As geologic time marches on, they will be pulled down into the earth, where they will be safe and secure until they emerge from some volcano (hint, lava is mildly radioactive from just this sort of thing occuring naturally -- it's one reason the Earth has a molten core).

    These materials will resurface hundreds of thousands of years from now, at which point most of their radioactive decay will be completed.

    And it's hard to think of a storage place more secure than at the bottom of a deep ocean trench where tectonic plates are being recycled. Once buried (by robots or teleoperated mechanisms) beneath a few meters of muck, they aren't going anywhere, and I believe they would be secure from pilfering.

    Yeah, in the locality of where they are buried, things might get pretty toxic, just as they will inside Yucca Mountain or other similar repositories. But after a few tens of thousands of years, the irradiated part of the environment would be pulled into the earth, with no human involvement needed or practical.

    1. Re:The proper solution ... by cdn-programmer · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What a stupid idea! Wake up and smell the coffee - its not waste and if you think it is then send it to Alberta.

      Up here we need about 75 nuclear plants and of course most Canadians have not come to grips with this idea either. But we need those plants and if we have them we'll make gasoline for our good friends just south of us.

      So send all your nuclear waste up here. We do know what to do with it. Send up your nuclear engineers too. We need them also.

    2. Re:The proper solution ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ....is to safely lift it into geo-stationary orbit using the space elevator, then use an ion drive to gently push it into the sun. Done.

      The challenge for now, is to pack it safely away until the space elevator is built.

    3. Re:The proper solution ... by Megane · · Score: 1
      That's not recycling, that's merely letting the planet bury them for you.

      Recycling is using them in a breeder reactor of some sort (as someone else said, send them to Canada), then the fuel reprocessing will only leave short-lived (a few hundred years at most) nuclear waste. The only reason we don't do this now is that Jimmy Carter (as bad of a president as he was a nice guy) getting skittish about weapons grade plutonium resulting from the fuel reprocessing, and forbidding us from using breeder reactors, but having no success in forbidding anyone else from doing so. And nowadays we can reprocess fuel without leaving pure enough plutonium to be a problem anyhow.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
  63. The tech to drop a shaft down 1000ft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You said: "If you've got the tech to drop a shaft down 1000ft, well, you'll have all the gear necessary (and normally, on-hand)to detect radioactivity.

    Since it's CLEAR that you have no idea about the so called "tech" to drop a 1,000 foot shaft, it consists of:

    1. One 1,200 foot length of caving rope, especially made for low stretch
    2. One Seat Harness
    3. One Rappel Rack
    4. Several Locking Carabiners
    5. Leather Gloves
    6. Helmet, with chin strap

    Sorry...

    No Gieger counters needed, ever.

    Yes, I happen to own a 1,200 foot piece of caving rope, and have PLENTY of experience dropping DEEP pits.

    1. Re:The tech to drop a shaft down 1000ft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's not saying leave it laying at the bottom of a thousand foot hole, he's saying that if they have the technology to actually bore a hole from the surface to that depth, it's likely that they'll have equipment to detect radiation. Fucking numbnuts.

    2. Re:The tech to drop a shaft down 1000ft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please tell me your post was some sort of joke.

      Get back to us when you can actually DIG a 1,000 ft shaft with that super awesome "caving rope" of yours.

  64. Information will survive. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Barring a very serious apocalyptic event, information will survive. The makers of Stonehenge didn't have computers. Sure, data storage methods have limited lifetimes, but, the data will always have been transfered over to something else. Not to mention that there will always be some things that can be recovered even from those.

  65. Record Keeping by mikesd81 · · Score: 1

    Warnings, they argue, would be misunderstood or dismissed, the same way ancient grave robbers ignored curses inscribed on the tombs of Egyptian pharaohs to seize the riches inside. The curse of plutonium packs a painful penalty.'"

    What great examples. Record keeping is so much better kept and used more since the middle ages. I'm not sure if anyone, other than who did it, and again they failed to keep records, knew what Stone Hedge was. Curses...how many of the curses have come true? All theses tombs found and raided, and I haven't heard of any curses coming true. Despite what civilization is becoming, we are getting more intelligent and we are keeping records, sometimes too many. I'm sure what ever symbol we use will still mean the same, and if not, someone can find it in a record.

    --
    That which does not kill me only postpones the inevitable.
    1. Re:Record Keeping by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is that nowadays, all of our record-keeping requires electricity. No electricity, no records. Game over.

  66. Navejo? by kf6auf · · Score: 1

    Maybe my understanding of history is flawed, but I was under the impression that Navejo is far from being a major language. I mean, wasn't it the primary basis for a US code in the Pacific during World War II or something?

    1. Re:Navejo? by Sparr0 · · Score: 1

      Not popular, but enduring. Compare 1600s Navajo to 2000s Navajo, then do the same with English (THE popular language).

    2. Re:Navejo? by Moridineas · · Score: 1

      To be or not to be--that is the question?

      It would be interesting to compare that to Navajo of 400 years ago, but AFAIK the written history is minimal.

    3. Re:Navejo? by dtdns · · Score: 1

      English as a written language hasn't changed too aweful much over the last 400 years, but it sounds entirely different today than it did back then. Go back much further and you pass through the "great vowel shift" where things really start to get different. I would guess that since Navajo as a language is relatively contained compared to English, it has not had as much opportunity to evolve, so it likely sounds closer to Navajo 600+ years ago (assuming it's that old) than English did over the same time period.

    4. Re:Navejo? by Moridineas · · Score: 1

      I agree completely on your comments about English, but I'm not sure what "contained" means in the context of Navajo. I'm not entirely sure of the geographic extent of spoken Navajo 400 years ago, but just because a language is in a small area doesn't mean it won't change. There are plenty of tiny areas with many different languages and mutually intelligible as well as unintelligble dialects (eg, the Caucus mts, Chitral area in Pakistan, etc).

      Other languages like Italian can read be read mch farther back then English, same for Persian. Sounds are in some cases different, written very similiar.

  67. Skull by Mantrid42 · · Score: 1

    Just put a skull on there. Thats a pretty universal symbol. Many civilizations independantly decided that a human skull or skeleton was a sign of death. My other recommendation would be a giant mural of people dying horribly, but that might lead future people to believe that there was a buried weapon there that they may want.

    1. Re:Skull by compro01 · · Score: 1

      but that might lead future people to believe that there was a buried weapon there that they may want.

      well, in a manner of speaking, it could be used as one.

      dirty bomb, anyone?

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
  68. The answer is obvious by Tablizer · · Score: 5, Funny

    A Goatse statue/image! It crosses cultural and language boundaries like nothing a bunch of eggheads in a lab can ever cook up.

    1. Re:The answer is obvious by smoker2 · · Score: 1
      A Goatse statue/image!
      For some inexplicable reason, my mind just flipped to an image of Arthur Dent falling from a giant marble cup, 13 miles up in the sky !

      *shudder*

  69. Ah, but which part of the gene pool? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Piles of skeletons attract archaeologists.

    1. Re:Ah, but which part of the gene pool? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Well ... that just means that at some point in the distant future there will be a temporary shortage of archaeologists.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  70. The warning in future English: by nrlightfoot · · Score: 1

    :-[ :-( :'-( :( :( :-C FYI WB to ADIH. GUD! FE! FO! FUM! ADBB! TARFU!! TEOTWAWKI!!! :( :( :( :( :-C :( :'-( :( :( :-[ I had to add this section of text to get this comment past the lameness filter, which may or may not have been a good idea.

    --
    what sig?
  71. who needs symbols? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    when this story gets posted every year for the last 4 years?

  72. Clean, safe nuclear energy by mcostas · · Score: 1

    The Nuclear Energy Institute and President Bush told us about "Clean, safe nuclear energy". Why not just mark the site with some of their PR materials with blue skies and smiley faces? I'm sure future generations will thank us for subsidizing reactor construction.

    1. Re:Clean, safe nuclear energy by PitaBred · · Score: 1

      Two things:

      The word "buried" only has one r. Read a book sometime.

      Second, you're wrong about the total area needed for solar power.
      I don't know if you're being dumb on purpose, but you sure got modded high for it, so you have some mods who don't read well either.

    2. Re:Clean, safe nuclear energy by mcostas · · Score: 1

      The "land use" argument is incredibly misleading, since renewable energy land use does not have to be exclusive. We can put solar panels on rooftops and windmills on farm fields. Try doing that with a nuclear reactor or waste dump. The nuclear industry spends millions of dollars telling us that nuclear is wonderful and cheap. But if that were true the "free market" would be building plants, which they aren't. If it's so wonderful, they shouldn't need massive subsidies. If we're going to subsidize something it should be renewable.

    3. Re:Clean, safe nuclear energy by Hurga · · Score: 1

      (don't get me started on Chernobyl. That was a poorly designed system, which is not used in the US).

      Ok. What about Three Mile Island? You've been lucky that time, but it would be foolish to think you'll always be.

      Hanno

  73. Self-heating coffee cans are the answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    But seriously, this whole thing is stupid. What they are calling "waste" is actually perfectly usable fissionable FUEL which people are going to be digging up and using 50 years from now. Plutonium is perfectly excellent reactor fuel and it's in use today. Why burry the stuff when you can burn it for energy?

    Nuclear energy and the politics of nuclear energy are the most mind-boggling thing. I know that one of the major issues in the recent election was whether they were going to let their perfectly good functioning reactors keep working until they reach the end of their operational lives, or they'll shut them down early. The Greens wanted them shut down early, probably because we so much extra cheap energy around these days?

    The same thing is going on with this plutonium. Then-President Carter signed an order banning fuel reprocessing and so we end up having to burry perfectly good fuel materials, which could be safely burned in new reactors.

    -----------
    Carry a gun, in California

  74. Summary by Wes+Janson · · Score: 1

    To summarize every major point made in this thread so far, as to why the article's concerns are stupid:

    First off, for all we know we're going to be wanting that "waste" back a century from now, for use elsewhere. Assuming that doesn't happen, then burying it hundreds of feet underground is going to put it out of the reach of all but the most technologically advanced, to whom it won't present a threat anyhow.

