|
The best part of the parody video is the small details like the muffled, echoed sound.
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2020 23:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 4, 2024 12:07 |
|
|
Would the US have been able to respond to a nuclear disaster like Chernobyl? No. Would a Chernobyl-like disaster be possible in the US with current regulations? No.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2020 23:53
|
|
|
Toxic Fart Syndrome posted:Would a Chernobyl-like disaster be possible in the US with current regulations? "current regulations" This is not an unsolvable problem!
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2020 06:18
|
|
|
Regulations only work in so far as ppl follow them. I posted a link here a while ago, which showed a near criticality at a US lab by scientist taking selfies with some nuclear material. Ppl are dumb and complacent and sometimes poo poo fails.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2020 06:26
|
|
|
The U.S. also has a revolving door problem, on top of the idea that bribes will eventually find their way to where they're intended to go, using some work-around like using relatives as conduits while establishment defenders say people can't help who their relatives are. Privatization and competition provide more incentive for shortcuts to profitability than governments seek shortcuts to productivity. A competent government with a nationalized nuclear reactor would at least be responsible for firing the problem people, rather than this ad-hoc shirking of responsibility where regulators can't fail, no matter what goes on.
galenanorth fucked around with this message at 14:19 on Sep 10, 2020 |
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2020 14:09
|
|
|
Got around to finishing this last night and I wish they had made a straight docudrama (like the Nat Geo adaptation of The Hot Zone) instead of trying to deliver some kind of Message about truth and ideology. Shcherbina confused me. At first he's a symbol of the Party and huge rear end in a top hat. Threatens to shoot people etc. But by the end he's a tragic hero who was redeemed by listening to science. So what does that say about the Party? Is the state irredeemably deceitful, rigid, and corrupt? If so then Shcherbina seems like a bad Party man, which is weird considering other Party men respect and follow him (the "Let him finish" courtroom scene and Legasov's "They listened to me but they followed you" bench speech). But if the Shcherbina is emblematic of the Party, doesn't that suggest it's more open to science and truth than literally everything else portrayed? I keep coming back to the bench conversation where Legasov tells Shcherbina he's the biggest hero of them all for marshaling all these forces and giving them whatever they needed to fix the problem. And I'm like, what forces? Soldiers, equipment, conscripted liquidators, mandatory evacuations? Wasn't all that stuff running on State machinery? The same lovely State that's the main villain of the series? Then you have stuff like the mayor and other apparatchiks are terrible and obsrtructive but once Gorbachev shows up everyone starts making the right decisions, appointing the right people, etc. So the bureaucracy doesn't work, until it does? They portray Dyatlov as the villain who made all the wrong decisions but when the time comes to hold him accountable multiple characters describe his trial as a sham? Khomyuk makes an offhand comment about how nobody will listen to her because she's a woman and she knows how things actually work. But Legasov and Shcherbina are listening to her? These are both Party men. There's even a scene where Legasov gets called out for using political appointments to further his own career. So does the Party ignore women or take them seriously? It's like State forces are singularly culpable for the disaster, but that same State plays an indispensable role in saving the world. The shoemaker scene also gave me whiplash. You have countless scenes of working class schmoes getting pushed around by the state. But also the state is run by incompetent working class people who should stay in their lane and let the experts make decisions? Like everything else about the show was loving amazing and I wish it was more realistic stuff and distorted synth music but every time the show was trying to tell me something important it came out as gobbledygook
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2021 20:06
|
|
|
It's been awhile since my last viewing, but I don't share your confusion in the many contradictions. When we see characters seek an understanding of the disaster ("the truth"), they're shown making good decisions that bring success. When they don't, they don't. We're shown a large group of people whose main goal is to keep the group intact (a bureaucracy). Our heroes are the exception. They've moved the group down a notch on their list of priorities and bumped "the truth" up. Because of their extant positions within the group, they can wield its power towards this new set of goals, but that doesn't reconfigure the group as a whole. I don't see "the State" as the villain, it's more "groups obsessed with self-perpetuation". There are contradictions everywhere because it's not grounded in truth, the group always comes first. You can still have sham trials, marginalized people, the respect of the party etc. because the only thing that’s changed is the outlook of a small number of people who hold just enough power to stave off further disaster. Ironically, by dropping the group down the priority list, our heroes end up saving the group from literally poisoning itself, which allows it to continue.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2021 21:55
