sonori

joined 1 year ago
[–] sonori@beehaw.org 1 points 34 minutes ago* (last edited 11 minutes ago)

Note, since the 80s the vast, vast majority of piston driven aircraft engines have been able to operate on unleaded fuel. We know this because for decades GA pilots have been filling out the paperwork for an experimental fuel variance and then running these engines unmodified on the cheaper unleaded they got from the gas station down the street without any apparent issue or rise in engine maintenance/failures among pilots that do this. The main hurdles being the necessary and not insignificant paperwork as well as concern over insurance rates.

From my understanding there was a problem with one series of engine in the seventies that was suspected to be due to unleaded fuel among the more modern product line of a major manufacturer, and while the engine was modified to fix it neither Lycoming nor Continental, the two primary piston engine manufacturers who make up the vast majority of the market, saw significant pressure to drop the official recommendation for unleaded until relatively recently.

Since the US finally started to get serious about phasing out leaded avgas in the 2010s, and the aditude of its been fine so far so why risk any change has run up against said pressure, both have to my knowledge dropped the requirement retroactively with no modification necessary for the majority of their historical and current product line.

You might need to re-engine or more likely just get an exemption for flying history aircraft, but the benefit to the hundreds of thousands that live near GA airports in terms of reduced damage to children’s nervous systems far outweighs the nebulous cost of switching the default form of avgas.

[–] sonori@beehaw.org 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

What does that have to do with the drivetrain of the car? That would be due to things like better hood and road design, better enforcement of speed limits, and since you cited a stat that includes drivers as well pedestrians over forty years the move to requing roll over protection, expansion of airbag systems, more available crash modeling, and of course the near worldwide mandate that cars include seatbelts.

Most of this is either structural and thusly uneffected by a drive train conversion, or governmental.

The biggest dangers involved with a drivetrain conversion are going to be the same as any major home automotive work, namely something heavy fall or slips during work, followed by getting fingers/hair/clothing caught in moving parts, etc…

None of this is going to endanger the public, at least not to the extent that it can compete with the chance of getting distracted driving and plowing through a pedestrian or right hooking a cyclist.

[–] sonori@beehaw.org 1 points 11 hours ago (4 children)

Honestly the unsafe part is that they are a ton or so of metal going at speed only decimeters from civilians with only the concentration and control of your average idiot there to prevent manslaughter.

Compared to that, there is very little you can actually do to a car that will move the needle on safety, especially for anyone but its occupants.

[–] sonori@beehaw.org 1 points 12 hours ago

The biggest concern in this place is the effect on collapsing the aquifer like has happened across the border in Pakistan. Overuse of water rights is difficult to enforce, but at least farmers had to trade one valuable liquid for another. By contrast with solar your only cost is upfront, and as such farmers are effectively penalized for turning off the pumps and not taking all they can to an even greater extent.

Now obviously it’s better to not be burning diesel and this was still a problem before electrifying, but it’s still seems bittersweet in this case.

[–] sonori@beehaw.org 3 points 15 hours ago (2 children)

Really? Doesn’t seem that wild to me that a place where cartels have openly claimed responsibility for assassinating politicians that threaten the status quo might see a large pushback against a change to the status quo.

[–] sonori@beehaw.org 9 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

You know what you must do. Down with all landlords./s

More seriously, I will note that multigenerational households are only looked down upon when the poors do it, if the rich do it than it’s just a family manor.

[–] sonori@beehaw.org 4 points 1 day ago

Honestly, I doubt needs are diverging so much as marketing has diverged between markets as various companies try to create and maintain places and growing markups for themselves.

Companies in the US focus on competing to sell the largest and thusly highest margin vehicles they can, companies in the Germany focus on upselling customers on speed because they have smaller parking and stricter emissions, and in the price competitive market of China, the focus is on infotainment systems that add something to market and upsell without actually costing much to add.

That being said, while marking can shape demand there is only so much that marketing can do to change the actual needs of car buyers. People still need and buy pickup trucks in europe and asia, rich Americans and Chinese still love their absurdity fast cars, and I doubt that the US or Europe are going to see an end to increasing electronics to increase markup anytime soon, China is just ahead of the curve on that one.

[–] sonori@beehaw.org 7 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I mean a lot of Amarican infrastructure was built by the new deal with a hundred year lifespan, so it’s not exactly a surprise that now a hundred years after the new deal there is a lot of Amarican infrastructure that needs to be replaced.

[–] sonori@beehaw.org 8 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Important to note that their stuff is not only things like remaining photos of dead parents and relatives, but also medications and the documents required to get a job, both of which have to be replaced at taxpayer expense. But hey, we offered them a place in the five and a half year long wait list they were already on, so the government really is doing all it can.

[–] sonori@beehaw.org 6 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Thing is, the research into direct cash transfusions and other straight basic income has shown that poor people generally have a very good idea of what they specifically need to do to get out of poverty, be that a gym membership to shower, good clothes, a bike or car, an apartment, someplace to keep documents and medications where they won’t be thrown out by cops, getting a GED after their parents threw them out for being gay, a preschool because their minimum wage job won’t let them keep a baby around the building, or other prerequisite to getting a job / a job that pays well enough for an apartment, they just don’t have the money to actually do any of it.

A person have a good community kitchen they can go to and get free food, and as such food stamps are worthless to them, but they can’t spend that same pittance on something that would actually help them get out of poverty like clothes and a gym membership or saving up for a small car where they can store their stuff and get to jobs, all because a government commite of people and lobbyists who have never lived outside of a gated community have decided what each poor persons budget should look like and coincidentally they all look the same.

People know how to learn to catch fish, they just can’t do it without the right tools, or because they have to be back standing in line at the shelter by 3PM each day.

[–] sonori@beehaw.org 2 points 3 days ago

And gobal warming means the rivers will soon be hot enough that about half of all salmon species stroke out in them. Replaceing clean energy with fossil fuels, which is the definitional result of removing clean energy from the grid while any fossil plants remain connected, not only hurts salmon numbers today, but ensures that for hundreds upon hundreds of years into the future there can be no salmon.

There is a reason why despite the no change to the number of dams and thouse same dams getting easier and easier for salmon to cross salmon runs have still tended to decline, and keeping methane plants that would otherwise be shut down today operating for decades to come does not help with that.

Neglecting all the stronger hurricanes, monsoons, floods, elimination of coral reefs, forests, and habitat, we can fertilize trees and reintroduce salmon, we cannot refrigerate the rivers.

[–] sonori@beehaw.org 2 points 4 days ago

Of course they will and have responded. The response naturally being, how could Hamas be so violent as to force the poor IDF snipers to do this?

4
submitted 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) by sonori@beehaw.org to c/finance@beehaw.org
 

If anyone here is interested in a more technical interview, here are two socialists with doctorates in economics talk about why after two hundred years of talking about fixing the housing market haven’t gotten anywhere.

 

Not sure if this fits here given it’s more foucued on prek-12 than Academia, but I figure it impacts the students going into college quite heavily and most of the same points still apply.

 

Evidently the joints on the flaps still need a little work into not letting gases through, but it seemed to still have enough actuation to keep the spacecraft stable until the engines took over for the landing burn.

 

A detailed discussion of the Shuttle program as well as some ethics in airspace.

 
  • A video about disposable vapes, and how addiction became the goal of every single company on the planet.
view more: next ›