    And even if somehow a bunch of degenerate savages get into the waste, a thousand years from now, why the fuck should we care? Absolute worst-case scenario, a number of people in the region die. We're talking radiation here, not a bacteria or a virus. If some idiots lug it up to the surface and start snorting it for joint pain, the ones who live will rapidly figure out something is wrong, and even if they don't understand what the mechanism is, they'll certainly be able to put it back and stay away. There's just no real way I can see it ever presenting a real "threat" to more than a tiny group of people.

    Seriously, it seems as though they're worried to death about litigious action by barbarians from the year 11999. Why the fuck should we care? If ten thousand years from now we've regressed so far that people don't understand the concept of radioactivity, then perhaps it's for the best.

  75. Stonehennge 2 ??? by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 2, Funny

    Hippies will dance around it naked at the full moon....

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
    1. Re:Stonehennge 2 ??? by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      "Hippies will dance around it naked at the full moon...."

      Excellent!

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
  76. easy. by nblender · · Score: 1
    Picture of a fat chick wearing spandex.

    Next project?

  77. Burial in Ancient Rock! by BigBlockMopar · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It would be surrounded by 48 granite or concrete markers, 32 outside the berm and 16 inside, each 25 feet high and weighing 105 tons,

    Or here's another thought: just bury it.

    Bury it in a pluton of ancient rock, several hundred meters down, as most current proposals suggest. When the site is filled, backfill it with concrete from the top to the bottom of the shaft.

    Any society with sufficient resources (technology, tools, time) to cut through that to see what we buried will also undoubtedly have an archaeological record of us, and will probably also have at least a very rudimentary understanding of nuclear physics. (Remember we might regress - think HG Wells.)

    In short, they're going to see that we went to a hell of a lot of trouble to dispose of something. That should be enough warning.

    Of course, you could also arrange dots into the periodic table. Again, any society capable of getting there will also have discovered the periodicity of chemistry, even if they don't understand our numbers or element names. A few arrows pointing at the swarm of dots representing the constituents of the waste ought to be enough. Pour slabs of something with a table of dots into the concrete at ten foot increments.

    All the stuff about communicating with them further than that is B.S. - never ask a humanities major a question when the audience is the scientists of the future - all you need to use is simple science. That's like asking a roofer to perform a heart transplant.

    --
    Fire and Meat. Yummy.
    1. Re:Burial in Ancient Rock! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As I mentioned above, hide the filled tunnel and provide a distraction which requires mining techniques to break into chambers with traps. Basically provide something similar to an Egyptian tomb but marked with scientific and primitive warnings. A civilization advanced enough to read the warnings will remain safe. Primitive tomb robbers will be warned of the tomb's curses and some will be killed by mechanical and radioactive traps. Maybe we'll blow the top of the mountain off if they're persistent, but that should both serve as another warning and will further hinder reaching the backfilled tunnel.

    2. Re:Burial in Ancient Rock! by Itchy+Rich · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Again, any society capable of getting there will also have discovered the periodicity of chemistry...

      So, you're saying that before 1896 the human race would have been incapable of mining out a couple of hundred metres of concrete? Any pharoah worth his salt could have that concrete shaft carved into a tasteful spiral staircase within his lifetime.
    3. Re:Burial in Ancient Rock! by marko123 · · Score: 1

      Hi there. I've read a fair bit of HG Wells, but I don't remember a regression story. Which one is it?

      --
      http://pcblues.com - Digits and Wood
    4. Re:Burial in Ancient Rock! by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      I think he means the situation in the future depicted in The Time Machine.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    5. Re:Burial in Ancient Rock! by ginotech · · Score: 1

      That's a horrible idea, really. You want to put an active nuclear bomb inside to keep them from finding nuclear waste? Thats like cutting off someone's head so they don't shoot themselves.

    6. Re:Burial in Ancient Rock! by stunt_penguin · · Score: 1

      In short, they're going to see that we went to a hell of a lot of trouble to dispose of something.

      It's quite likely that any attempt to dispose of something this carefully may be interpreted as an attempt to hide something of value, and this is precisely why someone would try and dig on this spot.

      I like the periodic table idea- maybe a picture of the Uranium atom with the correct number of electrons orbiing the nucleus would work just as well (although there would be 235/238/234) I think someone should spot the significance.

      Also, what about storing tiny, tiny samples of the agents involved in the areas behind the stones so that any civilisation with a Geiger Counter (heh, or whoever counter) would get a hint of the radioactivity buried within.

      --
      When the posters fear their moderators, there is tyranny; when the moderators fears the posters, there is liberty.
    7. Re:Burial in Ancient Rock! by Magic5Ball · · Score: 1

      Again, any society capable of getting there will also have discovered the periodicity of chemistry, even if they don't understand our numbers or element names. A few arrows pointing at the swarm of dots representing the constituents of the waste ought to be enough.

      So, if you found a periodic table with three more rows on it than the one we know today, and arrows pointing to elements 160, 164 and 178, you wouldn't be curious or want to obtain some?

      --
      There are 1.1... kinds of people.
    8. Re:Burial in Ancient Rock! by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      Not that I disagree with you but:
      "hats like cutting off someone's head so they don't shoot themselves."
      That would, in fact, work. Absurd, but functional... the /. way.
      -nB

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    9. Re:Burial in Ancient Rock! by Angstroem · · Score: 1
      Any pharoah worth his salt could have that concrete shaft carved into a tasteful spiral staircase within his lifetime.
      Yes, but that was because Pharaos had access to Alien technology.

      Says Erich von Däniken.

    10. Re:Burial in Ancient Rock! by ginotech · · Score: 1

      I know, "absurd" is the quality I was trying to apply to the parent's idea.

    11. Re:Burial in Ancient Rock! by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      There would always be 92 electrons. period. The difference between the isotopes of uranium is in the number of neutrons. If you change the number protons of an element, you give it a different name.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    12. Re:Burial in Ancient Rock! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And Dr. Daniel Jackson.

    13. Re:Burial in Ancient Rock! by stunt_penguin · · Score: 1

      Hehe, goes to show how long it's been since I did my high school physics exams (7 years ago, to be exact). *feels embarrassed*

      --
      When the posters fear their moderators, there is tyranny; when the moderators fears the posters, there is liberty.
  78. Plutonium is not a problem: IFR by Ralph+Spoilsport · · Score: 1
    All you need are IFRs that burn plutonium.

    When they're finalyl done burning everything down, and the actinides and transuranics are removed from the spent fuel, the remaining waste elements have half lives of a few decades at most. The result is that within 300 years, such wastes are no more radioactive than the ores of natural radioactive elements.

    After 2000 years, your granite countertop will be as radioactive as the waste from one of these.

    We can use plutonium to make electricity for many years, and come out with comparatively innocuous waste materials.

    RS

    --
    Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
  79. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 3, Informative

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  80. Religion to the rescue! It's all going to be OK! by VendettaMF · · Score: 1

    "I have to assume that the divine creator is going to take care of most of this stuff," said Steve Casey, the WIPP engineer charged with overseeing construction of the warning system.

    That's really encouraging.
    I had a lengthy diatribe about religion and engineering but, well...
    Those who can think already know and consider it obvious.
    Those who can't would just mod me "Troll".

    --
    kartune85 : Incapable of reason, observation or learning. A kind of dim, drab, flightless parrot.
  81. The very posting of this article was a VERYBadIdea by EvilPickles · · Score: 0

    Just think, no one would ever discover this tomb, if we didn't PUBLICIZE IT. Maps are not rare, Yucca mountain is probably not very difficult to find ON a map, all you have to do is look for the right symbol sequence (spelling), and you've got it! I really, hate the rich, powerful, IDIOTS messing with our future. The press makes it look like they're trying to warn you. The very publication of articles ont the subject, leaves behind a lot of evidence. My concern is that, if you have those pillars with language on them, people will discover them and then it WILL be a tourist attraction. People are stupid. Peoplem are gullible. People assume things. Like the mojave phone booth (linky: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mojave_phone_booth ). The presence of Magnets, and radar reflectors, in the tomb would be a significant thing to take note of. I think they should bury geiger counters in the sands out there, MILLIONS of them. Hopefully, someone will find them, if they are looking for treasure or whatever the hell they are doing digging out there. Modify these geiger counters to emit a very loud, very annoying sound, when near radioactive waste. Of course, someone is going to dig up a few of these, and then think they are gold detectors or something stupid like that, and then it is a tourist attraction. As they said, radar DEFLECTORS, deflect means to send the radar back, which means the radar operator will know something is there, but he won't know what's past that. It's like a science fiction movie, it's a major mystery, and people will try to dig it up, wanting to know what that radar signature is. But think, if they dig up, the internet, or a PC that still worked, with a copy of this article, they pretty much have a map to the tomb. The press has done similar evil things, like the publicisation of the mystery man who honors a very famous poets grave every now and again, no one knew who he was, or how he got into the graveyard. Upon the announcement of this, tons of people showed up to see him, only one man had seen him before, and this was a story done by Yahoo! news, so A LOT of people know about it, and there are probably throngs more people showing up evry year. If they can decode our language, english maybe, from an old computer, they have the map. Hell, if they can find a compiler, trial and errror, and common sense, will prevail. They might be able to read, even program these computers. They could learn everything all over again! With the underground crack network, they will have no problems getting everything runnning. I once had an idea, for a story centered around this, and the article has given me loads of ideas as well. Did the article say they were building a super structure over it? Bad idea. One also wonders and worries about ecological, or even climate changes affecting the site, deserts were once tropical forests you know. Could nature crawl back over the site? Could it thrive, maybe provide a habitable habitate for humans? The sun has already lived for a long time, there is not enough time left for a new species to develop, and be as intelligent as ours, based on current evolution history. It is vital now, more than ever to preserve our race. I still worry about the looming nuclear war, and no I don't mean I'm worried whether it might happen or not, I KNOW it will happen.

