No, I'm not misunderstanding the kind of non-emergencies. I've heard those stories before. But since we have demonstrated that we have those kinds of people in the world, we have demonstrated that my concerns are valid.
True... but with a phone with an active account, the caller can be held accountable for making a non-emergency call to 911.
That's not going to happen because otherwise people will stop calling 911 for real emergencies. You don't want people to wonder if the heart attack they are witnessing is enough of an emergency that they should risk calling 911.
... and then compare the cost of living between those countries.
Why don't you do that then? And be prepared to apologize when you return?
Perhaps the overhead involved at the district, county and state levels needs to be looked at very carefully. Ask yourself, where are the nicest premises that any school district has? Probably it's the district offices.
My point here is that we already have ample evidence that we need to drain the swamp, not merely throw more money at it.
One would also need to admit that the US spends more per pupil than all but a small handful of countries. And that one could improve the underpaid situation by spending more on teachers and improving their work environment and less on stuff that doesn't do that.
Because that reactivity is far lower in even common alloys, even when magnesium composes more than 95% of the alloy...
That sounded interesting, but when I read up on it, I saw that those alloys didn't actually have significantly lower reactivity. They have significantly lower surface reactivity, which is a good thing, but when they burn, they burn hot. The problem is that when it starts to burn in reaction with air in an environment well over both the melting points and ignition points of the alloy, it's 95% or more magnesium and that generates a lot more heat per unit volume (and mass) than steel would.
This is where the observation that a considerable portion of your material is ceramic spheres with pressurized nitrogen or halogen gases becomes relevant.
I've never heard of mass killing done in the name of science, no.
There's also the Belgium Free Congo State and the eugenics movement. And I think it's only a matter of time before some environmentalist themed group decides to try involuntary population reduction on people they don't like.
And yet there are many magnesium alloys with ignition temperature above their melting point and above the boiling point of pure magnesium.
Which isn't relevant when you have fires with temperatures hotter than these temperatures. A warship would have (or have inflicted on it) a variety of means to achieve these elevated temperatures. I don't see here direct discussion of the actual concern, the high reactivity of magnesium.
I get that the original poster was being bombastic, but I still don't buy that magnesium alloys are as stable in hot fires as you imply. It's worth noting in particular that warships have, and have inflicted on them, a variety of means for achieving temperatures hotter than what you mention.
And that is without getting into the fire retardant nature of metal foams that use ceramic beads in the cells.
Which is where most criticism of idontgno started. I already had read some of that before I had posted the first time.
And yet there are many magnesium alloys with ignition temperature above their melting point and above the boiling point of pure magnesium.
Which isn't relevant when you have fires with temperatures hotter than these temperatures. A warship would have (or have inflicted on it) a variety of means to achieve these elevated temperatures. I don't see here direct discussion of the actual concern, the high reactivity of magnesium.
I get that the original poster was being bombastic, but I still don't buy that magnesium alloys are as stable in hot fires as you imply.
And that is without getting into the fire retardant nature of metal foams that use ceramic beads in the cells.
Which is where most criticism of idontgno started. I already had read some of that before I had posted the first time.
And yet there are many magnesium alloys with ignition temperature above their melting point and above the boiling point of pure magnesium.
Which isn't relevant when you have fires with temperatures hotter than these temperatures. A warship would have (or have inflicted on it) a variety of means to achieve these elevated temperatures. I don't see here direct discussion of the actual concern, the high reactivity of magnesium.
I get that the original poster was being bombastic, but I still don't buy that magnesium alloys are as stable in hot fires as you imply. It's worth noting in particular that warships have, and have inflicted on them, a variety of means for achieving temperatures hotter than what you mention.
And that is without getting into the fire retardant nature of metal foams that use ceramic beads in the cells.
Which is where most criticism of idontgno started. I already had read some of that before I had posted the first time.
