Kelmon80 t1_jdzx9ja wrote

They are SO fucking annoying! I don't want some cap in my face while I drink, and I don't want to have to rip them off every time, leaving a potentially sharp piece of plastic I have to be careful to not jam in my face.

And where is the point in that? Here in Germany, all plastic bottles are returned WITH cap to get your deposit back. Who takes off the cap and then throws it away, to, you know, have a bottle you can't close? Escaped mental patients?

How about implementing it ONLY in countries where people - for whatever insane reason - throw those caps away on a regular basis?


Kelmon80 t1_j3r9xak wrote

>Matt Archer, the director of commercial spaceflight at the UK Space Agency, said he was hugely disappointed that the mission had not been successful – but still pleased that the first launch of satellites from Europe had taken place from British soil.

It's almost as if other nations launch their rockets from the equator for a reason...


Kelmon80 t1_j0fphx8 wrote

If pads are so expensive - tampons cost you $2000 over your entire lifetime. That's around $2 a month. Far, far less than I spend on condoms. Using a product that's 3 times more expensive is a choice you make, and can't really complain about.

And cheaper solutions exist. Menstrual cups last for ages, and are a one-time purchase, making your lifetime period costs go into double digits.

Man, if I could buy a single, reusable condom for $15 or so that lasts me 10 years, that would be incredible. Sadly, condoms only last that long for incels.


Kelmon80 t1_j0fof7o wrote

I don't quite see how why this specificity is neccessary.

Not that those women with very painful periods don't require leave as everyone who is in (unmanageable) pain - but could this not be handled just as any other kind of chronic/recurring pain issue is handled already? In particular as I understand this law does not mean that any women can just state they're in pain and go home. Just like with any pain issue, you have to see a doctor to grant you sick leave.

So what makes "uterus pain" special compared to migraines, stomach pain, pain in your limbs, etc.? Too painful to work is too painful to work, no matter where.


Kelmon80 t1_j0fn3ek wrote

> but XX people to this day get paid less for same jobs as their peers

Except they're not. The wage gap as it is commonly understood ("women in the same position make 76 cent to a man's dollar") is a complete falsehod.

Men and women with the same qualifications in the same job get paid pretty much (*) exactly the same - the wage gap compares the average salaries of ALL men with that of ALL women. And, guess what - there's more stay-at-home women than stay-at-home men, and there's more men working in more lucrative (and, on average, more demanding and/or dangerous) fields and positions than women.

And while that last part is still in need of fixing (More female CEOs AND more female garbage collectors/construction workers/tradespeople/soldiers) - any individual woman does not get paid less than her male counterpart.

(* The actual difference is between 1 and 2% in my country (government figures), half of which is attributed to men just being more successful in salary negotiations, the other half to actual plain old discrimination)


Kelmon80 t1_iycy2w0 wrote

Improvement is neither automatic nor always possible.

There is a limit to which you can compress hydrogen, and there are limits to how strong a pressure vessel needs to be (read: How heavy it will be).

Cars need about 100kg of tank to store 5kg of hydrogen.

A 737 can carry about 25.000l of fuel, with fuel tank weight more or less negligible, which is around 20 tons. Let's say 22 to account for the tanks as well.

Let's assume a sort of "worst case" - for safety reasons, car-sized hydrogen tanks are used for planes. A full tank being 105kg, this gives you 210 tanks on the plane, for a total of around 1050kg of hydrogen. So about 1/20th the weight in jet fuel. As Hydrogen has three times the energy density as jet fuel, that still leaves you with range reduction of 1/6th, at same load for the plane. And you probably lose quite a bit of space in the plane to accomodate all those small tanks.

Now the best case: You somehow fit two huge pressure vessel into the plane that carry all the hydrogen, and they are of the same shape and weight as the original fuel tanks, but (magically) are at a pressure high enough to get the hydrogen close to its boiling point - 25.000l of it will still be just around 1800kg, or 1/11 the weight of jet fuel, or a 4-fold reduction in flight range - but with the added bonus of also having a much lighter plane, buying you more range. Still, I doubt even in this magically ideal case, you get more than half the original range out of it.

The bottom line is that physics can't be cheated. A hydrogen plane *will* have a far lower range unless you're willing to allocate a considerable amount of additional space for hydrogen storage.

Mind you, that would still make them an interesting alternative on short-range flights, just not an universal replacement.


Kelmon80 t1_iwbrg2z wrote

Iron was a rare, expensive resource back then, and likely a huge investment for an ancient Egyptian farmer (or slave merchant, for that matter). But i fail to see why you can't brand cattle with some iron that's smaller than whatever is in use today. Even a finger-sized branding in the right position would still do its job: Differentiating who's cattle belongs to whom, even if it takes longer to figure out.

I mean, I'm not saying it couldn't have been used for slaves, but that's a huge assumption to make just based on size.


Kelmon80 t1_iv032yk wrote

If true, that may as well have be a well-calculates "show" for his more simple-minded subjects so he's seen as doing something about the tragedy, even if he himself may have thought it was silly.

Or he was a bit bonkers.

In any case, the relationship to gods and other spiritual entities in the ancient world tended to be more direct and transactional - maybe it was generally understood that this way, some water spirit or god was shown who's boss.


Kelmon80 t1_iugvovj wrote

That's a bad comparison, because conducting is actually a skill, "making a Mondrian" isn't. Anyone can do it. As long as it's then hung in a museum with a plaque that says "Mondrian", everyone will stare at it and go "mhhh, ah, yey, yes, amazing".

The greatest trick that the art community played on the world is getting incredibly lazy, and making people believe that they "just don't get good art" if they voice displeasure with their colored lines and crayon squiggles.

I prefer a more "Emperor has no clothes" approach to this.