  82. quote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    "The idea is to preserve humanity at all costs."

    Why, yes it is, so the sensible thing to do is to not make the hideous stuff in the first place, no matter what it costs us now to do something different.

    money-mouth

        Nuclear power is concentrated heat,that is all it is, a very dangerous and expensive and elaborate way to make some "hot", at a tremendous cost, both in dollars and in time and effort,and for millenia to come. We have a plethora of other heat sources and techniques to make power, we should be concentrating on devloping them and using them. We have practical fusion power, it is called "the sun", abundant sunshine on the earth, perfectly useable. There's a start. Deep underground-more heat, useable. And so on. renewable biofuels, min hydro setups, ocean thermocline temp and mineral/ion differences (automatic current flow), atmosphere/land natural static currents exploitation (tesla action), and whatever, there is a huge list now that taken as a total is quite enough, either as a "works right now-use it" scene or "looks good, throw some R&d at it" level. IF we just did that, and not the other.

    If we REALLY were concerned over future humans we wouldn't be poisoning THEIR planet now, would we?

    Nuclear "power" was a sap, a stealthy way to develop atomic weapons by the thousands, they had to come up with some marketing gimmick to "sell" it to the plebians, and to hide the true military costs. It has never been profitable in civilian use for power, and here is another example why, no one readily admits to the cost of disposal, and even in todays dollars with todays prices it isn't near the so called "deal" they kept claiming it was going to be for decades. I was just reading some figures the other day (sorry, didn't bookmark the article), compaing costs with coal generated, natural gas, hydro, commercial wind power, etc, and..no big deal, it is not even close to being significantly cheaper, and is actually more expensive than some of the options. granted, they all have drawbacks, all of them, but still..we can do even better. I would class nukes as 'close, but no see-gar, the waste is a deal breaker". It really isn't all that great, except perhaps for submarines. And if you add in disposal and decommissioning power plants and guarding them for generations, it is more costly just in dollars than the other methods of generating electricity by far.

  83. Perspective by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 1

    How's this different from, say, an abandoned mercury mine? "De Re Metallica" tells of mine floors oozing droplets of "quicksilver". Walk in, inhale, get chronically ill.

    Copper runs together with arsenic. Arsenic doesn't decay like a radioactive material does, neither does mercury. Abandoned copper mines are going to be health hazards until they are either emptied or subducted.

    Are we planning to put up 10,000 year warnings up around all our existing toxic waste dumps?

    If we need to, English should be good for the next couple of thousand years if it has anything like the longevity of Latin. After that, someone uncompromising might put a heap of skeletons in contorted positions. Or we could just have future explorers click on a EULA to enter.

    1. Re:Perspective by bofkentucky · · Score: 1

      Latin has the benefit of the Catholic Church keeping it alive for 1500 years after its native speakers died out, English does not have this luxury.

      --
      09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0
  84. Pretty stupid premise by the_Bionic_lemming · · Score: 1

    At the risk of being a jerk - While technolgy and information reigns - nobody would be stupid enough to walk into a death zone.

    If civilization crashes - some twit will walk out in front of the death hole and say "if you go in there you'll die"

    At that point - if some idiot goes into the hole, he'll die. As will the next idiot, and the idiot after that.

    The "Shamen" that said "if you go in there you'll die" will spawn a new religion, and the very few twits that would walk into the death hole will be regarded as stupid non-believers.

    Can we please metamod the article as +37 LAME?

    --
    _ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!
  85. Who cares? by Gorimek · · Score: 1

    I mean, if human civilization has collapsed so utterly that both historical knowledge and basic nuclear physics is unknown, any additional damage that this could possibly do has to be microscopic in comparision. And why would mining techology still be going strong??

    There seems to be some weird assumption that the next 10.000 years will be similar to the last 10.000, on average. I can 100% guarantee it will not!! Most likely, this very discussion will be archived for people then to read!

    If you really want the waste to be inaccessible, you should dump it in one of the very deep sea trenches, and have geology fold it into the earth mantle.

    1. Re:Who cares? by p3d0 · · Score: 1

      I think the plates at the bottom of the oceans are speading apart, not folding together.

      --
      Patrick Doyle
      I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
    2. Re:Who cares? by Gorimek · · Score: 1

      They can't all be spreading apart, since the earth is not expanding. Where would they go?

      The deep oceanic trenches are formed by plates colliding. When they collide, the "fold" can either go up, and produce mountain ranges, or down and produce trenches.

    3. Re:Who cares? by ghoul · · Score: 1

      Where the plates are pusing against each other mountains are rising. Where they are pulling apart trenches are opening up. But that is kind of besides the point. Even if no subduction takes place who the heck is going to go into a deep ocean trench ? And if they can get there they probably know radioactivity when they see it.

      I would love to put the politicians and government bureaucrats wasting public money on these repositories to be taken and dumped into a trench. Then maybe we can get onto real issues.

      --
      **Life is too short to be serious**
  86. Cultural by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 1

    Cultural symbols will not evoke the same emotional reactions in different cultures. This even would include the universal NO sign... it may mean nothing in the future.

    1. Re:Cultural by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A great example of this is what we in the US know as the 'swastika', identified with Nazism. The symbol (actually, it's reverse image) is also an Indian good-luck symbol that predates the Nazis. I have heard from Indian ex-pats of their discovery that, for some reason, Americans don't react well to displays of the (reverse) swastika.

  87. Not a real problem by rssrss · · Score: 1

    Several commenters have mentioned the pyramids of Egypt and the fact that they were looted in antiquity. The material deposited in Yucca mountain will not contain much gold, but it will be valuable to our descendants, who will see it as a cheap source of easily reprocessed nuclear fuel. They will remove it from Yucca mountain and use it within a few centuries.

    In ten thousand years, people who find signs warning of radioactive material will be disappointed to discover that salvors had beaten them to the site millennia before.

    --
    In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
  88. The Myth of Plutonium Toxicity by RussP · · Score: 1

    The point that always seems to be missed is that elements with longer half lives are actually *less* radioactive. Duh! That's *why* their half lives are longer!

    Plutonium has a long half life, and it radioactivity level is very low. It's main toxicity is chemical, and that is vastly overblown. See

    The Myth of Plutonium Toxicity

    at http://russp.org/nucpower.htm

    --
    I watch Brit Hume on Fox News
  89. Nuclear Waste isn't a problem anyway by ikekrull · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The solution is simply to make bullets and bombs out of it, give it a catchy name like 'Depleted Uranium' instead of 'Radioactive Waste', start an illegal war under false pretences, and dump thousands of tons of it indiscriminately wherever fighting occurs, ensuring large amounts are vaporised and scattered through the atmosphere.

    And, since its much easier to supress research into the carcinogenic, mutagenic and heavy-metal toxicity of the radioactive waste when it is part of a military programme, both the enemy, innocent civilians and friendly troops struck by friendly fire or on reconstruction duties can be sacrificed to slow (or rapid, depending on exposure) deaths due to radioactive and toxic particles ingested through exposure to battlegrounds where radioactive munitions have been used, or even the air, water and food chain in contaminated areas, with a clear conscience and plausible deniability.

    I think the most easily recognisable warning of radioactive danger for future generations will be the US Flag.

    --
    I gots ta ding a ding dang my dang a long ling long
    1. Re:Nuclear Waste isn't a problem anyway by PitaBred · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ever read the facts about depleted uranium? I wouldn't want to be shot with it, but I'd daresay that things like radon, burning oil and their own countrymen blowing them up provide more hazards to Iraqi's (that is what you were alluding to, wasn't it?) than depleted uranium shells.

    2. Re:Nuclear Waste isn't a problem anyway by fredmosby · · Score: 4, Informative

      Natural uranium is 99.3% U238 and 0.7% U235. U235 has a half life of 700 million years. U238 has a half life of 4 billion years. Isotopes with longer half lives are less radioactive. Therefore U238 is far less radioactive than U235.

      Depleted uranium is uranium that has had most of the U235 separated out. Making it less radioactive than natural uranium

      The average natural uranium content in topsoil is about 2 parts per million(that's without any contamination of any kind). Iraq has more than a trillion tons of topsoil. In the first meter of soil there is already more than two million tons of natural uranium. Adding a few thousand tons of depleted uranium will have no effect on the people of Iraq.

      The effects of uranium are well known and have been studied by many countries other than the United States. You are just making up a conspiracy theory because you have no facts on your side.

    3. Re:Nuclear Waste isn't a problem anyway by abb3w · · Score: 1
      In the first meter of soil there is already more than two million tons of natural uranium. Adding a few thousand tons of depleted uranium will have no effect on the people of Iraq.

      There's roughly comparable amounts of arsenic; however, giving people a concentrated exposure to that is also not a good thing.

      DU isn't harmless, but I suspect the main cause of the problem may be chemical, rather than nuclear.

      --
      //Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
    4. Re:Nuclear Waste isn't a problem anyway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a concentration problem. All the left over uranium in the nuclear fuels were safe when they were underground at low concentrations. Put low concentration, toxic materials all in one place and you have a problem. Raising the AVERAGE concentration of 2 ppm to 2.000001 ppm, is correctly, not a problem. Raise the local concentration to 200 ppm, and now the toxicity of uranium is a problem.

      Plus uranium is toxic, and not really a radiological problem. Just because it does not glow does not mean it is safe.

    5. Re:Nuclear Waste isn't a problem anyway by idsofmarch · · Score: 1

      Except you're making the assumption that a "few thousand tons of depleted uranium" will be spread over the entire country and not concentrated in a few small areas, say when someone unloads a 100 or so at one particular target. This is not to mention the fact that DU burns and becomes highly toxic after doing so. Having the shell sitting around is no big deal, but things change by how you use it.