Water is not an alloy of hydrogen. Similarly, a magnesium containing oxide is not an alloy of magnesium. As I noted before, magnesium alloy implies a large portion of elemental magnesium. And oxygen will be present because this ship will be used on Earth in an oxygen rich atmosphere.
at least, public school systems aren't. yes, they don't spend enough on this, and spend too much on that, but they aren't small.
Some public schools are in that category. And some public schools are in the category of only having a chemistry class because the teacher donated equipment.
The assumption here is that 100% of the cause for every notable gender imbalance today is due to inherent differences. I think that's pretty naive. Can you name the year when equality happened? Because what I observe is consistent change from 200 years ago, which basically agrees was non-equal. On what basis do we say that today, or 10 years ago, or whatever was the time when we hit equality?
So because it is hard to figure out what equality means, then equality never happens. Sounds like a non-problem I shouldn't care about then.
If you read the story, you find that it wasn't too dim to see, there was just something in the way. And if you can see a supernova from the far side of Earth, you are way too close.
The plaintiff was working two jobs during this time (she wanted to attain health insurance at the earlier place) and the defendants maliciously called the other employer apparently within a week of when she would have gotten her health insurance benefit and got her fired there.
It's one thing to fire an employee, you can always find some fig leaf pretext to cover your ass. But using private information that you got from the employee and going out of your way to contact another employer and cause harm to the ex-employee? There's no legitimate cause for that. That's demonstrates that it wasn't just a bad employee.
Slashdot Mirror
what makes you think it would stop someone from calling because somebody is having a heart attack?
Because they don't want to pay the fines?
No, I'm not misunderstanding the kind of non-emergencies. I've heard those stories before. But since we have demonstrated that we have those kinds of people in the world, we have demonstrated that my concerns are valid.
True... but with a phone with an active account, the caller can be held accountable for making a non-emergency call to 911.
That's not going to happen because otherwise people will stop calling 911 for real emergencies. You don't want people to wonder if the heart attack they are witnessing is enough of an emergency that they should risk calling 911.
... and then compare the cost of living between those countries.
Why don't you do that then? And be prepared to apologize when you return?
Perhaps the overhead involved at the district, county and state levels needs to be looked at very carefully. Ask yourself, where are the nicest premises that any school district has? Probably it's the district offices.
My point here is that we already have ample evidence that we need to drain the swamp, not merely throw more money at it.
admitting that teachers are underpaid.
One would also need to admit that the US spends more per pupil than all but a small handful of countries. And that one could improve the underpaid situation by spending more on teachers and improving their work environment and less on stuff that doesn't do that.
Because that reactivity is far lower in even common alloys, even when magnesium composes more than 95% of the alloy...
That sounded interesting, but when I read up on it, I saw that those alloys didn't actually have significantly lower reactivity. They have significantly lower surface reactivity, which is a good thing, but when they burn, they burn hot. The problem is that when it starts to burn in reaction with air in an environment well over both the melting points and ignition points of the alloy, it's 95% or more magnesium and that generates a lot more heat per unit volume (and mass) than steel would.
This is where the observation that a considerable portion of your material is ceramic spheres with pressurized nitrogen or halogen gases becomes relevant.
I merely answered the question. True motives are off topic.
What is it about the means that unjustifies the end? Because to me, cyborging a cockroach is less evil than killing a cow for meat.
I've never heard of mass killing done in the name of science, no.
There's also the Belgium Free Congo State and the eugenics movement. And I think it's only a matter of time before some environmentalist themed group decides to try involuntary population reduction on people they don't like.
And yet there are many magnesium alloys with ignition temperature above their melting point and above the boiling point of pure magnesium.
Which isn't relevant when you have fires with temperatures hotter than these temperatures. A warship would have (or have inflicted on it) a variety of means to achieve these elevated temperatures. I don't see here direct discussion of the actual concern, the high reactivity of magnesium.
I get that the original poster was being bombastic, but I still don't buy that magnesium alloys are as stable in hot fires as you imply. It's worth noting in particular that warships have, and have inflicted on them, a variety of means for achieving temperatures hotter than what you mention.
And that is without getting into the fire retardant nature of metal foams that use ceramic beads in the cells.
