OathOfFeanor t1_je4xy6m wrote

> Something various nations have been able to avoid with their own funds.

The same way ALL pensions do, the same way France is doing now, and the same way Social Security will do: by reducing benefits.

Without that, ALL pensions are mathematically destined to fail because people withdraw more money than they originally contributed.

As time goes on all pensions increase restrictions like income caps, longer vesting periods, and reduced benefit amounts.


OathOfFeanor t1_je2pu12 wrote

The problem is the way pensions work, they just cost continually more and more money.

So we would have to permanently solve the fraud to fix the deficit. A one-time injection from a specific criminal case can't do the job.


OathOfFeanor t1_jbx5h36 wrote

> Shaw’s behavior in the holodeck towards Picard, not fresh after losing Jennifer Sisko and Wolf 359 mind you, but 30 years later and after Picard has shown he wasn’t in control when violated by the borg and saved the Federation multiple times over

I could see him still blaming Picard. But we already saw this story with Sisko and it was more compelling! It was his wife too, in addition to his coworkers/friends. We even got to "meet" the wife.

Just bad writing IMO. Out of the entire Trek universe they couldn't come up with a new reason for tension between Shaw and the others.


OathOfFeanor t1_ja42gv7 wrote

> I didn't ask for them to be removed or anything

And I never said you did. However you commented in support of it after the fact and cited multiple examples where you are in favor it happening.

In contrast I don't like seeing well-written stories ripped apart and having the elements that make them special removed or suppressed just for generic broad appeal.

I don't like pure political dramas but I don't want Hollywood to start modifying them to make them more appealing to me; I just don't watch them.

I just feel like the original story should be told a little closer to the way it was written. Sorry if I have been overzealous in expressing that.


OathOfFeanor t1_ja40uhd wrote

There are plenty of 100% drama shows out there, no need to ruin a well-written fantasy that incorporates politics into it very well.

I don't want full CGI dragon episodes either but if you completely remove them the story doesn't even make sense. IMO they would be better used like a monster who you rarely see on screen at all, but that doesn't mean they don't exist and they are erased from the story.

If you are not a fan of fantasy you probably do not even realize what we are talking about with Lady Stoneheart. Catelyn Stark comes back from the dead. That's a pretty major plot point for a major character to come back from the dead, and they just left it out because they are clueless schmucks who didn't know what to do with it.


OathOfFeanor t1_j9xe82n wrote

> Not really. From a macro engineering perspective all of the current research in carbon nanotubes for structural use is aimed at producing longer tubes, often referred to as carbon nanotube fibers. Nanotube fibers that are long enough to be used in the same way as carbon fiber, or glass fiber, woven together and bound in a matrix to produce strong macro scale materials. > > ALL current carbon fiber use in concrete is mechanical and exactly equivalent to how glass fibers are used. Except that the carbon nanotubes are far smaller so although they provide stronger local support the scale of the cracking they prevent is reduced vs other fiber mix-ins.

This is absolutely 100% false and if you just browse the ACI YouTube channel you will find a whole ton of research of nano-scale carbon. The goal is NOT to make it micro or macro scale because the nano scale provides unique benefits.

It is incredibly different from how glass fibers are used and I recommend you educate yourself on the subject or else just stop talking down about a new technology you are unfamiliar with.

Again, carbon fiber and carbon nanotubes are very different materials.


OathOfFeanor t1_j9wh6ac wrote

You are confusing carbon fiber with carbon nanotubes.

Carbon fiber is fiberglass with carbon instead of glass. It's the same thing, but stronger. But it's still encased in a plastic binder, still micro or macro in size (not nano-scale).

Carbon nanotubes are pure carbon (sometimes with some oxides in there at low concentrations).

Their behavior and impact on the chemistry of the concrete are entirely different.


OathOfFeanor t1_j9wgxes wrote

> we just use bulk fiberglass to accomplish the exact same thing...basically identical performance

Absolutely false, but these sorts of attitudes are exactly why things take so long to propagate in construction.

Adding fiberglass fibers of any size to concrete will make only a fraction of the difference to tensile strength compared to the carbon nano tubes. With CNTs we're talking increases of something like 40% to the Young's Modulus which is significant.

The nano scale also improves the concrete's ductility. Fiberglass fibers have no effect on shrinkage, either. Fiberglass does not serve as a nucleation point for cement hydration products. The list goes on.


OathOfFeanor t1_j9tuvrd wrote

No, unfortunately the tensile strength gains are not that good.

But as you said it improves the concrete in other ways. Another significant benefit is that the carbon nanotubes reduce autogenous shrinkage of the concrete (basically shrinkage = cracking)

In some slabs people are already doing them without rebar depending on circumstances (subgrade, climate and frost line, expected usage and load, etc.), so this could extend that range just a bit as a middle ground. Someone who wants a concrete slab to hold a picnic table can get away with that, someone who wants a foundation for a building cannot.


OathOfFeanor t1_j9tm9gq wrote

Carbon nanotubes help us make the best concrete imaginable right now. They provide significant increases in tensile strength which is hard to achieve in concrete.

Concrete people will tell you about how "fiber mesh" (macro sized fibers of steel or composites) helps concrete.

Carbon nanutubes work the same way on the nano scale. Think about velcro. Which will be the stronger bond: fifty × 2-inch long velcro strands hooked together, or fifty trillion × strands that are each nanometers long?

One of the coolest things to me is how many shapes they can assemble the carbon into and how it affects the performance.

There are single-walled carbon nanotubes, multi-walled carbon nanotubes of a variety of designs, partially unzipped multi-walled carbon nanotubes which I think are the coolest, it's just insane. You look at these shapes and sure you could design them in 3D software but how the heck are they arranging carbon atoms in this manner? Cool stuff

Downside: This is pretty much only used in the research phase, no contractor in your town is using carbon nanotubes today. Construction is a VERY slow industry to adapt to something like this. We will see it in this progression, if it continues:

  • Research projects by Universities
  • Experimental civil projects by government entities (usually highway/bridge related)
  • Widespread use on civil projects
  • Maybe the cost comes down
  • Start to see it on commercial projects
  • Maybe the cost comes down more
  • Start to see it on residential projects

OathOfFeanor t1_j6wlkqq wrote

Maybe if you tune into their podcast daily or something they have discussed more but that linked page doesn't contain any useful information on this topic.

That link sings the praises of shade, and does not mention a single downside or challenge with its recommendation (such as irrigation). It only even mentions air conditioning twice, never exploring any aspect of it.

In contrast, I edited my post with scientific studies demonstrating that the limited amount of air conditioning we have in place now is already more effective than the shade is expected to be after full deployment. If we can deploy air conditioning we can save far more lives.