      --
      Anyone who whines about being modded down should be.
    6. Re:Nuclear Waste isn't a problem anyway by fredmosby · · Score: 1

      Most of the toxicology studies I've read say depleted uranium is about as dangerous as lead. I'm not saying lead is harmless, but if the bullets they use aren't DU they are probably lead.

    7. Re:Nuclear Waste isn't a problem anyway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The average natural uranium content in topsoil is about 2 parts per million(that's without any contamination of any kind). Iraq has more than a trillion tons of topsoil. In the first meter of soil there is already more than two million tons of natural uranium. Adding a few thousand tons of depleted uranium will have no effect on the people of Iraq

      interesting. If its so safe, why not add all that depleted uranium to the topsoil in the US?

  90. Burial is not the answer. by Sparr0 · · Score: 1

    Burying it with no warnings is not a solution. Earthquakes would break this idea, although they can be minimized by placement. But even ignoring natural disasters, society could fail, then start over, and reach the ability to dig deep mines without records. We are talking about tens of thousands of years, and digging down a mile is not beyond 1800s-era mining technology.

    1. Re:Burial is not the answer. by tehdaemon · · Score: 1

      The periodic table was also 'discovered' in the 1800's, even though the transuranics were not added until 1940 or so. Putting the periodic table up sounds like a good idea to me.

      --
      Laws are horrible moral guides, moral guides make even worse laws.
  91. Try This One... by Kamel+Jockey · · Score: 2, Funny

    bah weep graaagnah wheep ni ni bong

    --
    In case of fire, do not use elevator. Use water!
  92. No highly esteemed deed is commemorated here by mj01nir · · Score: 1

    This was covered back in '02 on /. :

    This Place is Not a Place of Honor
    http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/05/1 1/011235

    Check out the official SANDIA report:
    http://infoserve.sandia.gov/sand_doc/1992/921382.p df

    --
    the no .sig .sig
  93. Attention Mutants by windowpain · · Score: 1

    This is an old story and the LA Times left out the best part. Although the page has moved around a bit, I've had Expert Judgement on Markers to Deter Inadvertent Human Intrusion into the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in my bookmarks for years.

    I've always liked the first words of the study, a creepy, post-apocalypse-sounding salutation that summarizes what the message must convey:

    This place is not a place of honor.
    No highly esteemed deed is commemorated here.
    Nothing valued is here.
    This place is a message and part of a system of messages.
    Pay attention to it!
    Sending this message was important to us.
    We considered ourselves to be a powerful culture.


    Armageddon outta here, dude.

    --
    Insert witty sig here.
  94. Article only for members by Mr.+Freeman · · Score: 1

    The article linked to in the post is only available to members of the site where the article is hosted.

    How the heck did that even make it onto slashdot?

    If someone could post the article text here, it'd be quite helpful.

    --
    -1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
    1. Re:Article only for members by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't have to be a "member". You just have to feed them a bunch of BS demographics to get a free account. They have to be know whether to put up the Tampax ad or the Budweiser ad when you hit the page (or the Tampax/Budweiser combo ad if you're a drunken bitch).

      Just go to Bugmenot and pick a ready made account.

    2. Re:Article only for members by mh101 · · Score: 1

      Hmm, I clicked the link and read the entire article, and didn't have to register or log in or anything. I don't recall ever going to this web site before, and I usually just leave a site if it forces me to register just to read an article.

      But I guess it's also possible that I did register a year or more ago and have simply forgotten.

      --
      Duct tape is like the Force. It has a light side, a dark side, and it holds the universe together.
    3. Re:Article only for members by mh101 · · Score: 1

      I just tried in a different browser and got through to the article fine there too.

      --
      Duct tape is like the Force. It has a light side, a dark side, and it holds the universe together.
    4. Re:Article only for members by mh101 · · Score: 1

      ...and now this morning I try it again, and I need to register now! Strange.

      --
      Duct tape is like the Force. It has a light side, a dark side, and it holds the universe together.
  95. I know! I Know! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about radioactive markers?

  96. stonehenge as an example? by akhomerun · · Score: 1

    is it just me, or does the fact that stonehenge has no obvious pictures or writing make it a bad example? in itself, it's a symbol i guess, but it's not obvious. if someone drew something on stonehenge, it probably wouldn't be a mystery.

    surely warnings written in multiple languages will suffice, along with drawn or other kinds of symbols.

    symbols that exist can survive forever, such as an arrow or knife through a human skull. that symbol would never fade, and if it did, then humanity itself would not exist.

  97. Re:The monumental task of warning future generatio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unfortunately, given humanity's track record so far, the more warnings and "bad stuff here" deterrents you use, the harder people will try to dig it up and weaponize it.

  98. Cave Man did it best! by Dark+Coder · · Score: 1
    At least we understood the hunt that occurred 10,000 years ago from the cave paintings.

    Just make a stick figure showing it like this rudimentary ASCII art... (here's hoping that lame filter don't kick in.)



    __O
      |\. .__O
    ./ \ _/\ \ V_|O /****\


    If they can't "read" and art, like we can... well... they can roll over, Darwinishm-style.
    1. Re:Cave Man did it best! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you're saying something along the lines of "Porn collection contained inside"?

  99. We're not talking about burying spent reactor fuel by AWeishaupt · · Score: 1

    It's likely that any future civilisation with the level of science and technology to understand radioactivity and basic nuclear physics would have idenfified the radioactivity / Trinitite / Bloody big craters of the nearby Nevada test site, and worked out exactly what they're dealing with. To all those discussing the IFR, and reprocessing of the waste, it's important to consider exactly what WIPP is dealing with. Not spent reactor fuels, but transuranic actinide wastes from weapons research - predominantly stuff produced between WW2 and the Cold War, from the early research in Actinide radiometallurgy through to large-scale weapons Pu production. Look at the clean up job that is being undertaken with the buried waste tanks at ORNL Y-12 these days - that's the sort of stuff we're dealing with. Reprocessing waste, to extract the Plutonium, is always going to generate additonal actinide-contaminated waste, and that's what we're dealing with here. Not spent reactor fuel with heaps of Plutonium - waste from fuel reproccessing, basically. It's not practical to further reprocess the waste for IFR use, both for economical reasons, and for the fact that it will simply generate even more spent filters and crap like that contaminated with Pu and other nucleides - exactly like this waste we've already got. If recovering these nucleides was practical, we would be doing just that.

  100. Call up Superman by mh101 · · Score: 1

    How about getting Superman to toss all the nuclear waste into the sun like he did with all the nukes in Superman IV?

    --
    Duct tape is like the Force. It has a light side, a dark side, and it holds the universe together.
  101. Best book on the subject by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The novel "Riddley Walker" - Check it out.

  102. COBOL by Embedded+Geek · · Score: 4, Funny
    languages die and words once poetic or portentous become the indecipherable marks of a long-forgotten scribbler

    Heck, write the damn thing in COBOL. After all, what better language to use than one that refuses to die despite every best effort to kill it?

    --

    "Prepare for the worst - hope for the best."

  103. They'd figure it out...the hard way.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I would guess that if we are talking about one place (Yucca mountain), a relatively small number of persons will be liberating the high-level waste. When their hair falls out and they suffer the other symptoms of radiation poisoning, they will figure it out within a few days, and after a relatively low number of fatalities, they will leave their own message in a readily understood language.

  104. Write it in Chinese by 200_success · · Score: 1

    Chinese writing would be a pretty good bet for future readability. After all, modern Chinese characters are still rather similar to those of 4000 years ago. (The tradeoff is that we have no idea how Chinese was pronounced 4000 years ago, but for this application it's more important to convey the meaning.) As a bonus, it's known by a large portion of the human population that is spread through much of the world.

  105. Graphic imagery by HunterZ · · Score: 1

    Why not try something simple, like showing a picture of someone's face melting off while touching a glowing rock? Scary skull/skeleton images are pretty universal as well, I'd think.

    Reminds me of the awesome song from Full Throttle:
    "The population is greatly decreased,
    and now the odds are greatly increased
    that I may someday get a chance
    to kiss your lips.
    I thank the lo-o-o-o-rd each day,
    for the apocalypse.

    Folks are mostly disfigured or dead,
    but sugar I won't let it go to my head.
    My momma's face has dripped down
    into the dirt.
    But I'm still chasin'
    chitlins, whiskey, and skirt."

    --
    Arguing about vi versus Emacs is like arguing whether it's better to make fire by rubbing sticks or banging rocks.
  106. Linkage Goodness! by AWeishaupt · · Score: 1

    http://downlode.org/etext/wipp/ http://www.wipp.energy.gov/library/PermanentMarker sImplementationPlan.pdf As presently planned, the Level II messages will state through text and pictographs that there is danger present, and the danger is below the land surface. Level III messages tell that radioactive and hazardous waste is buried, instruct persons not to dig or drill, indicate the depth of burial, when WIPP was closed, that the repository is intended to last at least 10,000 years, that there is a decreasing danger over time, and requesting that the messages be updated to the current language or languages in use (space will be left on the markers for this purpose). Level IV messages expand on the above topics, and also address the potential for releases through ground water, identify cancer as the primary risk, provide detailed information on radioactive and chemical constituents of the waste, provide a geologic cross-section with reasons for choosing the Salado Formation for the WIPP, describe the locations world-wide where other nuclear waste sites are located, and urge readers to seek out those other sites and ensure consistency of messages. To enhance the potential for comprehension of the messages, it is planned that they will be inscribed in seven languages: English, French, Spanish, Arabic, Russian, Chinese, and Navajo. This spread of languages representing different cultures and geographical regions will, it is hoped, potentially allow the markers to serve as "Rosetta Stones" for future populations, and thus increase the chance that they will be understood. Other means of improving possibilities for comprehension include the use of complementary diagrams and pictographs, use of simple words and short sentences, and through the testing of message comprehension with populations indigenous to areas speaking each language, as described in this plan. The proposed text of the Level II, III, and IV messages are included in Appendix PIC of the CCA. Pictographs proposed in Appendix PIC include the following. Level II Message: Graphic symbols of the human face expressing horror and terror; DOE/WIPP 04-3302 42 Graphic symbols of the human face expressing something nauseating or poisonous; and Trefoil and biohazard symbols. Level III Message: The pictographs described above, plus: Diagram conveying the danger of digging or drilling; Spatial perspective of the marking system to the underground repository; and Time elapse diagram from WIPP closure via north celestial pole migration, including faces showing disgust at closure to neutral at 10,000 years, to contentment well beyond 10,000 years, and decreasing size radioactive symbol. Level IV Message: The pictographs described above, plus: Detailed spatial perspective of the repository; Geologic cross section of the WIPP site and relative position of the repository within the formations; Periodic chart of the elements, identifying the major radioactive and nonradioactive elements present in waste buried at the WIPP site; Azimuths of the bright stars Vega, Arcturus, Sirius, and Canopus as they rise above the horizon at the time of WIPP closure, allowing calculation of the time of closure; and World map showing the locations where other radioactive wastes are buried. Drawings of these pictographs are shown in CCA Appendix PIC.