Which is where most criticism of idontgno started. I already had read some of that before I had posted the first time.
Let's try this post again.
And yet there are many magnesium alloys with ignition temperature above their melting point and above the boiling point of pure magnesium. Which isn't relevant when you have fires with temperatures hotter than these temperatures. A warship would have (or have inflicted on it) a variety of means to achieve these elevated temperatures. I don't see here direct discussion of the actual concern, the high reactivity of magnesium. I get that the original poster was being bombastic, but I still don't buy that magnesium alloys are as stable in hot fires as you imply. And that is without getting into the fire retardant nature of metal foams that use ceramic beads in the cells. Which is where most criticism of idontgno started. I already had read some of that before I had posted the first time.
And yet there are many magnesium alloys with ignition temperature above their melting point and above the boiling point of pure magnesium.
Which isn't relevant when you have fires with temperatures hotter than these temperatures. A warship would have (or have inflicted on it) a variety of means to achieve these elevated temperatures. I don't see here direct discussion of the actual concern, the high reactivity of magnesium.
I get that the original poster was being bombastic, but I still don't buy that magnesium alloys are as stable in hot fires as you imply. It's worth noting in particular that warships have, and have inflicted on them, a variety of means for achieving temperatures hotter than what you mention.
And that is without getting into the fire retardant nature of metal foams that use ceramic beads in the cells.
Which is where most criticism of idontgno started. I already had read some of that before I had posted the first time.
At this stage they could likely bounce back from a launch failure, but lose a crew and it is all over.
Sorry, it's not that big a deal though they may well lose their commercial contract with NASA which would be a significant setback.
Water is not an alloy of hydrogen. Similarly, a magnesium containing oxide is not an alloy of magnesium. As I noted before, magnesium alloy implies a large portion of elemental magnesium. And oxygen will be present because this ship will be used on Earth in an oxygen rich atmosphere.
at least, public school systems aren't. yes, they don't spend enough on this, and spend too much on that, but they aren't small.
Some public schools are in that category. And some public schools are in the category of only having a chemistry class because the teacher donated equipment.
but this is a little more evil that that isn't?
What's more important? A little more protein in the diet or educating the next generation of scientists? See? It's more good.
But if they are calling it a magnesium alloy, then elemental magnesium is a principle component and flammability is an issue.
I don't see that SpaceX is trying to build a Vostochny-scale complex. Nor do they need one at present.
I don't see any point in looking at the estimated cost of a project that hasn't even begun yet.
Construction is not the actual beginning of a construction project.
They labor away in the labs creating data.
Most of them don't even do that.
The assumption here is that 100% of the cause for every notable gender imbalance today is due to inherent differences. I think that's pretty naive. Can you name the year when equality happened? Because what I observe is consistent change from 200 years ago, which basically agrees was non-equal. On what basis do we say that today, or 10 years ago, or whatever was the time when we hit equality?
So because it is hard to figure out what equality means, then equality never happens. Sounds like a non-problem I shouldn't care about then.
No, because people have no magical way of knowing that aggregate
You don't need to know it to be part of it.
That which survives: survives.
It's not a tautology because "survive" is being used here in two different senses and referring to different things.
The only insight of Darwinian evolution is that the process of speciation will demonstrate statistical bias through the law of large numbers.
Speciation is one consequence of Darwinian evolution - there are others. And it is a pretty deep insight which doesn't deserve your derisive tone.
If you read the story, you find that it wasn't too dim to see, there was just something in the way. And if you can see a supernova from the far side of Earth, you are way too close.
The plaintiff was working two jobs during this time (she wanted to attain health insurance at the earlier place) and the defendants maliciously called the other employer apparently within a week of when she would have gotten her health insurance benefit and got her fired there.
It's one thing to fire an employee, you can always find some fig leaf pretext to cover your ass. But using private information that you got from the employee and going out of your way to contact another employer and cause harm to the ex-employee? There's no legitimate cause for that. That's demonstrates that it wasn't just a bad employee.