I was partially wrong. The law does not consider a fetus a person with a full measure of rights. This is similar to how children do not possess all the constitutional rights and are subject to their parents or the state making choices for them. Regardless, the highest court in the nation decided in 1973 that a fetus is not of equal status with the mother, and that the mother is more important. As emotionally tumultuous as it may be a fetus is not a baby, it is a part of a woman. Traditionally the juncture point of fetus to baby has been birth, and I see no reason to change that, as it provides a distinct point of separation.
First of all the law, in general, does not recognize a fetus as a person. Some localities my differ on that but they are the exception.
Secondly, as I said you can't force one person to undergo medical treatment and procedures to preserve the life of another and claim to support self determination. A Fetus, even if it were afforded all the rights of a citizen can't legally demand that another person accept potentially life threatening risks to preserve its own life. If such were the case you'd see people in need of various transplant procedures suing others for a kidney, part of a liver, or a hip worth of bone marrow.
I can't speak to other peoples objections to that third trimester plan, but I can voice my own, which would fit within US law.
In the USA you can't currently legally force one person to subject themselves to a medical procedure in order to protect or aid another person. The only exception I can think of to that is vaccinations, which aren't quite the same because it isn't to protect/aid another person but society in general and frequently is coerced by denying services rather than forcing through actual use of force. By requiring that a pregnant woman undergo a cesarean section surgery rather than some other abortive procedure you are forcing her into taking on more or different medical risks than she consents to. To me abortion is a self determination issue, even if you assume that a fetus is possessed of the same rights as its mother it's wrong to force the mother into medical procedures against her will to support it.
Personally I find abortion very distasteful and wouldn't support anyone I know in having one outside of mental or physical medical necessity. My personal tastes though aren't as important to me as trying to maintain a civil and just society.
You probably interact with plenty of racists on a regular basis and just don't realize it. It's a well known failing of the internet that people feel free to act like assholes on the internet. So in normal social interactions with people who are in close physical proximity everyone tends to be mindful of what they say and when because if they insult someone it could have real lasting consequences in their life. On the other hand if you spout every vile thought that crosses your mind online the people that see it are likely to either be strangers from around the country/world, or a close circle of friends that are likely of the same mindset.
I'm not immune to this myself just because I am aware of it. I did however once randomly meet someone 2400 miles from home who knew my parents. That was a sobering experience in that I realized that even though I thought I was far from anyone who's opinion I valued, there I was talking to someone who could contact my parents straight away.
I've got a poorly insulated house in a pretty warm part of the USA and my electric usage gets up around 2K KWh during the hotter parts of the year. We keep the thermostat set in the low 70's so we're not trying for meat locker temperatures or anything. While I live in a warm area there are some much hotter localities that probably have houses with just as poor of an insulation value, if not worse.
I would expect that people in the US also just use more electricity in a wasteful manner than people do elsewhere because it is relatively cheap. I could be mistaken but I believe the average home is larger in the US than elsewhere. My power bill tops out around $250 during the hottest parts of the year but that is only a few months while most of the time it's around $150. Compared to my wages the electric bill is minor enough that I'm not very interested in taking action to reduce it. I could spend $10,000 putting in new windows, but even if by some miracle they reduced my power bill by 20%, and my power bill was always at that peak amount, it'd take 13 years to pay back its cost.
I wonder how much more use our rail system would get if we laid down a second set of tracks between major cities were there is only one set currently? I suspect that a big part of the delivery speed problems with rail shipping currently is that a line can only handle traffic in one direction at a time. So as it stands a train can't just leave when it's ready, it has to wait for the track to be clear of oncoming traffic first. By doubling the amount of rail we could quite possibly more than double the throughput.
Why use a backhoe for fiber optic lines? Maybe it's just the soil we have around here, or rather clay, but I've seen crews out using horizontal hydraulic boring equipment laying in 3 inch PVC conduit all over the place. I would guess they still have to do all the planning and much of the other work but you don't need to repair or re-landscape nearly as much stuff that way.
Not all government entities are created equal, and the same is true for private enterprise. I've never had a problem with my municipal services that cover gas, sewage, trash pickup, electricity, or water. The times I've had to contact them I've gotten an actual human on the line that resolved the issue quickly or helped me figure out the right party to contact to resolve the problem. Meanwhile dealing with both the phone and cable companies I've used over the years have always been exercises in frustration.
