<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Hacker News: nukareactor</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=nukareactor</link><description>Hacker News RSS</description><docs>https://hnrss.org/</docs><generator>hnrss v2.1.1</generator><lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Oct 2026 09:12:48 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hnrss.org/user?id=nukareactor" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"></atom:link><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by nukareactor in "Sixteen years after Deepwater Horizon, deep sea life shows few signs of recovery"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Assuming no outside forces suddenly intentionally do something to it. Attacks against infrastructure aren't uncommon. Having infrastructure that is well known to take quite some time to spin down with the consequences being ten thousand years of salted earth is quite a big bullseye.<p>Which I would still argue is far from making a "when" realistic. This entire comment chain started on the matter of cost. If someone has a reactor, the enemies won't try to explode. They will go Temüjin on it and seize it.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 21 Oct 2026 04:27:25 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50176080</link><dc:creator>nukareactor</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50176080</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50176080</guid></item></channel></rss>