|
|
|
I think the message is that everyone has a part to play, and they do their best by being honest and seeking out the truth, even when the system would prefer a lie to smooth things over.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2021 21:58
|
|
|
Toxic Fart Syndrome posted:Would the US have been able to respond to a nuclear disaster like Chernobyl? Chamale posted:I think the message is that everyone has a part to play, and they do their best by being honest and seeking out the truth, even when the system would prefer a lie to smooth things over. There were quite a few instances where Legasov and others said something that was technically correct but was still in effect a lie. The one that stood out to me was when the foreman asks whether the masks work and Legasov replies "... to an extent". That is a technically correct statement, but as the foreman points out if they really worked then everyone would be wearing them. There are other examples from different people, including the now famous 3.6 roentgen. The interesting thing is that Legasov shows remorse and guilt about these manipulations, when compared to the apparatchiks. I may be reading too much into this, but I took that as Legasov using the definition of a lie that exists in the sciences i.e. any statement that manipulates the truth, whereas the people from a political background were defining a lie as outright saying something that isn't true. The other obvious instance was his testimonial at the trial and its contradiction with Vienna; in Vienna he said that operator error led to the disaster. That was a correct statement, but it wasn't the whole story. By his definition, that constituted a lie but by others it didn't. The key issue is that reality can't be manipulated in the same way as people. As Feynman said: https://history.nasa.gov/rogersrep/v2appf.htm posted:For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2021 09:15
|
|
|
It's unfortunate that the show portrays the use of the shutdown button as a reaction to events. Historically the test was planned to end with shutting down the reactor and the only way to do this was the 'emergency' shutdown button. Much like the emergency (or hand/parking as came to be known) brake on my car it's used routinely and almost never in an actual emergency. One of the books on Chernobyl notes the AZ5 button in several reactors had to be replaced due to over use by operators. The book also explained the physical demands of running an RBMK reactor were high due to the constant need to push buttons meters apart on a massive panel, the operator had to be fit and strong as much or even more then experienced.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2021 09:48
|
|
|
Marx Headroom posted:Got around to finishing this last night and I wish they had made a straight docudrama (like the Nat Geo adaptation of The Hot Zone) instead of trying to deliver some kind of Message about truth and ideology. I'm not so sure it had a message like that, to me it seemed much more nuanced. It is retelling true events, afterall. I think the interpretation is mostly left up to the viewer to encourage debate and water-cooler chats. Marx Headroom posted:Shcherbina confused me. At first he's a symbol of the Party and huge rear end in a top hat. Threatens to shoot people etc. But by the end he's a tragic hero who was redeemed by listening to science. So what does that say about the Party? Is the state irredeemably deceitful, rigid, and corrupt? If so then Shcherbina seems like a bad Party man, which is weird considering other Party men respect and follow him (the "Let him finish" courtroom scene and Legasov's "They listened to me but they followed you" bench speech). But if the Shcherbina is emblematic of the Party, doesn't that suggest it's more open to science and truth than literally everything else portrayed? Again, while dramatized, these are (for the most part) real people and their actions and decisions are complicated. All of what you say is more or less true, (again) leaving it up to the viewer to decide. Do you think Shcherbina is the Ideal Party Man? If so, do you think other Party members live up to that ideal? If not, where do you think he fits into the Soviet system? Marx Headroom posted:I keep coming back to the bench conversation where Legasov tells Shcherbina he's the biggest hero of them all for marshaling all these forces and giving them whatever they needed to fix the problem. And I'm like, what forces? Soldiers, equipment, conscripted liquidators, mandatory evacuations? Wasn't all that stuff running on State machinery? The same lovely State that's the main villain of the series? That is one of the areas Mazin was pretty clear in his message: he believes only the Soviet Union could have responded to a crises like this. I would argue it was only possible in the Soviet Union, but that is a different discussion. The State's ability to compel compliance and service made it possible to seal the reactor, saving the world. I'm not sure the US could have solved a problem like that, although: Toxic Fart Syndrome posted:Would the US have been able to respond to a nuclear disaster like Chernobyl? Marx Headroom posted:Then you have stuff like the mayor and other apparatchiks are terrible and obsrtructive but once Gorbachev shows up everyone starts making the