Granted the above is only my experience and isn't necessarily representative of other municipalities and commercial enterprises. But going on personal experience I would love to hand over the administering of physical infrastructure for fiber internet connections to my municipality. Let whatever ISP's are interested rent usage of that publicly owned infrastructure, just like they already do when paying pole fees.
Yes, long term would mean more than a few years, decades is an acceptable usage.
The last time I heard the profit margin on a Model S was 20% or better. The entire company isn't profitable because they are putting everything into growing their capacity and the technology. It is entirely possible that this winds up with Tesla crashing and burning. It is however, also possible that rather than becoming a competitor to the major auto companies that it'll eat their lunch and replace them to a large degree.
Facebook is profitable, which is good to see, but also not really relevant, my bad there as profitability and P/E aren't the same thing. I could have a company that makes 95% profit margins on hundreds of millions of dollars of revenue, but if the stock valuation is high enough then it can still have a bad P/E. The P/E for Facebook is around 60.
Tesla has a very high P/E, somewhere north of 130, while GM and Ford are in the 4-6 range. However Tesla has room for growth which GM and Ford largely lack. Also GM has had bad P/E numbers in relatively recent times being in the mid 30's at some point, even as a huge international company.
Like you say the short term growth potential doesn't support their stock price. However a lot of the money in the stock market isn't looking for only short term growth. The high price of Tesla stock reflects that a lot of fund managers think they have a decent chance of huge long term growth. So yes, Tesla stock is an expensive gamble but it still has a clearer path to long term growth and profitability than companies like Twitter and Facebook.
I'm pretty sure anyone who actually goes out and shoots regularly on their own time is going to be a better shot than the vast majority of non-infantry troops. See ammo costs money and consequentially range time is usually kept to the bare minimum required in the military. Depending on your job in the military that might mean firing as little as 100 rounds every 18 months.
I'll grant you that the enemies we've fought in the middle east have been fanatics on the edge of losing everything. And of course underestimating a fanatic is easy and dangerous as hell. I don't think we have many people like that here in the USA currently, but it would be silly to say that such a situation couldn't or wouldn't arise here in the USA.
The bombs over guns situation is a result of the many imbalances between the military and the various guerilla groups. The Taliban uses bombs because it is more cost effective and lower risk than committing their limited warm bodies. Professional militaries do the same thing only we deliver our bombs and missiles by remote, and because we try to an extreme extent to minimize personnel loses.
You can even see how this varies here on Earth. I once spent a few months watching a large construction project progress in the middle east. There were easily ten times as many workers as you would have on a similar project in the USA, because it was cheaper to hire a load of people with hand tools than to employ fewer people and equip them with power tools.
You just described a huge majority of the folks that make up the military. Maybe in the Army and Marines you have a useful percentage of trained infantry and other combat troops. But in the Air Force you'd be looking at maybe 1:100 if not 1:1000 actually having any kind of combat training beyond the joke of basic training. I would expect the Navy to have similar numbers to the AF in terms of combat training. In the end only a small chunk of the military would actually be usefully trained to fight, maybe 20% at the very best, but I would expect more like 10%.
A more critical issue in my mind is when fighting overseas the military is able to limit its exposure as much as possible so that only the teeth and a well protected perimeter is all that is visible. That is not the case within the USA. Most bases I've seen are essentially wide open to infiltration and have impossibly more perimeter than can be defended. The military is also pretty gung ho on gun control on its bases so that even if there are enough small arms to go around and defend the perimeter they are almost entirely locked up in an armory. The personnel also mostly live off base on the local economy and so they and their families are vulnerable. Also the utilities for each base are usually coming from the local community and don't have meaningful backups where they can be protected.
It depends on how much you're paying for the kids. We already subsidize dependents/children through tax benefits. That isn't necessarily a bad thing since we don't want a population drop off like Japan is facing. But we don't want to encourage a population boom either as might happen if we started handing out cash for having kids. Perhaps we could give tax credits or deductions for income earned above the UBI level, which would not be cashable. A system like that would encourage working/productive people to have children to shelter their income. However a person coasting by on the UBI would see no financial benefit in having children.
