this post was submitted on 17 Jan 2026
54 points (71.1% liked)

Lemmy Shitpost

37041 readers
2967 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.

Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means:

-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...

If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Memes

2.Lemmy Review

3.Mildly Infuriating

4.Lemmy Be Wholesome

5.No Stupid Questions

6.You Should Know

7.Comedy Heaven

8.Credible Defense

9.Ten Forward

10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)


Reach out to

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 33 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] not_that_guy05@lemmy.world 51 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Zoom in a little more. I can't see what it says.

[–] colourlessidea@sopuli.xyz 20 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

op using nuclear it's erous and bad for the environment

No.

8g CO2/kWh

43g CO2/

[–] Naich@lemmings.world 18 points 1 week ago (1 children)

There's nothing more erous about nuclear then it being used by op.

[–] Wappen@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

You sure it's an o before the p? Could also be the right half of a p.

pp using nuclear

[–] TigerAce@lemmy.dbzer0.com 35 points 1 week ago

At least removing the like button isn't as bad as posting images with parts of the text cut off.

[–] flamingos@feddit.uk 15 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You can hit share, more, Firefox and then hold the image to download the original image, btw.

[–] tomiant@piefed.social 1 points 1 week ago

Can't do shit on the app tho.

[–] Janx@piefed.social 11 points 1 week ago

I can't even read this shit. You really have to steal and then crop out where it came from this bad!?

[–] richardwallass@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

France's Naarea, a nuclear startup, has filed for a suspension of payments as a protective measure while it seeks new financing, indicating financial difficulties in the sector. This situation reflects broader challenges faced by the nuclear industry in France, which is undergoing significant changes and investments.

[–] 4am@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] richardwallass@sh.itjust.works -2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Doesn't make difference, this project is dead and it is a total waste of money.

When you have nothing to say about the content you critize the form.

[–] tkk13909@sopuli.xyz 5 points 1 week ago

I love Kyle Hill

[–] ZkhqrD5o@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

IMO: Wind/Solar > Nuclear (no Rosatom) > Fossil > No power > Nuclear (Rosatom)

[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I love how people act like german government is against nuclear. When the actual situation is the following:

Reality:

  1. Yes, Nuclear is not popular with the German public and might not for good reasons
  2. The German nuclear power plants were planned to shutdown and weren't maintained to continue to run for a long time.
  3. Continue to run the nuclear power plants would require a lot of investment
  4. Germany is and was moving towards renewable energies for independence of nuclear and Russian gas anyway.
  5. Building new nuclear power plants take years.
  6. Germany choose to invest in renewable energy instead.
  7. Germany doesn't have mines for nuclear materials to run a nuclear power plant independently, unlike France.
  8. Germany has domestic coal. Germany has coal power plants. Germany can run coal power plants independently. That is important for the military.
  9. So germany chose a bit more coal short term; and coal and nuclear free future. Germany is literally uses less coal now than ever.

So germany has been reducing nuclear, coal and natural gas power usage.

[–] bigmamoth@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

the cope is unreal.

nuclear is the cleanest and most sure energy method of production proportionaly to the enrgy produce by it and by a long mile. You were convinced by stupid ecology ideals ( russian propaganda) to not invest in anything except for unreliable and intermitent energy production cause you could always burn russian gaz. if it wasnt the case nord stream 1 and 2 wouldnt exist. You still produce and pollute a lot with coal, France it s litteraly 100x less coal.

1 you give no reason why nuclear bad

2 no vision of the future

3 no vision of the future + no money

4 yeah how independance from russia is going ? https://archive.is/p9noZ

5 no vision of future + no money

6 no vision of future

7 yeah talk me about all the uranium mine in france

8 yeah cause uranium isnt well known to have an ultra high energy dencity and you can't procure it

9 yeah and it s dumb and it cost highly for lmittle to no benefice

wp germany

[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I love how I never said nuclear was bad but gave the reasons of the German government.

Talk about cope.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium_mining_in_France

France has stopped. But they can easily pick it up again.

Fucking hell.

Edit: it is also very funny that you don't understand why energy density is not the only important feature for energy sources for war scenarios, instead of e.g. having direct access to it instead of being dependent on other nations... in a war...

[–] bigmamoth@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

you arent even independant from russia and you talk about being indépendant from allies country. lmao

[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

"You" lol I am not german. But don't feel bad, you haven't been right about much until now.

Germany is actively working on being independent from Russia... that was literally part of my original comment. It is work in progress... and sidenote, germany used to buy their uranium from France but also from Russia and China. So "allied" countries are both true and false. But i am not surprised that you are simplifying that issue because that is all you did.

[–] Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz 1 points 1 week ago

germany used to buy their uranium from France but also from Russia and China.

Kazakhstan is going to remain neutral in any conflicts, and they produce shittons of uranium, so does Canada IIRC.

There's also a certain former French colonies looking to sell uranium at market rates, instead of the pennies the French were getting it for.

[–] Gonzako@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

I'd love nuclear in my country and making nukes is a great plus too

[–] INHALE_VEGETABLES@aussie.zone 2 points 1 week ago

I downvoted just to make sure.

[–] Denjin@feddit.uk 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)
[–] oneser@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 week ago

And who's gonna give us that sweet, sweet yellow cake? :)

[–] UltraBlack@lemmy.world -4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I'm pretty sure kyle hill is getting paid by nuclear power companies. He's constantly shilling

[–] Derpenheim@lemmy.zip 6 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Shilling? My brother in christ, it is quite literally the only way forward. Fossil fuels are killing us, and will continue to do so. Wind and solar just aren't enough. Hydro and geo energies aren't available everywhere.

There is no shilling, there is only desperate pleading for us to pull our heads out of our asses and do something.

[–] black0ut@pawb.social 14 points 1 week ago

Nuclear is not economically feasible and still does have its fair share of problems. It also generates waste, even if at far less scale than fossil fuels. Wind and solar are cheap and very scalable in most countries, which makes them economically feasible (and can also accelerate a move from fossil). Don't be so quick to discard them.

As a matter of fact, last month, in Spain, we generated more energy just from wind than from nuclear. (31.7% vs 21.4%) source

[–] VibeSurgeon@piefed.social 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Wind and solar just aren't enough.

Wind + solar + storage is both enough and beating nuclear at this point, and by the time the next nuclear power plant actually manages to get online, the calculation will be even further in favour of that mix, on account of the absolutely plummeting cost of storage, which is following the same trend as solar used to, with costs reductions >98%. Not to mention the built-in resilience you get from having a more widely distributed instead of having a few nodes producing the lion's share of your power.

I don't have any ideological opposition to nuclear. If you manage to build it without massive subsidies and taking care of your waste, feel free to build them. That's happening in exactly 0 places worldwide though.

[–] tomiant@piefed.social 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Lion's don't share. Except with other lions. Which makes all shares lion's shares.

[–] Deme@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 week ago

There's no world where you could build more nuclear at the rate that would be required to fix things. It's expensive as hell and there's not enough skilled people to go around to build all of it globally.

I must be a shill to.