I don't see anything you said that contradicts what I said. The plane burns approximately the same amount of fuel per hour regardless of weight. If a flight takes 4 hours, the plane will be loaded with approximately 5 hours of fuel (regulation says 30 minutes extra fuel during daytime, 45 during nighttime -- Most pilots just go an hour). The reason they don't "fill up" is because that's a waste of money.
I'm a pilot. The only weight-based calculations we do are to check that we're within the max weight of the plane, and that our CG is in the envelope. Calculating fuel consumption has nothing to do with weight.
Actually, free as in everyone picks up the tab, including the person receiving the benefit.
Re:Collateralized vs Non-Collateralized Loans
on
Let Them Eat Teslas
·
· Score: 1
That's because they aren't accountable to anyone, because they have to pay their own bill. As soon as someone else pays their bill, they will naturally be accountable to that person for their education and the rules around it should stipulate that.
So far you're the only other person who seems to realize this. If you load a 10 passenger plane with children who weigh 75lbs on average, it burns approximately the same amount of fuel that it would if it's loaded with adults weighing 150lbs each. The difference in weight only significantly affects the ascent of the plane (and is balanced out during descent) and not normal cruise operations. The cost to operate the plane is damn near equal. Unless the airline is being forced to keep seats empty to make up for the extra weight in another seat for the purposes of takeoff, there is no other reasonable explanation charging extra based on weight.
The plane burns approximately the same number of gallons of fuel per hour at cruise regardless of how much weight is aboard. The performance differences are all in ascent and descent, and how long that takes. Weight is relevant, but it is not pertinent.
That's not strictly true. The plane costs approximately the same amount to stay airborne regardless of whether it's carrying 100 lbs or 180 lbs. The real factor is that if the plane can only carry 180 lbs (hypothetically) and you weigh 180, then they can charge for one passenger. If you weigh 100lbs, they can sell a second ticket for someone who is 80lbs (assuming there's another seat).
On these smaller planes this kind of difference might matter, but the big airliners you often see in the US these weight differences aren't the limiting factor, it's the number of seats they can fit on the plane and still have people 'comfortably' sit in them.
The startup...expects to be served with a lawsuit"
So is that what makes this newsworthy? Post an article when at least the lawsuit has been filed, or better yet when it has been ruled upon. Right now, who cares?
What you said in your post is that it doesn't imply equivalent harm, not that "there is no equivalent harm" and those are two different things. It certainly does imply it. Whether it was intended to imply that or not, it does.
This has been my experience, as well. If HBO wants to curb piracy (which it sounds like they don't care about anyway) then they need to offer subscriptions outside of the cable networks. I'm guessing there's some stipulation in their contracts with the current carriers that prevents them from doing this.
Most literalists I know insist that a "day" in genesis really was a modern, 24 hour day. I let one of them try to explain this once, but it was so riddled with logical fallacies that I have forgotten it now. It had something to do with how the layers of earth are aligned inappropriately and older rock is sometimes on top of newer rock.
I also wonder if this means that the omnipotent God tried several thousand times to create a suitable helper and failed (thus generating all the different types of animals).
So Kickstarter won't charge me what I've pledged until the project is 100% funded? Sorry, I've never used it myself, just browsed it and thought it was an interesting implementation.
It's all about context, and there are very few people who would get that JMS is a person (let alone a specific person) from that awful headline. This is news for nerds. I expect a lot more nerds to know what JMS is regarding software than I would expect them to know who JMS is regarding people. You may be confusing nerds and geeks.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't see anything you said that contradicts what I said. The plane burns approximately the same amount of fuel per hour regardless of weight. If a flight takes 4 hours, the plane will be loaded with approximately 5 hours of fuel (regulation says 30 minutes extra fuel during daytime, 45 during nighttime -- Most pilots just go an hour). The reason they don't "fill up" is because that's a waste of money.
I'm a pilot. The only weight-based calculations we do are to check that we're within the max weight of the plane, and that our CG is in the envelope. Calculating fuel consumption has nothing to do with weight.
Actually, free as in everyone picks up the tab, including the person receiving the benefit.
That's because they aren't accountable to anyone, because they have to pay their own bill. As soon as someone else pays their bill, they will naturally be accountable to that person for their education and the rules around it should stipulate that.
I was going to mention that but didn't have a link available :)
That only matters if the plane is flirting with its max weight, which most airliners are not.
So far you're the only other person who seems to realize this. If you load a 10 passenger plane with children who weigh 75lbs on average, it burns approximately the same amount of fuel that it would if it's loaded with adults weighing 150lbs each. The difference in weight only significantly affects the ascent of the plane (and is balanced out during descent) and not normal cruise operations. The cost to operate the plane is damn near equal. Unless the airline is being forced to keep seats empty to make up for the extra weight in another seat for the purposes of takeoff, there is no other reasonable explanation charging extra based on weight.
There *is* a limited amount of space inside a plane. They are not infinitely large and only constrained by fuel, as people here seem to think.
The plane burns approximately the same number of gallons of fuel per hour at cruise regardless of how much weight is aboard. The performance differences are all in ascent and descent, and how long that takes. Weight is relevant, but it is not pertinent.
That's not strictly true. The plane costs approximately the same amount to stay airborne regardless of whether it's carrying 100 lbs or 180 lbs. The real factor is that if the plane can only carry 180 lbs (hypothetically) and you weigh 180, then they can charge for one passenger. If you weigh 100lbs, they can sell a second ticket for someone who is 80lbs (assuming there's another seat).
On these smaller planes this kind of difference might matter, but the big airliners you often see in the US these weight differences aren't the limiting factor, it's the number of seats they can fit on the plane and still have people 'comfortably' sit in them.
Yes, and then they will start robo-calling for the other party....
They may, if they know that the person they are selling to is planning to use it for an illicit purpose.
So is that what makes this newsworthy? Post an article when at least the lawsuit has been filed, or better yet when it has been ruled upon. Right now, who cares?
Fox News must be on permanent April 1st then.
I find it hilarious that you posted this as a joke, but then the real answer (right below you) says "Analytics/data science."
Satire predicts reality, yet again...
What you said in your post is that it doesn't imply equivalent harm, not that "there is no equivalent harm" and those are two different things. It certainly does imply it. Whether it was intended to imply that or not, it does.
This has been my experience, as well. If HBO wants to curb piracy (which it sounds like they don't care about anyway) then they need to offer subscriptions outside of the cable networks. I'm guessing there's some stipulation in their contracts with the current carriers that prevents them from doing this.
Hrm... I'm not sure that you understand the intent of using an analogy.
Most literalists I know insist that a "day" in genesis really was a modern, 24 hour day. I let one of them try to explain this once, but it was so riddled with logical fallacies that I have forgotten it now. It had something to do with how the layers of earth are aligned inappropriately and older rock is sometimes on top of newer rock.
I also wonder if this means that the omnipotent God tried several thousand times to create a suitable helper and failed (thus generating all the different types of animals).
Ah, but if you believe in biblical literacy and divine inspiration, then it doesn't matter that it has been translated to English.
So Kickstarter won't charge me what I've pledged until the project is 100% funded? Sorry, I've never used it myself, just browsed it and thought it was an interesting implementation.
Figures that would get modded down, that actually helps prove my point.
It's all about context, and there are very few people who would get that JMS is a person (let alone a specific person) from that awful headline. This is news for nerds. I expect a lot more nerds to know what JMS is regarding software than I would expect them to know who JMS is regarding people. You may be confusing nerds and geeks.
Thanks, glad at least one AC gets the point!
And, of course, this is news for nerds -- NOT news for *geeks*