It's a loaded question whether the word is admire or respect, because both can be defined in such a way as to paint you in a bad light should you choose any human being. The only two choices that came to my mind when I heard this story were the newest pope, the Dalai Lama, and Aung San Suu Kyi, none of which I could remember the names of on the spot. And even if I did recall their names odds are that they've said or done something reprehensible that'd soon be shoved in my face. Hell the safest answer to that question would probably be "Putin, because you have to respect venomous snakes unless you fancy getting bit."
While healthy funding is a part of building a good school system, parent involvement is likely a bigger problem. Which is why poverty is self perpetuating. Children in homes where their parents struggle to provide for the family simply aren't as likely to get the help and followup with school work as their peers. The parents in such situations frequently have more than one job and so are present less, and given that they likely grew up in the same situation are probably less capable of helping their children to begin with.
This sounds like the same argument that is used for Abstinence only sex ed classes.
I agree that we shouldn't have illegal residents and so their driving skills shouldn't be a factor. However, reality doesn't match our desires and I think we'd be better off now, and for the foreseeable future, by not locking illegal residents out of the licensing process. Making the DMV act as part of ICE just costs us citizens more time, money, and lives.
Drivers Licenses aren't some privilege, they are supposed to be a safety check verifying that a person can operate a vehicle without destroying lives and property willy nilly. By making them a citizenship check you effectively ensure that no illegal resident's driving skills and road safety knowledge will be tested prior to them taking to the road.
Health insurance for all is the same kind of situation as the drivers license except instead of being about safety on the roads it is about financial responsibility and making sure that hospitals treat patients first instead of checking bank and credit card balances. Hospital ER's are required to treat patients first and figure out the bill later. That means that for many people in the US their primary physician is whoever happens to be on duty at the local ER. When they can't pay for the bill, which will be exorbitantly high because they didn't get treatment until it was an emergency and provided through the most expensive channel possible, the rest of us who do have the money/insurance to pay our bills actually take on part of that cost. I don't like the way Obama care was implemented, as it is a half-assed measure. He should have pushed through single payer federal health insurance and let the private vulture insurance companies meet the market for extra insurance.
I'll grant you that giving the right to vote to non-citizens is on the face of it pretty silly. Although if you look at it and realize that most citizens don't care enough to vote at all it's hard to see how it is worth refusing the right to interested people who live in the area, even if they do so illegally. And even in the event that you vote your lizard in s/he is still a lizard and likely to pay far more mind to any potential corporate sponsor than their electorate.
A sizable greenhouse with an aquaponics setup could be a very good addition providing fish as well as fruits/vegetables. You could do composting inside to generate heat and actually produce food year round.
A biodigester setup would also be very useful as a means to process waste materials like sewage and food waste. The end result of which is methane, and free fertilizer. The methane can be used simply as cooking/heating gas or pressurized for storage.
That part is basically already true for me. I go to a shoe store and by the time we've sorted out which shoes will actually fit me I'm left picking between a lot of garishly colored shoes that all look ridiculous.
On top of that, assuming that you can't retrofit an existing truck to be self driving is kind of silly. Especially if we are planning on having a human driver accompany the truck everywhere and handle complicated in town driving. I would guess a conversion kit would include a suite of sensors, a set of motors to actuate any controls that can't already be controlled electronically, and a computer which uses the aforementioned items to control the truck.
I get that they don't want every light industrial zoned bit of property occupied by office buildings. But their method of dealing with that issue is kind of ridiculous. They should divide the light industrial zoning class and assign those new classes as they deem appropriate. That said it is still silly as Palo Alto is a compact little bit of city that is right next to Los Altos, Mountain View, and Sunnyvale which all have plenty of gas stations last I checked. Plenty of the population of this country manages to live everyday further away from anything than that. People I work with live far enough out in the boonies that if they decide to eat out for dinner the closest thing is a 15-20 minute drive.
Drones are an excellent source of titanium and schematics! My only real complaint with them is that they took forever to bring in reinforcements when I wanted to farm them. I spent awhile with 3 of the little flyers chasing me around waiting for them to call in bigger sentinels for me to kill as I was looking for a crafting component that they seemed to drop. Of course I eventually got tired of the kiting and not getting the drop and left. Once I got out of the atmosphere I was attacked by a sentinel fighter craft which dropped what I needed.
