[russnewcomer]

I lived in the relatively safe stable part of a war zone as a foreign civilian for a few years, and had friends who were frequently in the less safe/less stable parts.

So much of our modern world is designed for modern infrastructure, and when that infra falls down, you either have to do without or accept a level of danger that is probably higher than the modern world takes, but lower than what our ancestors 100 years ago took.

[armchairhacker]

I wish, if possible, we’d design infrastructure to be much more resilient to failure to make it slightly less economical. Resilient =/ economical and nobody’s economy is strong enough to sacrifice almost any of it, but maybe somewhere there’s a compromise…

[ajsnigrutin]

You don't even have to be in a warzone... look at texas blacouts not that long ago. In my country, we had icy rain [0] destroy pretty much all above-ground wiring, and ham radio operators had to bring in their equipment to help rescuers. Somehow with the 'green agenda' we've started banning all the alternative ways of cooking and heating (wood, gas, oil,..), and in the future, it will get only worse.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2Gr_RKN4Os

[Eisenstein]

The 'green agenda' is a red herring. The problem lies with companies not maintaining their infrastructure because it costs money, then blaming whatever is convenient when it breaks.