this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2025
149 points (100.0% liked)

World News

50083 readers
2486 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Approximately 1.6 million tons of old ammunition are lying on the bottom of the North Sea and Baltic Sea, posing a considerable danger: their casings are slowly rusting and emitting toxic substances such as TNT compounds.

Most of the ammunition was deliberately sunk in the ocean after the war because the Allies were concerned that Germans would resume hostilities against them again at some point, and ordered that Germany destroy all ordnance. At the time the easiest way to do so seemed to be to simply dump everything into the sea.

top 10 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] NecroParagon@midwest.social 36 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Every time I read something like this the laziness and lack of foresight is just baffling. It's hard to comprehend.

[–] atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works 18 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

It’s hard to overstate just how systemic “we can fix it later” was in the mid 20th century. Progress had happened quickly since the turn of the century, many centuries old problems were solved overnight by new inventions (like penicillin) and it was assumed that that progress would continue.

For instance, the century date problem, later known as the Y2K problem, was first realized in the 1950s. Then brought to light again in the 1970s. But nobody did anything about it until the mid 90s.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago

Old science fiction books are exactly like this. They just assumed we'd have technological solutions to everything.

Also, they weren't living in a largely collapsed ecosystem. Today we view this story in horror, but back then there were 1/4th the people, wildlife and nature was bountiful. It was probably hard to imagine that we humans could substantially alter the world. Hell, people today look into the sky and say global warming is bunk. Yeah, looks huge from down here! Take a look from space, paint on a marble.

[–] CameronDev@programming.dev 2 points 2 weeks ago

was

Haven't changed much really...

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca -4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Eeehh? The Y2K problem is result because of decisions taken in the 70's (for very good reasons) and nothing was done until the 90's because it wasn't an issue before. Y2K did not exist even as an idea in the 1950's

[–] atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 weeks ago

The first person known to publicly address this issue was Bob Bemer, who had noticed it in 1958 as a result of work on genealogical software.

Source

[–] kubica@fedia.io 8 points 2 weeks ago

Or possibly the mentality of "it is now someone else's problem".

[–] blimthepixie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 2 weeks ago

Classic mentality of 'lets dump it in the sea'

[–] wewbull@feddit.uk 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

...and unless we recover it all with robots, that's exactly where it's staying. It's far too unstable to move with people.

[–] thejml@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 weeks ago

To be fair, people are pretty unstable as well.