Slashdot Mirror
I was partially wrong. The law does not consider a fetus a person with a full measure of rights. This is similar to how children do not possess all the constitutional rights and are subject to their parents or the state making choices for them. Regardless, the highest court in the nation decided in 1973 that a fetus is not of equal status with the mother, and that the mother is more important. As emotionally tumultuous as it may be a fetus is not a baby, it is a part of a woman. Traditionally the juncture point of fetus to baby has been birth, and I see no reason to change that, as it provides a distinct point of separation.
First of all the law, in general, does not recognize a fetus as a person. Some localities my differ on that but they are the exception.
Secondly, as I said you can't force one person to undergo medical treatment and procedures to preserve the life of another and claim to support self determination. A Fetus, even if it were afforded all the rights of a citizen can't legally demand that another person accept potentially life threatening risks to preserve its own life. If such were the case you'd see people in need of various transplant procedures suing others for a kidney, part of a liver, or a hip worth of bone marrow.
I can't speak to other peoples objections to that third trimester plan, but I can voice my own, which would fit within US law.
In the USA you can't currently legally force one person to subject themselves to a medical procedure in order to protect or aid another person. The only exception I can think of to that is vaccinations, which aren't quite the same because it isn't to protect/aid another person but society in general and frequently is coerced by denying services rather than forcing through actual use of force. By requiring that a pregnant woman undergo a cesarean section surgery rather than some other abortive procedure you are forcing her into taking on more or different medical risks than she consents to. To me abortion is a self determination issue, even if you assume that a fetus is possessed of the same rights as its mother it's wrong to force the mother into medical procedures against her will to support it.
Personally I find abortion very distasteful and wouldn't support anyone I know in having one outside of mental or physical medical necessity. My personal tastes though aren't as important to me as trying to maintain a civil and just society.
You probably interact with plenty of racists on a regular basis and just don't realize it. It's a well known failing of the internet that people feel free to act like assholes on the internet. So in normal social interactions with people who are in close physical proximity everyone tends to be mindful of what they say and when because if they insult someone it could have real lasting consequences in their life. On the other hand if you spout every vile thought that crosses your mind online the people that see it are likely to either be strangers from around the country/world, or a close circle of friends that are likely of the same mindset.
I'm not immune to this myself just because I am aware of it. I did however once randomly meet someone 2400 miles from home who knew my parents. That was a sobering experience in that I realized that even though I thought I was far from anyone who's opinion I valued, there I was talking to someone who could contact my parents straight away.
I've got a poorly insulated house in a pretty warm part of the USA and my electric usage gets up around 2K KWh during the hotter parts of the year. We keep the thermostat set in the low 70's so we're not trying for meat locker temperatures or anything. While I live in a warm area there are some much hotter localities that probably have houses with just as poor of an insulation value, if not worse.
I would expect that people in the US also just use more electricity in a wasteful manner than people do elsewhere because it is relatively cheap. I could be mistaken but I believe the average home is larger in the US than elsewhere. My power bill tops out around $250 during the hottest parts of the year but that is only a few months while most of the time it's around $150. Compared to my wages the electric bill is minor enough that I'm not very interested in taking action to reduce it. I could spend $10,000 putting in new windows, but even if by some miracle they reduced my power bill by 20%, and my power bill was always at that peak amount, it'd take 13 years to pay back its cost.
I wonder how much more use our rail system would get if we laid down a second set of tracks between major cities were there is only one set currently? I suspect that a big part of the delivery speed problems with rail shipping currently is that a line can only handle traffic in one direction at a time. So as it stands a train can't just leave when it's ready, it has to wait for the track to be clear of oncoming traffic first. By doubling the amount of rail we could quite possibly more than double the throughput.
Why use a backhoe for fiber optic lines? Maybe it's just the soil we have around here, or rather clay, but I've seen crews out using horizontal hydraulic boring equipment laying in 3 inch PVC conduit all over the place. I would guess they still have to do all the planning and much of the other work but you don't need to repair or re-landscape nearly as much stuff that way.
Not all government entities are created equal, and the same is true for private enterprise. I've never had a problem with my municipal services that cover gas, sewage, trash pickup, electricity, or water. The times I've had to contact them I've gotten an actual human on the line that resolved the issue quickly or helped me figure out the right party to contact to resolve the problem. Meanwhile dealing with both the phone and cable companies I've used over the years have always been exercises in frustration.