right decisions, appointing the right people, etc. So the bureaucracy doesn't work, until it does? Yes, although I do not think it is portraying an ideal form of governance where experts have to trick their way into the halls of power and then convince the most powerful person that their self-preservation depends on certain actions... Marx Headroom posted:They portray Dyatlov as the villain who made all the wrong decisions but when the time comes to hold him accountable multiple characters describe his trial as a sham? Again, real events: that was how he was portrayed and how his reputation was later slightly repaired. Dyatlov did everything "right" according to the bureaucracy, but was obviously wrong given the result... Marx Headroom posted:Khomyuk makes an offhand comment about how nobody will listen to her because she's a woman and she knows how things actually work. But Legasov and Shcherbina are listening to her? These are both Party men. There's even a scene where Legasov gets called out for using political appointments to further his own career. So does the Party ignore women or take them seriously? Khomyuk is an insert character used to represent a merry-go-round of scientists who were involved, and experienced different hardships around the disaster and with the bureaucracy. Marx Headroom posted:It's like State forces are singularly culpable for the disaster, but that same State plays an indispensable role in saving the world. I think this is the closest the show has to an overt message. Marx Headroom posted:The shoemaker scene also gave me whiplash. You have countless scenes of working class schmoes getting pushed around by the state. But also the state is run by incompetent working class people who should stay in their lane and let the experts make decisions? The shoemaker scene was also mirroring the scene between Legasov and Shcherbina where the nuclear physicist who is trying to save everyone's lives first has to explain reactor design to the owner of a concrete factory. I personally loved the score, creepy like an 80s horror movie, which I felt the show had a patina of already. Fun fact, a lot of the synth music is created with sounds from a nuclear reactor!  Plucky Brit posted:The Three Mile Island disaster would have required a large exclusion zone around the plant if they didn't have a containment building for the reactor. There was an atmospheric release but it was almost entirely noble gases rather than aerosol particles like Cs-137 and I-131 which can be absorbed by organisms. Which is my point: an uncontained reactor would never be built here...
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2021 10:12
|
|
|
Toxic Fart Syndrome posted:I'm not so sure it had a message like that, to me it seemed much more nuanced. It is retelling true events, afterall. I think the interpretation is mostly left up to the viewer to encourage debate and water-cooler chats. Wasn't there a couple of experimental total uncontained reactors build in the 60's in the US?
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2021 12:42
|
|
|
Toxic Fart Syndrome posted:Which is my point: an uncontained reactor would never be built here... Yep, I'm agreeing with you. The primary aim of nuclear safety is to have multiple barriers between each stage to stop a crisis from developing further. The UK ONR defines it like this: Faults (these will occur, no matter how careful people are) --- Issue (starting to lose control) --- Emergency (control of some aspect of the plant is lost) --- Accident (permanent damage to the plant) --- Disaster (off-site radiation release) The issue is that Chernobyl didn't have any barriers to stop the accident from becoming a disaster. TMI did, though it wasn't well designed and so there was a release of some particles. Personally I think nuclear safety for new build has become too onerous, requiring too much justification and redesign. This only makes things safer if the old plants are shut down even if new ones aren't available; this doesn't happen, and so old plants that are very unsafe are kept running far beyond their design life because the new ones can't be justified as acceptably safe. Even though they are orders of magnitude safer than the old plants. Of course everyone could follow Germany's example and decommission all of their reactors then become reliant on Russian gas.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2021 13:11
|
|
|
Can't reply to everyone but just wanted to say I appreciate the replies, I revisited the series with them in mind and it really boosted my enjoyment and admiration for the show. It's Good folks. Also wanted to highlight my fav post in the thread:
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2021 18:34
|
|
|
RIP Paul Ritter (Actor who played Dyatlov)
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2021 17:38
|
|
|
"Ukrainian scientists report that, for an unknown reason, nuclear reactions have increased in the remains of the Chernobyl power plant. Most areas of containment have shown decreasing radiation, yet an inaccessible room 305/2 radiation counts have doubled over the last 4 years. Radiation levels are high enough to preclude installing sensors. Further complicating matters, fuel containing materials, initially the consistency of lava, are disintegrating into radioactive dust." from Wikipedia:Current Events https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2021/05/nuclear-reactions-reawaken-chernobyl-reactor galenanorth fucked around with this message at 23:10 on May 10, 2021 |
|
#
?
