Well, money is a sort of power, after all. It's the power to get things done; and most people have to buy it, in exchange for their time. Inheriting ludicrous sums of cash might as well count as a super power.
First off, a poor chump couldn't afford either the Batman's or Green Arrow's toys--which went along way in giving these characters actual crime fighting ability.
Secondly, if you have to work to keep a roof over your head and food on your plate, you probably don't have a lot of time left to devote towards extensive training.
Problem is, when a technology gets cheaper and more readily available, it gets cheaper and more readily available for everyone. The idea of an unassailable fortress is just about as laughable of an idea as an unsinkable ship, for that reason alone.
For example, we live in a world where a $100-500 shaped charge / explosively formed penetrator can be a very serious threat to a $5-6 million dollar main battle tank. Even since our prehistory, one relatively common theme is that it's easier to make or concentrate energy than it is to deflect or absorb it. Unless something drastic changes in the field of materials science, that observation is about as good as a fact of life.
A bow and arrow is much more easy to make than a suit of armor which will defeat it. The old castle designs proved weak when firearms and cannons came about, and fortresses evolved to withstand frontal attacks from massive cannons. Cannons evolved into artillery and the idea that large, permanent installation could keep a determined enemy indefinitely at bay died shortly after.
It'd be cheaper and ultimately more effective for your ultra rich to simply buy the mob's good will, and try to otherwise go unnoticed.
History shows that a defending force usually spends disproportionally more effort and energy than an attacking force setting up their fortifications and storehouses. Also, no matter how ingenious, a defense has to work 100% of the time, whereas an offense may only need to land one or two good shots to render the defense useless.
Any successes the opposed piston design has enjoyed was mostly because it's basically a two-cycle design. So, yeah, they get more torque/displacement/RPM than comparable 4-stroke engines. The problem is, there are vastly more simple two-cycle engines, which for the most part are capable of similar thermodynamic efficiency.
The only truly interesting development I've seen in this area is an opposed engine where both pistons share the same crank, and there were two sets of pistons per crank pin--designed for attack drones, IIRC.
The advantage is that you don't need a cylinder head, so the engine can be lighter, and often smaller
Yeah, instead of some massive aluminum cylinder head and weighty valve train, you only need another main bearing and associated structure, and another crankshaft to boot. Sounds like real weight savings!
but I doubt that can be accomplished without some serious military training.
Even the military historically has a hard time getting soldiers to shoot at the enemy. S.L.A. Marshall claimed something like 75% of the troops who saw combat in WWII didn't fire their weapons directly at the enemy--who knows what the actual figure is, but some people won't shoot at another person, even when that person is shooting at them!
It's about being able to turn on the part of the human brain which makes psychopaths who they are when you need it (empathy and remorse just make you like a deer in the headlights), and to turn it back off when you don't.
Of all the safe-sex methods available, which of them do you recommend rape victims employ?
I recommend a having a concealed weapon, the know how and the unforgiving will to use it when the situation demands. Abstinence is the one and only true safe-sex method, after all.
So instead of giving them "reason" to seek tax loopholes, you suggest giving up that tax revenue without a fight?
If the rich seek to exploit tax loopholes, that creates demand for lawyers who exist solely to understand, lobby for and even to create the tax loopholes in the first place. Demand for tax lawyers will make people become tax lawyers; laws of supply and demand you see.
Do you really mean to create even more lawyers?! Talk about unforeseen consequences.
Could be those things, but I'd seriously steer towards the idea that it didn't fly because it was probably way outdated at that point. The one which was destroyed along with its rocket was launched in 1986, and this one was probably scheduled to go up after that. In the middle of the digital revolution.
If I were to guess, launching a new film-based spy satellite after 1980 probably didn't make a heck of a lot of sense in the first place, from the perspective of manning the systems, and mid-air retrieval of the film canisters alone--and that spy-quality remote digital imaging was well matured at that point, so it would have been stupid to launch yet another film-camera and commit to maintaining yet another dinosaur.
Lockheed had a contract to build so many, and that's the last of 'em.
It was probably the last one on the production lineup, and got the launch got scrubbed because something better came out, and instead of wasting a Titan launch on something obsolete, they changed plans. TFA didn't say this particular bird was launched in 1971, or at all, just that the first one flew in 1971.
Whether it be an air show or air race, I'll point out that the activity of being a spectator of the sport is in all likelihood statistically safer than the drive they took to go watch the show in the first place.
Bad things happen to good people. It sucks. 'Nuff said.