Granted the above is only my experience and isn't necessarily representative of other municipalities and commercial enterprises. But going on personal experience I would love to hand over the administering of physical infrastructure for fiber internet connections to my municipality. Let whatever ISP's are interested rent usage of that publicly owned infrastructure, just like they already do when paying pole fees.
Yes, long term would mean more than a few years, decades is an acceptable usage.
The last time I heard the profit margin on a Model S was 20% or better. The entire company isn't profitable because they are putting everything into growing their capacity and the technology. It is entirely possible that this winds up with Tesla crashing and burning. It is however, also possible that rather than becoming a competitor to the major auto companies that it'll eat their lunch and replace them to a large degree.
Facebook is profitable, which is good to see, but also not really relevant, my bad there as profitability and P/E aren't the same thing. I could have a company that makes 95% profit margins on hundreds of millions of dollars of revenue, but if the stock valuation is high enough then it can still have a bad P/E. The P/E for Facebook is around 60.
Tesla has a very high P/E, somewhere north of 130, while GM and Ford are in the 4-6 range. However Tesla has room for growth which GM and Ford largely lack. Also GM has had bad P/E numbers in relatively recent times being in the mid 30's at some point, even as a huge international company.
Like you say the short term growth potential doesn't support their stock price. However a lot of the money in the stock market isn't looking for only short term growth. The high price of Tesla stock reflects that a lot of fund managers think they have a decent chance of huge long term growth. So yes, Tesla stock is an expensive gamble but it still has a clearer path to long term growth and profitability than companies like Twitter and Facebook.
I'm pretty sure anyone who actually goes out and shoots regularly on their own time is going to be a better shot than the vast majority of non-infantry troops. See ammo costs money and consequentially range time is usually kept to the bare minimum required in the military. Depending on your job in the military that might mean firing as little as 100 rounds every 18 months.
I'll grant you that the enemies we've fought in the middle east have been fanatics on the edge of losing everything. And of course underestimating a fanatic is easy and dangerous as hell. I don't think we have many people like that here in the USA currently, but it would be silly to say that such a situation couldn't or wouldn't arise here in the USA.
The bombs over guns situation is a result of the many imbalances between the military and the various guerilla groups. The Taliban uses bombs because it is more cost effective and lower risk than committing their limited warm bodies. Professional militaries do the same thing only we deliver our bombs and missiles by remote, and because we try to an extreme extent to minimize personnel loses.
You can even see how this varies here on Earth. I once spent a few months watching a large construction project progress in the middle east. There were easily ten times as many workers as you would have on a similar project in the USA, because it was cheaper to hire a load of people with hand tools than to employ fewer people and equip them with power tools.
You just described a huge majority of the folks that make up the military. Maybe in the Army and Marines you have a useful percentage of trained infantry and other combat troops. But in the Air Force you'd be looking at maybe 1:100 if not 1:1000 actually having any kind of combat training beyond the joke of basic training. I would expect the Navy to have similar numbers to the AF in terms of combat training. In the end only a small chunk of the military would actually be usefully trained to fight, maybe 20% at the very best, but I would expect more like 10%.
A more critical issue in my mind is when fighting overseas the military is able to limit its exposure as much as possible so that only the teeth and a well protected perimeter is all that is visible. That is not the case within the USA. Most bases I've seen are essentially wide open to infiltration and have impossibly more perimeter than can be defended. The military is also pretty gung ho on gun control on its bases so that even if there are enough small arms to go around and defend the perimeter they are almost entirely locked up in an armory. The personnel also mostly live off base on the local economy and so they and their families are vulnerable. Also the utilities for each base are usually coming from the local community and don't have meaningful backups where they can be protected.
It depends on how much you're paying for the kids. We already subsidize dependents/children through tax benefits. That isn't necessarily a bad thing since we don't want a population drop off like Japan is facing. But we don't want to encourage a population boom either as might happen if we started handing out cash for having kids. Perhaps we could give tax credits or deductions for income earned above the UBI level, which would not be cashable. A system like that would encourage working/productive people to have children to shelter their income. However a person coasting by on the UBI would see no financial benefit in having children.
It's a loaded question whether the word is admire or respect, because both can be defined in such a way as to paint you in a bad light should you choose any human being. The only two choices that came to my mind when I heard this story were the newest pope, the Dalai Lama, and Aung San Suu Kyi, none of which I could remember the names of on the spot. And even if I did recall their names odds are that they've said or done something reprehensible that'd soon be shoved in my face. Hell the safest answer to that question would probably be "Putin, because you have to respect venomous snakes unless you fancy getting bit."
