Good ventilation is the main one I'm aware of. Hydrogen is only flammable when there's a particular range of mixture with oxygen. If it's too dilute then it won't burn, and the same in the other direction with not enough oxygen mixed inside the hydrogen. So a leak that goes straight into the outside air is not really super dangerous, the hydrogen shoots up and away and quickly dilutes to non-flammability.

In Hindenburg's case there were multiple internal gas bladders contained by the aerodynamic outer envelope, held in place with frames and with walkways and other gaps between, so there were a lot of spaces for a mixture of air and hydrogen to accumulate and reach the right mix to burn. They had no way to reliably detect that this was happening, back then they didn't have sensors and relied on crewmen literally walking around listening for hissing sounds or "shimmering" air where gas of different densities were mixing. Since Hindenburg was originally intended to use helium lifting gas it wouldn't have been a problem, but switching to hydrogen should have caused a complete redesign to eliminate these internal spaces and ventilate better. And in a modern airship sprinkle the thing with sensors so you can immediately know if there's a leak.

The actual ignition of the Hindenburg is thought to have been due to a static discharge spark. Hindenburg's outer skin was somewhat insulated from its inner framework and the air and ship were charged due to a thunderstorm that had recently passed by. When the crew dropped ropes to the ground this grounded the inner framework and caused sparks between the outer envelope and the framework as it tried to dump its charge into the ground as well. Again not a problem for a helium airship, but something that should have been subject to a redesign for a hydrogen one. Make sure the whole ship is properly grounded and then there won't be charge differences to cause sparks inside it.

Note that there's a theory that was proposed a while back that Hindenburg's outer envelope was super flammable in its own right and was the actual source of most of the fire. It was made of cotton painted with cellulose acetate butyrate along with iron oxide and fine aluminum powder - similar in composition to thermite or solid rocket fuel. But tests were done with recreations of the material and although it was indeed flammable it didn't burn anywhere near fast enough to account for the speed with which the Hindenburg was destroyed. Probably still something to avoid with modern materials, though. Don't make your hydrogen airship out of stuff that could catch fire.

Well, briefly.

https://media1.tenor.com/m/4BRF8qhc7RYAAAAd/but-why-ryan-reynolds.gif

Yay, a badge! :)

Of course, given the community I'm in, I'll probably end up in trouble for violating some kind of regulation that comes with having a badge like that.

Was he admitted under some sort of DEI program? I don't see anything suggesting that. And even if he was admitted under a DEI program, Yale didn't kick him out because he advocated against DEI and so they rescinded it. The issue was completely unrelated to that.

Edit: Oh, I think I see what you might be going for; the claim that the AI detector is "biased" against non-native English speakers. If that's what you meant I still think that's extremely strained, he's just pointing out that the mechanism is particularly unreliable under these circumstances. Like if a breathalyzer has a 2% false-positive rate normally but 15% false-positive rate for diabetics, and someone with diabetes is arrested based on a breathalyzer reading, he could argue against the evidence on that basis. It's not asking for "special treatment."

Edit 2: OP added the second quoted line to his comment after I edited mine, which I guess confirms my interpretation?

Yeah, "something bad happened" doesn't always mean "and therefore someone must be to blame." Sometimes life just sucks.

Actually, yes. I think we should be looking more at using hydrogen as a lifting gas, helium is too precious to squander on balloons. Its flammability can be mitigated in a variety of ways, Hindenburg was badly designed as a hydrogen airship (it was originally meant to use helium).

I'm not seeing the face-eating leopard aspect of this story. The essence of the "leopards ate my face" meme is not merely "someone experienced consequences," It's that someone actively supported, advocated for, or enabled a policy or system, and is then shocked when that same policy or system harms them.

I would agree but I'm starting to think that that would make me part of the problem. So maybe I should insult your fashion sense instead? Argue that leopards are better than jaguars? As I said, not sure how to fix this.

[ Removed by Reddit ]

Sadly, a conclusion I'm leaning towards as well. In theory this system should allow an even greater mixing of ideas than Reddit and its ilk, there's no central authority determining which subjects are forbidden. But it seems we just do that to ourselves anyway, and since each instance and each community are so much smaller than Reddit it's much more effective. The same "single giant impersonal central authority" thing that's a downside of Reddit also means that it's easier to seamlessly encounter everything that is allowed under it.

I don't really know how to fix this since it seems like most people literally want it to be this way. We don't like having our views challenged, it's comforting to look around and see that everyone agree with you.

I like that the Ivory Coast is not only in the wrong spot, it's not actually on any coast. It's right in the name.