Hell, in the case of notable celebs, not only do they get the copyrights, and or royalties, they inherit the right to control their dead relatives' "right to publicity", which includes the ability to license their likeness, voice or individual personality to whatever end...forever.
Just doesn't seem right that people think they have the right to make an income because they have the same genes as someone who was remarkable. Though, I suppose if I were in their position, I'd be all for it just the same.
Interesting note about private espionage related to what you've said about the sidewinder: L. Ron Hubbard Jr. (son of the cult leader) claimed in a penthouse interview that his father obtained the designs for an infrared seeking missile (perhaps early AIM-9 or AIM-4 variants) through brain washing one of the lead engineers. He then sold it to the Russians, among other bits of information.
So, who knows. They probably had several information vectors.
The Vz 58 is a lot closer to a cross between the StG44 and SKS, in that it has a striker based action, with the a piston action similar to the SKS's short stroke piston and also the open top breach design.
But, yeah, it'd be foolish to think there weren't a few StG44s running around Kalashnikov's shop when he set about making the AK.
Maybe that's just tangential to baldness, though? If you have a guy with little confidence because he's going through the male pattern baldness thing, he's not going to make as many sales, which is likely going to further deteriorate his confidence in a sort of negative feedback loop.
If these men embraced their position in life, shaved it all off (and kept it short), did some things to bolster their confidence like getting in shape, they'd probably be seen as more authoritative and therefore more trustworthy. It's my experience that women in particular are more attracted to confidence itself than most any other male character trait.
I think it'd be more popular (and profitable) to rent these out to water-starved but well-off countries, to power desalination plants. A float it in, as a turnkey system, complete with technicians and all; that would be pretty nifty.
Look, the USG takes in what, about 2 trillion yearly in income tax (plus other forms of taxes and tariffs), and has a debt of 14 trillion. I wish I could say I took in 14% of my cumulative debt each year. I'm probably closer to 10%.
The American people don't have a revenue problem. They have a spending problem. Look at a graph and you see the income is increasing in a sort of natural logarithmic curve, and the spending is tending towards an exponential curve. That can be sustainable for a period of time, but it's not sustainable forever.
No. 100% of the reason we were downgraded is that there is no end to this trend in sight. Frankly, the the dumb bastards at the S&P picked a poor time to come to this realization, only because it amounts to kicking a guy while he's down, and it's invariably going to cause income to go down and spending to go up even more!
If you think the prospect of letting the US default ever existed in the slightest, then you simply don't understand politics.
Whoever is the weaker party any given time is always against increasing the deficit, at least publicly. Privately, they're always for increasing it, because both sides know that's the only way they can keep this scam going, at least in the short term. It doesn't matter if they're democrats or republicans, they're both painfully aware that more deficit spending is the only way to keep the ponzi scheme going. It's just like ol' Bernie Madoff's racket, only a billion times larger, and legal!
We have a Democrat Senate and President, and a Republican House, which means that (R)s get to yank the chain of everyone above, because he who has the chairman gets to establish parliamentary procedure, which is made worst that they have every political incentive to make the other guys look like fools.
However, that doesn't mean they aren't absolutely positively guaranteed reach some sort of "compromise" at the 11th hour, and also get to come away from this skirmish looking like heroes, because they got some kind of imaginary promise to reduce the deficit/taxes/whatever.
The one thing I don't think either side was counting on is this credit de-rating fiasco, despite choosing to honor our debts.
Actually, whenever I've set out computers, monitors, tv's...etc....overnight someone usually grabs it before the trash guys can come...lots of neighborhood trash scavengers about I guess these days.
Oh, sure. They strip out the copper wiring, and any other recyclable bits which might be worth something, then dump the CRT bearing carcass out in *my* alley--often right in the middle!
I don't know where you hail from, but here in the US, law enforcement certainly is the preeminent duty of a police force. Individuals comprising a police force are universally called LEOs in police-speak. I'll let you guess what that TLA stands for. That even applies to correctional officers, who in many jurisdictions only have police authority over inmates.
But, no... Uniformed officers are paid to prevent crime through their presence, enforce the law, protect life and property, and respond to crimes--not in any particular order. Detectives exist to take pictures and make a white tape line line around you when the uniformed cops fail. Maintaining order is a job for the riot squad.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, money is a sort of power, after all. It's the power to get things done; and most people have to buy it, in exchange for their time. Inheriting ludicrous sums of cash might as well count as a super power.