  107. Re: Skulls & bones were rejected by WIPP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Skulls and bones were actually discussed in the original WIPP study. They were rejected as being culturally defined, ie today's usage on medicine bottles being unrelated to the original (pirate) meaning. Generally, they assumed that while human beings would not change much physically in 10'000 years, almost no abstraction would survive (stay understandable) that long.

    The proposal was to replace artificial symbols with pictorials. Disgusted faces, stick people displaying sickness, with symbols which tie sickness to the actual monument.

    Related link about how the monument was planned (long but interesting reading):
    http://www.physics.uci.edu/~silverma/benford.html
    The process involved all kind of scientists, including a physicist/science-fiction author.

    The original WIPP report is also available somewhere as a PDF (sorry, no link). They accepted two or three alternative solutions for everything, from physical layout to warning labels.

  108. problem solves itself by fishbowl · · Score: 1

    Radioactive material will cause mysterious deaths and illness. Tribes will develop dogmatic arguments for avoiding the site, all on their own. They will mark it with their *own* symbols. Anyone who comes along with a scientific method, will stand a chance of figuring it out. Until then, tribe leaders and priests will make some argument, driven by the empirical understanding that avoiding the site helps increase the strength of the tribe, and vice versa.

    --
    -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
  109. Go read "DEEP TIME" by KlaymenDK · · Score: 1

    Go read "DEEP TIME", this subject is nothing new...

    http://www.physics.uci.edu/~silverma/benford.html

  110. Running out... by jd · · Score: 1
    Uranium is rather easier to estimate than oil. We know the abundance of the elements on Earth, whereas oil is a compound. Although oil cannot exceed the total amount of hydrogen or carbon, the amount of hydrogen and carbon that form oil in pools large enough to extract close enough to the surface to be extractable is much harder to guess. Uranium is uranium, and we don't care what compounds it has formed, so the total minable uranium will be much closer to the abundance of the element than oil is to the abundance of its constituent elements. Oil reserves are guesses, uranium reserves are a mathematically provable value.


    Having said that, you assume that the guesses were wrong. Actually, there are some excellent reasons for believing the guesses were right.


    Britain now consumes more food than it produces - it fell into a food deficit a few weeks back. Not sure about other countries, but I suspect that many do likewise. The 80s is about when starvation in Africa hit the point where people were dying in vast numbers. In America and other industrialized countries, it is no longer possible to feed everyone a healthy diet. People are fed extremely bloaty, chemical-laced, drug-laced* toxic sludge instead, unless they're rich enough to afford the real stuff.


    We're not "out of food" in the sense that nobody has any, but we ARE "out of food" in the sense that it is no longer economically viable to keep people fed. I strongly expect the region incapable of maintaining human life (because there simply isn't any food) to continue expanding, and for those regions with high population densities to place more and more people in the position of eating dangerously unhealthy products in a desparate effort to avoid admitting to the fact that they simply don't have the food to feed their people. (The picture is complicated by Africa having extremely high death rates from disease and war, as well as from starvation, but the evidence seems to be that a significant portion of the world CANNOT feed itself.)


    We should also bear in mind that the oceans have supplied a very large percent of the food for some time. However, cod stocks are extinct in some places and down 90% in others, with many edible fish stocks down 70-80%. The oceans can no longer support human life in the manner to which it is accustomed.


    *Angel dust and other illegal substances are, according to some reports, routinely added to cattle feed along with extremely high levels of antibiotics and growth hormones. All this because the livestock have to be kept in unhealthy conditions in order to feed the population at all, and have to be bulked up to maximise meat per square foot of land used. The majority of farmers don't use organic farming - not because it's more expensive (they'd simply raise their prices, and would probably make greater profits) but because it's not physically possible to supply sufficient food using any kind of sane system of farming. If sane farming practices were mandated, a good half of the American population would look like the BBC images of Ethiopia that spawned Live Aid.


    Oil has passed its peak and North Sea oil is virtually exhausted (having passed peak sometime in the 80s). Nor is oil the only fossil fuel in trouble. There are no working coal mines in Great Britain - the very few minable seams left are far too contaminated with sulpher to be of much value. It is unclear how much oil is left in Saudi Arabia, but it is notable that they have failed to increase capacity although they have quota to spare. There have been no major oil finds ANYWHERE in the world for some time and it is thought likely that this is because there are none to find. The arctic wildlife refuge has so little oil that although the area Bush wants drilled would take 10-15 years to get the pipeline and installations in place, there is at most 10 years worth of oil there, assuming the best possible estimates given.


    All in all, the usual cry of "there will always be more" demonstrably has no validity. We are not in good shape, as things stand, and drastic changes will need to be made to human habits if humanity plans on staying around long enough to care about fusion.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    1. Re:Running out... by Jesus_666 · · Score: 1

      Britain now consumes more food than it produces - it fell into a food deficit a few weeks back. Not sure about other countries, but I suspect that many do likewise.

      I think it's still a common practice in the EU to overproduce certain things (like milk IIRC) and then destroy some of it in order to keep the prices stable.

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    2. Re:Running out... by bhiestand · · Score: 1
      Britain now consumes more food than it produces - it fell into a food deficit a few weeks back. Not sure about other countries, but I suspect that many do likewise.

      You suspect wrong.

      (The picture is complicated by Africa having extremely high death rates from disease and war, as well as from starvation, but the evidence seems to be that a significant portion of the world CANNOT feed itself.)

      Right, starvation is a weapon in war. There is not a shortage of food being produced. The planet produces excess food, and it's getting cheaper by the day in developed nations. The issue is that some people stockpile it, others steal it, and some people do both in an effort to gain control and power over other people.

      When obesity is the primary health concern of the impoverished in America, I think you need to consider the idea that maybe it's people killing people instead of mother earth killing people because she can't support us.

      This is a WAG, but I'm going to say that the world could probably double its food output by simply educating 2nd and 3rd world countries in modern agriculture sciences and giving them some of the basic technology and equipment used to achieve the results.
      --
      SWM seeks new sig for a brief fling
  111. Warning is easy, and problem is minor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bury the waste deep deep in granite under concrete, and flood the area and ground with pottery and glass skulls.

    The skulls will be a hint that there is something dangerous.

    If civilisation collapses, primitives won't be able to dig through the granite and concrete.

    Sophisticated civilisations will be able to detect the radioactivity.

    The only people at real risk are Victorian-age engineers, for a brief period when they have the ability to dig through the concrete but haven't yet discovered radiation. If the skulls aren't a clue to stay away, a few people will get radiated and die. It's not a big issue.

  112. Stonehenge is a good example of the problem by ctid · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Presumably it meant something very important to those who built it, but now we don't know what that was. Surely this is an excellent summary of the dilemma facing those who want to bury a deadly substance and keep it undisturbed for millenia?

    --
    Reality is defined by the maddest person in the room
  113. no problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think there is no problem.
    Nuclear radiation will be all around the world, rather sooner then later.
    People will survive that, like the animals and plants near Tschernobyl.
    And they will find ways to avoid the places which are too radioactive, even for them.

  114. Or just search Slashdot for it by Atario · · Score: 1

    They're sure to get several dozen results by then.

    http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/05/1 1/011235

    --
    "A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy." --Theodore Roosevelt
  115. universal symbols of death: your skulls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just leave a few skulls and pictures around. Pictures tell a pretty accurate story of humans hunting buffalo and elk from ancient times. No reason skulls and poison "death below" could not be pictured on stone.
    Of course, no warning ever stopped idiots. Better to not mark it at all if you wish to protect them.

  116. The "language" of intention by noidentity · · Score: 1

    I was thinking along the lines of making the containment structure clearly show that it was intentionally made to keep something dangerous inside. Any intelligent beings could determine the intent without having to decode any language. One problem is that it might appear to be a structure made to securely contain something of value. So another option is to be sure that anyone mistakenly entering it would die quickly and graphically, serving as a warning to others. This kind of thing could also apply to stockpiles of biological weapons. The worst situation would be material which had an ill health effect in the long-term but was hard to determine the cause of.

  117. Two words. by Bigthecat · · Score: 1

    Goatse Man.