While healthy funding is a part of building a good school system, parent involvement is likely a bigger problem. Which is why poverty is self perpetuating. Children in homes where their parents struggle to provide for the family simply aren't as likely to get the help and followup with school work as their peers. The parents in such situations frequently have more than one job and so are present less, and given that they likely grew up in the same situation are probably less capable of helping their children to begin with.
This sounds like the same argument that is used for Abstinence only sex ed classes.
I agree that we shouldn't have illegal residents and so their driving skills shouldn't be a factor. However, reality doesn't match our desires and I think we'd be better off now, and for the foreseeable future, by not locking illegal residents out of the licensing process. Making the DMV act as part of ICE just costs us citizens more time, money, and lives.
Drivers Licenses aren't some privilege, they are supposed to be a safety check verifying that a person can operate a vehicle without destroying lives and property willy nilly. By making them a citizenship check you effectively ensure that no illegal resident's driving skills and road safety knowledge will be tested prior to them taking to the road.
Health insurance for all is the same kind of situation as the drivers license except instead of being about safety on the roads it is about financial responsibility and making sure that hospitals treat patients first instead of checking bank and credit card balances. Hospital ER's are required to treat patients first and figure out the bill later. That means that for many people in the US their primary physician is whoever happens to be on duty at the local ER. When they can't pay for the bill, which will be exorbitantly high because they didn't get treatment until it was an emergency and provided through the most expensive channel possible, the rest of us who do have the money/insurance to pay our bills actually take on part of that cost. I don't like the way Obama care was implemented, as it is a half-assed measure. He should have pushed through single payer federal health insurance and let the private vulture insurance companies meet the market for extra insurance.
I'll grant you that giving the right to vote to non-citizens is on the face of it pretty silly. Although if you look at it and realize that most citizens don't care enough to vote at all it's hard to see how it is worth refusing the right to interested people who live in the area, even if they do so illegally. And even in the event that you vote your lizard in s/he is still a lizard and likely to pay far more mind to any potential corporate sponsor than their electorate.
A sizable greenhouse with an aquaponics setup could be a very good addition providing fish as well as fruits/vegetables. You could do composting inside to generate heat and actually produce food year round.
A biodigester setup would also be very useful as a means to process waste materials like sewage and food waste. The end result of which is methane, and free fertilizer. The methane can be used simply as cooking/heating gas or pressurized for storage.
"in a style and color you hate"
That part is basically already true for me. I go to a shoe store and by the time we've sorted out which shoes will actually fit me I'm left picking between a lot of garishly colored shoes that all look ridiculous.
On top of that, assuming that you can't retrofit an existing truck to be self driving is kind of silly. Especially if we are planning on having a human driver accompany the truck everywhere and handle complicated in town driving. I would guess a conversion kit would include a suite of sensors, a set of motors to actuate any controls that can't already be controlled electronically, and a computer which uses the aforementioned items to control the truck.
4 times??? that's some bad math there.
4 x 27 = 108
3 x 27 = 81
Saying 4 times is just a little hyperbolic, when saying 3 times would be more accurate though not perfect.
I get that they don't want every light industrial zoned bit of property occupied by office buildings. But their method of dealing with that issue is kind of ridiculous. They should divide the light industrial zoning class and assign those new classes as they deem appropriate. That said it is still silly as Palo Alto is a compact little bit of city that is right next to Los Altos, Mountain View, and Sunnyvale which all have plenty of gas stations last I checked. Plenty of the population of this country manages to live everyday further away from anything than that. People I work with live far enough out in the boonies that if they decide to eat out for dinner the closest thing is a 15-20 minute drive.
I wonder if anyone has worked out spoofing GPS to cheat. I presume that the game uses the phones GPS chip to decide where you are anyways.
Drones are an excellent source of titanium and schematics! My only real complaint with them is that they took forever to bring in reinforcements when I wanted to farm them. I spent awhile with 3 of the little flyers chasing me around waiting for them to call in bigger sentinels for me to kill as I was looking for a crafting component that they seemed to drop. Of course I eventually got tired of the kiting and not getting the drop and left. Once I got out of the atmosphere I was attacked by a sentinel fighter craft which dropped what I needed.