First off, a poor chump couldn't afford either the Batman's or Green Arrow's toys--which went along way in giving these characters actual crime fighting ability.
Secondly, if you have to work to keep a roof over your head and food on your plate, you probably don't have a lot of time left to devote towards extensive training.
Right on. The vast majority of my guns just happen to be breech-loaders.
Problem is, when a technology gets cheaper and more readily available, it gets cheaper and more readily available for everyone. The idea of an unassailable fortress is just about as laughable of an idea as an unsinkable ship, for that reason alone.
For example, we live in a world where a $100-500 shaped charge / explosively formed penetrator can be a very serious threat to a $5-6 million dollar main battle tank. Even since our prehistory, one relatively common theme is that it's easier to make or concentrate energy than it is to deflect or absorb it. Unless something drastic changes in the field of materials science, that observation is about as good as a fact of life.
A bow and arrow is much more easy to make than a suit of armor which will defeat it. The old castle designs proved weak when firearms and cannons came about, and fortresses evolved to withstand frontal attacks from massive cannons. Cannons evolved into artillery and the idea that large, permanent installation could keep a determined enemy indefinitely at bay died shortly after.
It'd be cheaper and ultimately more effective for your ultra rich to simply buy the mob's good will, and try to otherwise go unnoticed.
History shows that a defending force usually spends disproportionally more effort and energy than an attacking force setting up their fortifications and storehouses. Also, no matter how ingenious, a defense has to work 100% of the time, whereas an offense may only need to land one or two good shots to render the defense useless.
Any successes the opposed piston design has enjoyed was mostly because it's basically a two-cycle design. So, yeah, they get more torque/displacement/RPM than comparable 4-stroke engines. The problem is, there are vastly more simple two-cycle engines, which for the most part are capable of similar thermodynamic efficiency.
The only truly interesting development I've seen in this area is an opposed engine where both pistons share the same crank, and there were two sets of pistons per crank pin--designed for attack drones, IIRC.
The advantage is that you don't need a cylinder head, so the engine can be lighter, and often smaller
Yeah, instead of some massive aluminum cylinder head and weighty valve train, you only need another main bearing and associated structure, and another crankshaft to boot. Sounds like real weight savings!
Meh. They've been tried.
but I doubt that can be accomplished without some serious military training.
Even the military historically has a hard time getting soldiers to shoot at the enemy. S.L.A. Marshall claimed something like 75% of the troops who saw combat in WWII didn't fire their weapons directly at the enemy--who knows what the actual figure is, but some people won't shoot at another person, even when that person is shooting at them!
It's about being able to turn on the part of the human brain which makes psychopaths who they are when you need it (empathy and remorse just make you like a deer in the headlights), and to turn it back off when you don't.
Good ol' universal translator. Unfortunately, its vocabulary is...limited.
Of all the safe-sex methods available, which of them do you recommend rape victims employ?
I recommend a having a concealed weapon, the know how and the unforgiving will to use it when the situation demands. Abstinence is the one and only true safe-sex method, after all.
So instead of giving them "reason" to seek tax loopholes, you suggest giving up that tax revenue without a fight?
If the rich seek to exploit tax loopholes, that creates demand for lawyers who exist solely to understand, lobby for and even to create the tax loopholes in the first place. Demand for tax lawyers will make people become tax lawyers; laws of supply and demand you see.
Do you really mean to create even more lawyers?! Talk about unforeseen consequences.
Could be those things, but I'd seriously steer towards the idea that it didn't fly because it was probably way outdated at that point. The one which was destroyed along with its rocket was launched in 1986, and this one was probably scheduled to go up after that. In the middle of the digital revolution.
If I were to guess, launching a new film-based spy satellite after 1980 probably didn't make a heck of a lot of sense in the first place, from the perspective of manning the systems, and mid-air retrieval of the film canisters alone--and that spy-quality remote digital imaging was well matured at that point, so it would have been stupid to launch yet another film-camera and commit to maintaining yet another dinosaur.
Lockheed had a contract to build so many, and that's the last of 'em.
It was probably the last one on the production lineup, and got the launch got scrubbed because something better came out, and instead of wasting a Titan launch on something obsolete, they changed plans. TFA didn't say this particular bird was launched in 1971, or at all, just that the first one flew in 1971.
Whether it be an air show or air race, I'll point out that the activity of being a spectator of the sport is in all likelihood statistically safer than the drive they took to go watch the show in the first place.
Bad things happen to good people. It sucks. 'Nuff said.