  118. No warning needed - it won't be there long by boomer42 · · Score: 1

    A warning to work for 10,000 won't be needed because the material won't be there. Within a few hundred years, that radioactive "waste" will be dug up and reused. Like the air you exhale still contains most of the oxygen, the fuel we discard still contains a large fraction of the enriched material. Since Jimmy Carter banned reprocessing in the 1970's, we have no choice but to dispose of fuel that still contains large amounts of usable material in the form of (principly) U-235 and P-238. In a typical power reactor today, by the end of the fuel cycle 30%-40% of the energy is coming from fissioning plutonium. The fuel is discharged because there is too high a build-up of fission products that absorb neutrons. Just like suffocating in a closed room. It's not the lack of oxygen that gets you, it's the buildup of carbon dioxide. Back to my point, before too long people will figure out that throwing away fuel that took large amounts of electricty to enrich is a bad idea. Within 300 years all the short lived, high energy fission products will have decayed leaving only the long lived, low energy materials like Uranium and Plutonium. You can handle those with your hands with no shielding. (Little known fact: Plutonium is an alpha emitter. A sheet of paper will stop all radiation from plutionium. As long as you don't eat it or breath it in, it won't hurt you.) So our decendents will say "thank you," dig up the material, reprocess it, and keep their "X-box 36 Million" consoles and electric flying cars running. If there are signs, they should say "Dig here! Free energy!" (Know your sources - I've been a Nuclear Engineer for 25 years)

    1. Re:No warning needed - it won't be there long by alexgieg · · Score: 1

      A small complement: A recent article in Scientific American Brazil (it was probably published in an earlier American edition, but I'm not sure) talked extensively on the new reprocessing techniques on discarded fission material, and how new nuclear plant projects are able to use those to produce energy, leaving in the end only harmless metal.

      IIRC, current nuclear plants use only 5% of the energy actually present on fission material. When the material is discarded, about 95% is still available but unused, and those 95% are what makes this material harmfull to living beings. The new technology will revert this, using 95% and leaving 5% unused. The then discarded metal (the one with 5% radioactive energy) doesn't cause problems.

      The most interesting point of the article is that the current discarded material can be used in these new plants. When it's all used up there won't rest any nuclear "waste".

      Now a question remains: will ecofanatics ever stand up and say, as they should, "Er... yes, sorry, we were wrong all the time"? Yeah, sure...

      --
      Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
    2. Re:No warning needed - it won't be there long by Recneps · · Score: 1

      will ecofanatics ever stand up and say, as they should, "Er... yes, sorry, we were wrong all the time"? the leader of green peace is now in support of nuclear power, he has changed his views on it after 30 years of fighting it. hopefully others follow his example. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic le/2006/04/14/AR2006041401209.html

  119. make it like a game by haqatak · · Score: 1

    Seperate each floor with different levels of toxic juices, that way, if you survive level 10, you probably have some kind of radiation suit anyways and its not that dangerous for you

  120. Whats wrongn with using a little Protong? by torpor · · Score: 1

    Besides the Zermatism, I mean ..

    Look, its whack. But that doesn't mean there isn't something useful to come out of it .. I, for one, believe that Protong is a useful construct. It sure makes it fun to read things backwards ..

    --
    ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
  121. This place is not a place of honor by p3d0 · · Score: 1
    --
    Patrick Doyle
    I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
  122. Thank You by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That was the best comment in this entire thread.

    If I actually had an account and had mod points, I'd mod you up. So consider this a +5 from an AC.

  123. Artificial skeletons and skulls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Instead of letting the skeletons and skulls of the first victims serve as warnings, plant artificial skeletons. Maybe splatter them with something that fluoresces in the radiation. Anyone ignoring this fairly obvious warning will just end up reinforcing the point.

  124. Terrible loss of civilizations by Steeltoe · · Score: 1

    We've had Ice Ages while humanity has populated this earth. There's even been discoveries that humans actually co-existed with dinosaurs. Landmasses that are now land has once been ocean and visa versa.. Some land millions of years ago, is now buried so deep none of us could have a hope of getting there..

    Consider the scale you're talking about.. Earth is at least hundreds of million of years old, and over long periods the surface is really boiling when seen in "fast-film".

    Something to destroy an advanced civilization, have to be HUGE. Eventually it will wipe out most traces of this civilization, except for the forklore, myths and occational artifacts.

    That area, has been what is termed 'Positively Forbidden Territory' for the Western world since the year 1938, which now, in light of what Dr. Chow had to say, was probably not at all coincidental. At any rate, Professor Chi Pu Tei and his students discovered what was first described as a series of caves or caverns, but later admitted to be a complex system of artificial tunnels and underground storerooms. These tunnels are perfectly squared and the walls, ceilings, and floors are highly glazed, as if somehow the passages and rooms were carved by a device emitting heat of such intensity that it simply melted its way into the moun- tains.

    Ancient texts, maybe more than 5000 years old in Sanskrit found all over Asia, and especially the areas around India speaks of:

    "the holy Indian Sages, the Ramayana for one, tell of "Two storied celestial chariots with many windows" "They roar like off into the sky until they appear like comets." The Mahabharata and various Sanskrit books describe at length these chariots, "powered by winged lighting...it was a ship that soared into the air, flying to both the solar and stellar regions."

    There are also references all over the Vedas to wars with missiles being fired on cities both from the land and air, destroying most of the cities, and anti-missile systems protecting said cities.

    From A tribute to Hinduism (Mind you, the word Hinduism never existed before some scientists started tagging people that name. Before that, it was just the natural folklore and daily way of living in the areas in the Middle East, shared by people that now call themselves Muslims and others..)

    There are many indications that humans knew how to fly, or have had experiences of flying in vehicles. One of the most famous examples being the Nasca Lines of Peru (Warning: This was the site with the best pictures I could find, but it's a bit New Ageish).

    1. Re:Terrible loss of civilizations by flabbergasted · · Score: 2, Informative
      There's even been discoveries that humans actually co-existed with dinosaurs.
      This so called evidence has been discredited for a very long time. Please visit the talkorigins.org page on Paluxy. The "human-like" nature of the footprints are superficial at best and do not hold up to careful examination. After reading the discussion at t.o. you can return to the bible.ca site you listed and see the features they described in the images for yourself. You can then make up your own mind.
  125. Naive assumptions, unnecessary project by seven+of+five · · Score: 1

    This project assumes that people and things will be pretty much the same 20,000 years from now as they are today. More likely, and barring planetary scale catastrophe, more change will happen in the next 200 years than in the past 2 million. Look at the emerging fields of nanotech, info science, biotech, etc. It's doubtful that homo sapiens will still be around in even in 200 years, much less 20,000. This project looks to warn future generations who will be less vulnerable to the danger, and far better able to deal with the problem.

  126. Re:Moot point without space travel! by vertinox · · Score: 1

    The idea is to preserve humanity at all costs. As far as we know, Earth is the only home for intelligent life - and, perhaps, life at all - in the universe.

    If the average human's body cannot withstand radiation in 1,000 years... That means one thing.

    We haven't evolved to a state where we can travel long distances in space.

    Which also means we are most likley stuck on this planet...

    Given the stastistics, we will most likley be hit with a meteor between now and 10,000 years that will most likley make life a living hell for all still around... That is unless we happen to be elsewhere.

    Or perhaps we aren't but we are technologically advanced enough to divert any incoming asteroids...

    Or survive a gamma ray burst... Or magnetic pole reversal... Or anything else that may cause solar radation to kill off life on the surface.

    For some reason I feel that life on Earth is indeed a fluke and we might be the only things in the universe with self awareness.

    This might be our only chance to branch out and get off this planet before we are snuffed out by a cosmic hiccup. If our future selves are cave dwellers... Our chances of surviving an End of the World Event go to 0%.

    --
    "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
    -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
  127. link here by ElephanTS · · Score: 1

    I agree with you 100% and hate the comments you've had. I include a link about DU I read recently. I think it should be understood that the US (and to a lesser extent the UK) forces are actively engaged in a low level nuclear war right now.

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=vie wArticle&code=20060503&articleId=2374

    DU is extremely harmful stuff people! After "Shock&Awe" air meters in the UK peaked at 400% normal value radioactive(March2003). Sickens me that people can be so glib regarding this.

    --
    spoonerize "magic trackpad"
  128. Ipsum dolor by aioue · · Score: 1

    "Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Proin tincidunt sapien eget urna. Maecenas euismod. Praesent at ipsum. Donec eu purus. Vestibulum dignissim, augue at ultrices ullamcorper, libero magna vehicula tortor, at viverra tortor ipsum sit amet metus. Fusce malesuada."

    Translation: "Traveller Beware! Microsoft Templates Lurk Within."

  129. fuck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What cracks me up is that these people are optimistic enough to think there will be intelligent life 10,000 years from now. It's up to us, yes, but it's also up to the Universe and mostly up to chance. Once a huge asteroid crashes on "our" planet (yes, some people think we have some sort of ownership over this planet) the human race will be gone and earth will go on with a brand new ass and no intelligent life on it, or no life at all.
    People, the first thing we should do is stop doing shit that is harmful to us and try to get out of here, life should be completely subordinated to insure we, as a species, survive beyond the planet earth (beyond in time and beyond in space).

  130. Simple solution by joshv · · Score: 1

    Leave a large hunk of plutonium physically accessible at ground level. Anyone who cannot read the signs, understand the symbols and such, will wander in, irradiate themselves, and then die. It won't take long for the locals to figure things out and develop their own signage.

  131. Simpsons Did It! by Tony · · Score: 1

    Gregory Benford talked about this back in 2000. Somebody must've read it recently.

    --
    Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
  132. Bible by PhYrE2k2 · · Score: 1

    You're right. Let's ammend the bible!

    -M

    --

    when you see the word 'Linux', drink!
  133. when in doubt, use a toilet by geckoFeet · · Score: 1

    Excrement is a universal symbol of disparagement.

    How about scattering a bunch of pit toilets around the site? The pits are only a couple of dozen feet deep, so won't interfere with the primary purpose. They can be lined with some low-value but durable concrete. Up top, instead of a western throne, an Asian squat toilet of the same material, perhaps (partially?) enclosed by a low wall. These toilets would, of course, be fully functional although not necessarily comfortable, but the most important purpose would be symbolic. The "two footprints and a hole" structure would be hard to misinterpret.

  134. Benford's Ideas on this are interesting by Evil+Pete · · Score: 1

    Sometime back I happened on this article by Gregory Benford about how we can communicate across tens of thousands of years to our descendants in the form of a warning ... as in don't open this up.

    I particularly like the suggestion near the end about making the site scary so that it would become a place that was taboo just because it was so creepy. His suggestion was shaped stone monoliths that would wail in the wind. Anyway worth reading.