May 10, 2021 23:07
|
|
|
Viral marketing for season 2 getting hectic
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2021 23:32
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-hZ6UnNhF4
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2021 15:47
|
|
|
Could this be radiation ghosts?
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2021 15:54
|
|
|
galenanorth posted:"Ukrainian scientists report that, for an unknown reason, nuclear reactions have increased in the remains of the Chernobyl power plant. Most areas of containment have shown decreasing radiation, yet an inaccessible room 305/2 radiation counts have doubled over the last 4 years. Radiation levels are high enough to preclude installing sensors. Further complicating matters, fuel containing materials, initially the consistency of lava, are disintegrating into radioactive dust." from Wikipedia:Current Events Early on, an FCM formation called the Elephant’s Foot was so hard scientists had to use a Kalashnikov rifle to shear off a chunk for analysis. “Now it more or less has the consistency of sand,” Saveliev says.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2021 16:57
|
|
|
etalian posted:Early on, an FCM formation called the Elephant’s Foot was so hard scientists had to use a Kalashnikov rifle to shear off a chunk for analysis. “Now it more or less has the consistency of sand,” Saveliev says. Also it was so radioactive that standing in direct line of sight of it for more than 12 seconds would give you a lethal dose of radiation.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2021 19:59
|
|
|
nine-gear crow posted:Also it was so radioactive that standing in direct line of sight of it for more than 12 seconds would give you a lethal dose of radiation. The Ak-47 is apparently one of the best multi-purpose tools ever developed by man...
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2021 20:12
|
|
|
When Legasov talks about the meltdown creating lava, the Elephant's Foot is the rock that formed when that lava solidified.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2021 20:17
|
|
|
I'm giving this series my 3rd rewatch, I'm halfway through and going to read this thread as an intermission. What's striking me so clearly is that for me this soundtrack is the best of anything I've ever watched. It's obtrusive so I'm noticing it which is always bad EXCEPT for this series. It's 
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2021 06:48
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/qikipedia/status/1393234658926661636?s=19
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2021 12:03
|
|
|
Spinz posted:I'm giving this series my 3rd rewatch, I'm halfway through and going to read this thread as an intermission. What's striking me so clearly is that for me this soundtrack is the best of anything I've ever watched. The sound design too. The crackle of their instruments is the loving scariest thing in the world
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2021 12:26
|
|
|
Spinz posted:I'm giving this series my 3rd rewatch, I'm halfway through and going to read this thread as an intermission. What's striking me so clearly is that for me this soundtrack is the best of anything I've ever watched. The way they did the sounds and music is quite remarkable, it's apparently all from recordings in an operating Chernobyl like power plant. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTw1-nw5S4A
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2021 21:52
|
|
|
CeeJee posted:The way they did the sounds and music is quite remarkable, it's apparently all from recordings in an operating Chernobyl like power plant. Thanks for this this is fantastic I had no idea!!!!! And it's a woman and so am I so it's even better 
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2021 23:23
|
|
|
Has anyone watched Chernobyl 1986, the new Netflix movie? I’m guessing it doesn’t compare favourably to the HBO series.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2021 18:47
|
|
|
kaesarsosei posted:Has anyone watched Chernobyl 1986, the new Netflix movie? I’m guessing it doesn’t compare favourably to the HBO series. I can't find that on Netflix or IMDB even, are you sure that's the title?