Hell, in the case of notable celebs, not only do they get the copyrights, and or royalties, they inherit the right to control their dead relatives' "right to publicity", which includes the ability to license their likeness, voice or individual personality to whatever end...forever.
Just doesn't seem right that people think they have the right to make an income because they have the same genes as someone who was remarkable. Though, I suppose if I were in their position, I'd be all for it just the same.
Interesting note about private espionage related to what you've said about the sidewinder: L. Ron Hubbard Jr. (son of the cult leader) claimed in a penthouse interview that his father obtained the designs for an infrared seeking missile (perhaps early AIM-9 or AIM-4 variants) through brain washing one of the lead engineers. He then sold it to the Russians, among other bits of information.
So, who knows. They probably had several information vectors.
The Vz 58 is a lot closer to a cross between the StG44 and SKS, in that it has a striker based action, with the a piston action similar to the SKS's short stroke piston and also the open top breach design.
But, yeah, it'd be foolish to think there weren't a few StG44s running around Kalashnikov's shop when he set about making the AK.
Maybe that's just tangential to baldness, though? If you have a guy with little confidence because he's going through the male pattern baldness thing, he's not going to make as many sales, which is likely going to further deteriorate his confidence in a sort of negative feedback loop.
If these men embraced their position in life, shaved it all off (and kept it short), did some things to bolster their confidence like getting in shape, they'd probably be seen as more authoritative and therefore more trustworthy. It's my experience that women in particular are more attracted to confidence itself than most any other male character trait.
I think it'd be more popular (and profitable) to rent these out to water-starved but well-off countries, to power desalination plants. A float it in, as a turnkey system, complete with technicians and all; that would be pretty nifty.
(one half being the lack of any revenues)
Look, the USG takes in what, about 2 trillion yearly in income tax (plus other forms of taxes and tariffs), and has a debt of 14 trillion. I wish I could say I took in 14% of my cumulative debt each year. I'm probably closer to 10%.
The American people don't have a revenue problem. They have a spending problem. Look at a graph and you see the income is increasing in a sort of natural logarithmic curve, and the spending is tending towards an exponential curve. That can be sustainable for a period of time, but it's not sustainable forever.
No. 100% of the reason we were downgraded is that there is no end to this trend in sight. Frankly, the the dumb bastards at the S&P picked a poor time to come to this realization, only because it amounts to kicking a guy while he's down, and it's invariably going to cause income to go down and spending to go up even more!
If you think the prospect of letting the US default ever existed in the slightest, then you simply don't understand politics.
Whoever is the weaker party any given time is always against increasing the deficit, at least publicly. Privately, they're always for increasing it, because both sides know that's the only way they can keep this scam going, at least in the short term. It doesn't matter if they're democrats or republicans, they're both painfully aware that more deficit spending is the only way to keep the ponzi scheme going. It's just like ol' Bernie Madoff's racket, only a billion times larger, and legal!
We have a Democrat Senate and President, and a Republican House, which means that (R)s get to yank the chain of everyone above, because he who has the chairman gets to establish parliamentary procedure, which is made worst that they have every political incentive to make the other guys look like fools.
However, that doesn't mean they aren't absolutely positively guaranteed reach some sort of "compromise" at the 11th hour, and also get to come away from this skirmish looking like heroes, because they got some kind of imaginary promise to reduce the deficit/taxes/whatever.
The one thing I don't think either side was counting on is this credit de-rating fiasco, despite choosing to honor our debts.
Actually, whenever I've set out computers, monitors, tv's...etc....overnight someone usually grabs it before the trash guys can come...lots of neighborhood trash scavengers about I guess these days.
Oh, sure. They strip out the copper wiring, and any other recyclable bits which might be worth something, then dump the CRT bearing carcass out in *my* alley--often right in the middle!
I don't know where you hail from, but here in the US, law enforcement certainly is the preeminent duty of a police force. Individuals comprising a police force are universally called LEOs in police-speak. I'll let you guess what that TLA stands for. That even applies to correctional officers, who in many jurisdictions only have police authority over inmates.
But, no... Uniformed officers are paid to prevent crime through their presence, enforce the law, protect life and property, and respond to crimes--not in any particular order. Detectives exist to take pictures and make a white tape line line around you when the uniformed cops fail. Maintaining order is a job for the riot squad.
Silly rabbit, governments don't know the meaning of "earn"!
I think this is more an example of Lawnmower Man.
All I want to know is when I can expect my four-assed monkey.