    --
    Bitter and proud of it.
  135. My 2 cents and a candy. by Theropissed · · Score: 1

    The "Rosetta Stone 2.0" is a good idea. However the chance of them finding just one Rosetta Stone would be minimal. (to my knowledge there is only One rosetta stone, and that was found by chance in a desert.). Make multiple ones scattered about and with horrible images on each one. Though if archaeologists are like any of the ones from today. They wont heed warnings of a curse, and they could likely continue digging. Either way i dont think Humanities stupidity would go away ever. So whoever they are, they are boned.

    --
    Yeah yeah, i know, so quiet.
  136. They have succeeded already by Jasper__unique_dammi · · Score: 1

    They have succeeded already! All generations of man is warned! It has been on /.!

  137. Barrier series by abb3w · · Score: 1
    The warnings outside are one step. However, some non-verbal warnings might help, too.

    First, there should only be a single route of access through the rock. Block it off with a series of airtight barriers, repeating the warnings. Between the barriers, you'll want a non-verbal warning of a highly specialized form. For each, you need:
    * A few dead bodies, from people who have died (naturally) of cancer; the more pronounced the cancer, the better.
    * A radiation source in about the 10000 Curie range, using an isotope with a half-life on the order of 1 year... sufficent to kill any bacteria in the area.

    The radiation source will be harmless in 20 years. However, it will leave behind a dead body, perfectly preserved for centuries as a primitive warning. If they're advanced enough to do an autopsy, they get a more detailed warning, which hopefully might give a clue to decipher the warning.

    --
    //Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
  138. A message and system of messages by drouse · · Score: 1

    One of the main problems with protecting this site is that it isn't a case of "touch the glowing rocks and drop dead" - and if you have that kind of scary message and someone messes around with the site and doesn't turn into a glowing skeleton - then the warnings will be ignored.

    That is why so much of the focus is on education, telling people what is here and the types of dangers that the waste represents. The problem with an educational messages, of course, if that it is very hard to get across, especially if there is a language/cultural barrier.

    This is a tough problem and a lot of people have put a lot of work into trying to solve it (that and the whole natural physical containment issue).

    An interesting look into the warning system design process is here:

    http://downlode.org/Etext/wipp/

    --
    -- I browse at +5 with stripped sigs ... Ha! Ha!
  139. Morons can't imagine smart people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yet another moron who thinks future people will be stupid.

    This is because, morons cannot imagine anyone smarter than themselves. Just look at what gets "5 - Insightful" here on Slashdot!

    You can't put the Geiger counter back in the bottle.

  140. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  141. Assumptions about future civilizations by jim_deane · · Score: 1

    I have noticed some significant assumptions made by most people considering this issue. The two most important assumptions are:
    1. The Human species will continue to advance technologically, or at a minimum will retain our current level of technology and knowledge.

    2. The Human species is the only species we are concerned about.


    The second example is more speculative; we don't think there are any other species which are approaching the ability to develop large scale civilization and higher brain functions. However, since we don't really seem to understand the mechanism by which we developed our own advanced civilization and higher thought processes, nor why it occurred when it did and not at some earlier or later point, we may not be good judges of this natural phenomenon.

    The first example is the one that concerns me more, and which most people ignore. There is no reason to believe that we will not experience a catastrophic natural or man-made event that results in the collapse of civilization. This is fairly unlikely in the next ten years, slightly more likely in the next hundred, more likely in the next thousand, etc. If we destroyed a significant portion of our infrastructure, it is likely we would descend as a civilization into a new dark age. Without the knowledge and infrastructure base, we would not be looking for radioactive material to power our nuclear reactors--we would be looking for land on which to hunt and grow crops. Travelling groups of humans might notice a site such as the nuclear waste storage facility. Curiosity might get the better of them...

    So, we have two problems. How do we communicate with a future human race that might be far more advanced than we are; and how do we simultaneously plan to communicate with a future human race that has regressed into a new dark age? If you really want to speculate, then you might consider how we communicate reliably with a non-human intelligent race...

    Jim
  142. My solution: full accountability by plopez · · Score: 1

    Every year, take the waste from nukes, low level, high level, whatever; and chop it into little peices. Then mail it to customers, managers, regulators, stock holders etc. Anyone who directly benefits from it.

    Then let them deal with safe disposal.

    This is actually the perfect libertarian ideal, where there are no hidden costs or subsidies.

    It will never happen though as most humans are not far removed from irresponsible 3 year old like behavior ("It's not my problem!", "Just throw it away!", " Let some one else worry about it!" etc.)

    --
    putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
  143. Unlikely by hoppo · · Score: 1

    The key to interpretation is having a point of reference. The FA brings up an interesting point, but consider the difference between human cultures today and early civilizations. Written and other persistent, nonverbal records are ubiquitous in today's society. The comparatively high literacy rate, combined with the ease of production of the written word provides a much more vast store from which to draw. Obviously everything we have today will not survive, but just think of what future archaeologists would still manage to find -- a wealth of books to decipher our language, as well as magazines, more realistic drawings and paintings, movie film, etc.

    We have learned quite a bit about prehistoric civilizations from just their tools, homes, and a few other artifacts. Does it really seem reasonable to think the evidence we will leave behind won't paint a much more vivid picture to a presumably more advanced society?

  144. i'm sure i remember reading by petermgreen · · Score: 1

    that depleted uranium actaully gets more radioactive at first not less as the decay products have shorter half lives than the uranium itself.

    anyone know if this is true?

    --
    note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
  145. Here's a suggestion... by JollyFinn · · Score: 1

    Make a nice story that says something came from the sky and people died in diseases because of it. Make a nice cartoon of it and people burying the cause of the disease and those who died from diseases to the cave. Then mumify most malformed dead for display and after that have millions of peoples bones in the cave after that. I mean after they see the amount of bones in the caves they are probably not going to continue their path of searching what killed them.

    The point that something came from the sky might need alteration but basic idea of needing to carry thousands of tons worth of human bones out of cave migh make someone understand what the cartoon was about.

    --
    Emacs is good operating system, but it has one flaw: Its text editor could be better.
  146. dupe by BroadwayBlue · · Score: 1

    I read this story in Time or Newsweek back in the early 90s. I'm glad to see that progress has been made. Not.

  147. India is the major English speaking country by ghoul · · Score: 1

    I couldnt help notice that you mentioned 3 major english speaking regions but left out India. Granted India has other languages too but all educated people speak English that makes it around 300 million English speakers. I guess only the US comes close to that figure and Ireland?? Dont they speak Irish? Next you will be counting France as an English speaking country

    --
    **Life is too short to be serious**
    1. Re:India is the major English speaking country by Jesapoo · · Score: 1

      I think you both missed the point of the post, and got your facts horribly wrong.

      Maybe half a million people speak Irish as their first language. Between Scots gaelic, Welsh and Irish language speakrs there are maybe a million people in the British Isles who don't speak English as their first language... so, somewhere between 1% and 2% of the population. In all honestly, it's probably closer to 1.

      A large majority of the French population, despite common stereotypes, can speak english, although I'd obviously never claim it was a language in particularly high use, unlike for those who speak Welsh or Irish as their primary language who often have to revert to English for many every-day things. Of course, this is all within limited experience, and I'd love to know if there are any language experts around who can confirm or correct me here :)

      India has about 800mil english speakers, give or take - but, again, primarily second language IIRC, although it is somewhat more prevalent than in France.

      I appologise if I offended anyone for missing out their country. I simply grouped up the obvious ones where english is the primary, de juro, de facto, language. That's 65million english speakers in the British Isles, 325mil in North Nmerica, 25million in Australasia.

      I could have included the Phillipines, where there are maybe 50million English speakers, but I believe most of those are second language. South africa only hits about 35mil english speakers, oddly enough :P

      Hope that helps clear things up!

    2. Re:India is the major English speaking country by ghoul · · Score: 1

      Firstly your facts are wrong 800 million Indians do not speak English as a primary language. There are regional languages. However the point I was making 300 million do speak English as their primary language as in they do most of their daily work/education in English.
      Secondly while English is an official language of India it is NOT an official language in USA and only one of two in Canada so including North America and not including India does not make sense. BTW if you go to the southern states of US or to Quebec in Canada you will have difficulty in communicating if all you can speak is English
      Britain might have given rise to the language but the destiny of this language is now in the hand(maybe throats) of those who speak it and by and large the largest group is from India.
      I do get the fact that your post is not exactly on this point but I find it irritating when people make false assumptions about the world.

      --
      **Life is too short to be serious**
    3. Re:India is the major English speaking country by Jesapoo · · Score: 1

      Perhaps my wording, "primarily second language", was confusing I never stated that 800mil use English as a primary language - indeed, if I did this would be refuting rather than reinforcing my point. To clear up what I was trying to say - Around 800mil people *can* speak English in India, but the majority of those 800mil use it as a secondary language.

      Unfortunately, I have no references to back this up, and, indeed, your 300mil statement may be correct. Unfortunately, either way, it doesn't have a huge relevance to the original point.

      The US has no National-Government level official language as written in, say, the constitution. Therefore your statement that English is not the Official language in the US is somewhat misleading, as there is no other language that is. All National-level legal documents and laws, including the Constitution, are written in English. And so, although it is not specifically stated, English IS as near as damned to an official language as you can get. There is no other language that has anywhere near the same penetration and (for lack of a better word,) influence as English. If you wish to be pedantic, English is the language used for all things _Official_, which, I suppose, could be viewed therefore as making it the official language.

      Saying English is only one of two official languages in an officially bilingual country is somewhat absurd, as noting that French is an official languages does not aid any point of relative argument. If you want to argue statistics, English is the official language of all but ONE province in Canada, and only ONE is officially bilingual.

