This endeavor misses the whole point. There are two possibilities for 10,000 years from now.
1. Humanity is extinct.
2. Humanity is extant.
The first possibility means we can ignore any need for markers, let's focus on the second.
If people are still around, there are two possibilities.
1. They still understand radioactivity enough to detect it beforehand, or to recognize it after it has made people sick.
2. People have no sophisticated culture that can understand radioactivity.
Only if the latter is true, would any warnings be necessary.
If this is the case, what obligation do we have to those people? Literally any action we perform right now could lead to the eventual death of some arbitrary person thousands of years in the future. Butterfly effect and all that.
Is this place going to make the human race extinct? Possible, but unlikely. So we're talking about killing a few hundred people in the next few million years, supposing there is some sort of Hollywood-esque unfolding of history with its apocalypse and long-haired swordsmen going on quests in the aftermath.
We already do our nuclear (and other) engineering knowing that people are going to get killed. Hell, when we build bridges, we know that statistically one or two will be killed. And when a nuclear power plant is built, it's even bigger... someone will likely be killed. Over so many years of operation, someone will be killed (and not necessarily from some Three Mile Island thing, a person will be stressed out in the office and have a heart attack).
So if in the span of 10,000 years some savage dumbasses who fucked up and wrecked civilization die of radiation poisoning, what's the big fucking deal? Refusing to deal with our need for nuclear power, refusing to build the waste disposal facilities that such needs because we can't come up with some universal symbology to mark it as a dangerous place... that might be the reason that technological civilization does drop dead.
1. Humanity is extinct. 2. Humanity is extant.
The first possibility means we can ignore any need for markers, let's focus on the second.
If people are still around, there are two possibilities.
1. They still understand radioactivity enough to detect it beforehand, or to recognize it after it has made people sick. 2. People have no sophisticated culture that can understand radioactivity.
Only if the latter is true, would any warnings be necessary.
If this is the case, what obligation do we have to those people? Literally any action we perform right now could lead to the eventual death of some arbitrary person thousands of years in the future. Butterfly effect and all that.
Is this place going to make the human race extinct? Possible, but unlikely. So we're talking about killing a few hundred people in the next few million years, supposing there is some sort of Hollywood-esque unfolding of history with its apocalypse and long-haired swordsmen going on quests in the aftermath.
We already do our nuclear (and other) engineering knowing that people are going to get killed. Hell, when we build bridges, we know that statistically one or two will be killed. And when a nuclear power plant is built, it's even bigger... someone will likely be killed. Over so many years of operation, someone will be killed (and not necessarily from some Three Mile Island thing, a person will be stressed out in the office and have a heart attack).
So if in the span of 10,000 years some savage dumbasses who fucked up and wrecked civilization die of radiation poisoning, what's the big fucking deal? Refusing to deal with our need for nuclear power, refusing to build the waste disposal facilities that such needs because we can't come up with some universal symbology to mark it as a dangerous place... that might be the reason that technological civilization does drop dead.