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2021 18:54
|
|
|
El Jeffe posted:I can't find that on Netflix or IMDB even, are you sure that's the title? https://letterboxd.com/film/chernobyl-1986/
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2021 19:14
|
|
|
Weird, looks like the imdb title is Chernobyl: Abyss.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2021 19:17
|
|
|
CeeJee posted:It's unfortunate that the show portrays the use of the shutdown button as a reaction to events. Historically the test was planned to end with shutting down the reactor and the only way to do this was the 'emergency' shutdown button. Much like the emergency (or hand/parking as came to be known) brake on my car it's used routinely and almost never in an actual emergency. One of the books on Chernobyl notes the AZ5 button in several reactors had to be replaced due to over use by operators. The book also explained the physical demands of running an RBMK reactor were high due to the constant need to push buttons meters apart on a massive panel, the operator had to be fit and strong as much or even more then experienced. Yes, true, they would shut it down. But, the key here is the button was the trigger because the reactor had been primed for explosion by the operators. They even explained it that when the button was pushed, all the rods enter the reactor to shut it down. It's just in this case since they had been fully removed and the tips being made of poo poo that speeds reactions up kinda hosed an already over stressed reactor. It wasn't "pressing this button blows stuff up" but "Pressing this button when they did, under these circumstances, brought about the end result"
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2021 15:32
|
|
|
kaesarsosei posted:Has anyone watched Chernobyl 1986, the new Netflix movie? I’m guessing it doesn’t compare favourably to the HBO series. Can't be any worse than the Chernobyl movie some Russians did. They announced it while people were raving about this miniseries and that would show the true cause of the explosion. American spies.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2021 01:50
|
|
|
The Last Call posted:Can't be any worse than the Chernobyl movie some Russians did. Same movie. I don't think it explicitly blame American spies, but it does fail to mention the reactor's design flaws, the coverup of those flaws, or the initial coverup of the disaster. Also, the main character is a firefighter who somehow is involved with the first response, the evacuation, and the dive to drain contaminated water from below the core.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2021 02:12
|
|
|
Chamale posted:Same movie. I don't think it explicitly blame American spies, but it does fail to mention the reactor's design flaws, the coverup of those flaws, or the initial coverup of the disaster. Also, the main character is a firefighter who somehow is involved with the first response, the evacuation, and the dive to drain contaminated water from below the core. Well ain't that something.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2021 02:37
|
|
|
While I absolutely dont believe the "spies" version, its also not something as far fetched as people would believe. Some US agency did pull off a few very succesful sabotage missions during the cold war. One of them had to do with a major pipeline and resulted in some explosion of some kind. I also recall something anout the US successfully sabotaging one of Iran's reactors back on the 90's?
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2021 04:12
|
|
|
Dalael posted:While I absolutely dont believe the "spies" version, its also not something as far fetched as people would believe. An American agent somehow planted a bomb near the reactor core and set it off at the exact moment the reactor crew was destabilizing the reactor? The CIA did a lot to try to hurt people in the Soviet Union, but blowing up a pipeline is simpler than causing a meltdown. Sabotaging a reactor leaves obvious fingerprints. When America or Israel sabotage Iranian reactors, they immediately know it was deliberate.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2021 04:41
|
|
|
Shageletic posted:The sound design too. The crackle of their instruments is the loving scariest thing in the world I love horror movies but so few are actually scary rather than relying on jump scares and loud musical blares when they happen to cause a surprise reaction. This was a an excellent mix of both anticipation and fear of what comes next.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2021 08:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 4, 2024 12:07 |
|
|
cheeki breeki https://stalker.fandom.com/wiki/Vodka
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2021 15:04
|
|