      Again, my point was not to exclude India from my posts, nor offend the minority of Canadian or American citizens who do not speak English fluently, nor was it to make any broad statements about the future of language. I agree to your point - that India contains, as has been pointed out in both my previous and your previous post, a major english speaking population group. However, to explain why India was omitted, the point originaly was to merely to illustrate a view on an issue in the most straight-forward manner possible, and talking about India would have simply, in my opinion, have diluted the simplicity of the statement and either confused people or been entirely superfluous and excessive, adding in unnecessary complexity. It was *not* a post about the makeup of the English language, and so I did not feel that a detailed breakdown of the distribution of the language was necessary.

  148. Pork for linguists ,historians and green nuts by ghoul · · Score: 1

    These are th kind of kangaroo projects dreamed up by PhDs in lingusitics and history whose lifes work is not worth a rat's ass otherwise and who would be starving on asst. professor salaries otherwise.

    I mean what the heck is wrong with just taking the waste on a ship and sending it on a round the world voyage and every 1 mile you dump a kilo of the waste into the ocean. Given the size of the ocean the waste would get diluted down to background levels in 10 mins

    Problem solved. But no!! We have to build Yucca and WIPP. Otherwise how else we justify those huge salaries for the nuclear ministry people and those huge donations for the Greenpeace nuts.

    --
    **Life is too short to be serious**
  149. What if future generations like radiation? by Zangief · · Score: 1

    Hey, it can happen!

  150. Stonehenge decoded! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    IIRC, some researchers decoded Stonehenge (one of the largest henges in the world!) a couple years back...

    The real message of Stonehenge is "Look out for that asteroid (the one I'm pointing to)!"

  151. DoE Permanent Markers Implementation Plan by marcbloch · · Score: 1

    Department of Energy's plan, from August, 2004:

    http://www.wipp.energy.gov/library/PermanentMarker sImplementationPlan.pdf

    Includes:
    1. Large Surface Markers;
    2. Small Subsurface Markers;
    3. Berm;
    4. Buried Storage Rooms;
    5. Hot Cell; and
    6. Information Center.

  152. "Deep Time" by OgGreeb · · Score: 1

    There is an excellent book that covers this issue and related ones: Deep Time: How Humanity Communicates Across Millennia by the physicist and SF writer Gregory Benford. ISBN: 0380793466.

    --
    -- Gary Goldberg KA3ZYW 301/249-6501 AIM:OgGreeb Digital Marketing Inc., Bowie, MD //www.digimark.net/
  153. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  154. Duh by p3d0 · · Score: 1

    Ocean trenches are where they are spreading apart. Mountain ranges are where they are pressing together.

    --
    Patrick Doyle
    I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
  155. If its so safe by ikekrull · · Score: 1

    I mean, if the effects are so well understood, and its so safe, why don't we just plow the nuclear waste into the fields? Theres trillions of tons of topsoil, a little extra radioactive waste can't hurt anybody, right?

    Theres no evidence that plowing it into the fields is a bad idea, since nobody has done it and measured the effects, so it must be a good idea, right?

    --
    I gots ta ding a ding dang my dang a long ling long
  156. Ozymandias by justins · · Score: 1

    I met a traveler from an antique land
    Who said: Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
    Stand in the desert. Near them, on the sand,
    Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
    And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
    Tell that its sculptor well those passions read,
    Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
    The hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed,
    And on the pedestal these words appear:
    "My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:
    Look upon my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
    Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
    Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
    The lone and level sands stretch far away.

    --
    Now before I get modded down, I be to remind whoever might read this that what I am saying is FACT. - bogaboga
  157. Mummy's Curse! by Dabido · · Score: 1

    'ignored curses inscribed on the tombs of Egyptian pharaohs to seize the riches inside. The curse of plutonium packs a painful penalty.'

    Plutonium ... I think he was Pharoah in the late old Kingdom wasn't he?
    Let's dig him up and see if he was as rich as they say he was!!!! :-)

    --
    Sure enough, the cow costume was hanging up next to the superhero outfit and sailors uniform. (S,Spud)
  158. Do Not Dig Here symbol by pappajok · · Score: 1

    I recomend: A head, face in agony with a shovel penetrating the skull and chip flying from the shovel/skull contact location. Why, because: A primitave to less advanced socity should be able to recognize the meaning, while advance socities should take prepatory measurements erroring on the side of precausion. just a thought

  159. I to think our waste will not be waste.. by Mad_MaxB58 · · Score: 1

    In 50 or less years we will find a use for all of the waste we have today. Think about it landfills of just 50 years ago are being looked at and used as an energy source today. http://epa.gov/cleanenergy/renew.htm http://www.energy.sc.gov/Renewable%20energy/lmop.h tm

    --
    Maxwell L. Barrett Comp-WE-Mentor Software Trainer
  160. Extremely fragile technology by coyote-san · · Score: 1

    All of that is extremely fragile technology. Electronic media is, if anything, known to be extremely unreliable due to format changes and deterioration of the underlying media. Even if you have good media, do you have the software to understand it?

    E.g., what would you do with a backup of a msql database? Not 'mysql', the once-popular 'msql' that preceded it.

    The internet is also fragile. Look at the big picture -- how many copies really exist? The host (hopefully with backups), some search engines, a few intelligence agencies. But anywhere else?...

    Paper? Most mass-produced paper contains small amount of acid that slowly deteriorates the paper. Acid-free paper should be stable, but iirc deterioriating paper is already a problem.

    The risk from year-to-year is minimal, but shouldn't be entirely ignored. (Can you say New Orleans Public Library?) But over a few generations you definitely need to consider the risk of "fire, flood and insurrection".

    More than 500 years out? Greenhouse gases would have washed out of the atmosphere and we would almost certainly be seeing the start of the next ice age. How long until many of those caches would be destroyed?

    --
    For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
  161. There Is No Waste! by fluffy666 · · Score: 1

    There is no way we should be burying this stuff, or at least the vast majority.

    As has already been mentioned, IFR-style reactors can burn all of the actinide wastes - the stuff that has the nasty 100kyear half lives. With a decent breeder program, we should also be able to use up what we currently have as depleted uranium. We should not be burying used fuel rods, it's a pathetic cop-out.

    Once the actinides are dealt with, the vast majority of the fisson products have half lives in the 30 year region. Concentrated, these make excellent material for nuclear batteries - the ultimate in UPS. Those people responsable for running hospitals, airports, server farms or other places where 24/7 power is absolutely vital may appreciate this; the fact that the power is also essentially free would be a side advantage. Importantly, if people are using the stuff for a commercial application, they will be highly motivated to maintain and secure it.

    This leaves a very small amount indeed of genuine long lived fission products (Tc-99 et al). The technology does exist to transmute these into stable elements; however, if deep burial is seen as cheaper, then vitrification and burial on the small scale required, sufficiently deep so that no warning could be needed should not be a major problem.

  162. Yes it is. by marcus · · Score: 1

    You forget motivation. Why would they want to dig through a mile of rock or concrete even if they could?

    Assume that they have taken special notice of a random concrete feature a couple of meters across on the surface. Recall, that it is in the middle of nowhere, a desert, currently. Also recall that there are hundreds or thousands of equivalent concrete structures scattered all over the countryside. There are missile silos, bridge and building foundations, sewage tanks, etc.

    Assume that for some reason they are possesed by a nearly unbearable curiosity and a tremendous urge to find out just what is under this particular chunk of concrete.

    Assume that it has been thousands of years, in which case it won't matter, the stuff will be safe.

    Assume for the sake of argument that it is still active *and* dangerous.

    If they have the skills, and most important the disposable energy, to dig up a few hundred meters of concrete, or drill through the equivalent distance of native rock, then if they have achieved that level of a standard of living, then they will understand what a periodic table is and what radioactivity is, without the need for words.

    Even after all that, many people have died along the path of discovery that has brought us where are today. One woman named Curie comes to mind. Why should we expect to utterly safeguard those on the path to discovery in the future?

    Again, assuming a circa 1800s like pre-radioactivity knowledge level of technology, people will die in the mine just doing the digging. There's no need for radioactive dangers, in a 1800s era mine half a mile deep, they'll be dozens killed just doing the grunt work!

    --
    Good judgement comes from experience, and experience comes from bad judgement.
    - W. Wriston, former Citibank CEO
  163. this is necessary! by MooseTick · · Score: 1

    What if a future George W Bush type were to encounter such place when they were young. This of all teh leadership we may miss out on in the future!

  164. Irrelevant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > Firstly your facts are wrong

    And you're being a dick.

    Not only that, but you're being a dick who's missing the point and spewing effectively false information.

    Certainly, many people in India speak English. If society collapsed, though, how many of them would continue to speak English and to teach it to their children, grandchildren, and so on?

    Probably few. Most people would go with Hindi, or simply with their mother tongues. If everyone around you speaks either Tamil or Tulu as their best language, there's not so much motivation to learn English. Now add in the fact that there won't be the quality of education in this hypothetical "collapsed society" world, that there won't be as much free time to spend learning, and that English is from a different language group and hence harder to learn than a second (for example) Dravidian language, and the odds of English surviving as a major language in India are slim to none.

    Yes, lots of Indians speak English and you really, really want us to know that. That's very nice - we know. It just doesn't matter to what we're talking about.

  165. A series of images Re:Use a skull, DOH! by Randym · · Score: 1
    While I agree with the poster in the main, I'd suggest a series of three images, *ending* with the skull.

    Image 1: A person's face smiling, bright eyes, long hair.

    Image 2: A person -- not smiling; half-closed eyes, massive hair loss.

    Image 3: A skull.

    This would show the process of radiation poisoning. If anyone ignored the symbols and went beyond them, the people who didn't go could compare the progress of their comrade's painful demise with the pictures and draw the correct conclusion: IF YOU GO HERE, YOU WILL QUICKLY DIE IN A NASTY WAY. Message successfully transmitted down the generations, and probably reinforced locally with an oral tradition: "And in this cave, there lives an invisible monster...".

    --
    DNA is a Turing machine. You, however, being dynamic and emergent, are not.
  166. Moo by Chacham · · Score: 1

    How about storing them in succeeding levels of more and more radiation. With the hope that they'll stop digging once they get sick.

    Hmm... they could even provide free samples. :)