asdaaaaaaaa t1_je9nch7 wrote

That's exactly what I said though. While the idea/blueprint/engineering of the car is alright, the actual quality of work/building going into them suffers immensely. Doesn't matter if I plan or engineer a bridge that can support multiple Godzillas at once, if it's not built right it won't meet specifications/requirements.


asdaaaaaaaa t1_je7ods6 wrote

Some people just really struggle to separate business from personal feelings, and understand the complex nature of having an investment board or large groups running things. While it's nice they did this, it should be obvious that many other changes will eventually follow that will be a net negative for the content and users unfortunately. Always is when this happens. It's good the subreddits are gone, but bad if overall users drop like a rock or leave in droves because of profitable changes.


asdaaaaaaaa t1_je7dy66 wrote

Some? Unless I see entire departments standing up to denounce the actions of other officers doing shit like this, it's firmly all in my opinion. If someone I know did something like this, I would make it as clear as possible I am not affiliated with or support them. Or you know, a large part of my industry in this case.


asdaaaaaaaa t1_je4bo0x wrote

That's the thing, had they actually addressed or fixed the quality control issues, I wouldn't have minded so much. Still wouldn't be buying one, but I'd respect that they at least solved the problem. I just don't think they can sell Teslas at a competitive price without cheaping out on something, and I'd imagine some of that is labor/quality control.

They're still an incredibly new player to the market, so would make sense that anything they try to do would be as expensive, if not more than their competitors who can scale a lot better and have longer relationships with other businesses. Letting build quality go to shit isn't the correct way to keep prices competitive IMO, especially with a 2-ton moving vehicle.


asdaaaaaaaa t1_je4bght wrote

The materials themselves aren't poor quality, and I'd imagine the engineering (on paper) would work. The major issue is quality control. Doesn't matter if your seat belt can stop an elephant, if the dude building the thing doesn't follow the right steps or get it to the correct tolerances, it's not going to work anyway.


asdaaaaaaaa t1_jdx9dvn wrote

People get nasty over money/investments. I had a friend in jail for 12 months, he was doing a in-jail rehab program. You know which addiction was the hardest to kick there, and the one they generally had the least success in? Dealing/money, not even a drug. Apparently they got more than twice the amount of people successfully rehabbed (Well, not returning to jail) on drugs compared to dealers.

I don't know, the worst stuff I've witnessed has always been over money. It grabs certain people for whatever reason, more so than many other things.


asdaaaaaaaa t1_jdugbv0 wrote

Anything that gets turned into fine enough powder and gets dispersed will explode. Sugar, flower, sawdust, dust itself, etc. Most factories have stuff like that in them. Most oils and fats used in food production can be quite flammable as well. Really, heavy production just isn't the safest thing, but it's a great way for you to get chocolate bars or whatever else at an actually affordable price.


asdaaaaaaaa t1_jdq2nn5 wrote

Unfortunately, I'd imagine many people won't think farther when companies say "It's for your security, don't you want to be like Tom Cruise buying your coffee?". I've always wondered why companies didn't do something like this, use fingerprints for verification. I'd imagine there's some good money selling that list/information to various intelligence companies/organizations and law enforcement at the least.


asdaaaaaaaa t1_jdnhic0 wrote

I think no matter what happens, giving everyone access to mental health care facilities and treatments is just a beneficial thing for everyone. It's sorta like providing regular healthcare. Generally if you bar someone from initial treatment, it's much more expensive and time consuming for everyone when it's an emergency. It's also much harder to come back from such an emergency, whereas earlier treatment could put someone in a position where they'd at least be able to assist with some payments, or support themselves.


asdaaaaaaaa t1_jcjpait wrote

There's a reason saferooms aren't really used outside of movies, especially with large groups of random, untrained people who aren't ready for emergencies like that. For the shooter, it actually makes a great point to hold and fall back into, as well as it conveniently gathering victims for them. Sure, no one can get in after it shuts (assuming it was made by someone intelligent, and built correctly), which tells me after the first handful of people get there they'll be terrified/panicking and such the door most likely anyway.


asdaaaaaaaa t1_jcjp3yf wrote

Pretty sure a bulletproof room also just conveniently gathers victims. Either everyone's going to know the code to get in including the aggressor/shooter, or no one will know it but a few people will know and the room will simply not be effectively used.

After reading the article...

>Once the door is secured, no one can access it from the outside.

Great, so the first person who gets there will probably be terrified, shut the door, and everyone else with run to the door not realizing it's already closed/locked. Or the shooter might prioritize going to that room and using it as a fallback/safety point by shutting themselves in.

This is just a non-solution, stuff like this never works out well when you're depending on a bunch of random, terrified people and children to use it correctly. Also apparently assuming the aggressor/shooter will magically not know the room exists or target it specifically. Since it's not about keeping kids safe, I'd imagine either a "friend" is getting a contract to build it, or it's some dumb political move by someone who should never lead or be in office.


asdaaaaaaaa t1_jbu5y7c wrote

You don't need to always work in an industry to see blatant mistakes and general trends. I can tell you that aircraft fires aren't good, and I don't need to be an engineer or pilot to say that. When a company makes a point to move away from something, then has to return to it after clearly having different plans it's safe to say they made a mistake. You don't bring stuff back from the dead because what you have currently is a better option.


asdaaaaaaaa t1_jbjf7lx wrote

All you have to do is see how much attention and support things like the "war" on drugs had, or the "war" on terrorism. Suddenly police get massive amounts of tools, funding and support. Bills/laws are put on the fast-track to being passed, rights are bypassed, etc. They have no problem confronting issues if they actually want to fix them or care. If nothing's being done, it's generally not because it's physically difficult or impossible, it's more of a conscious decision to not deal with or fix the issue. Especially when it's state employees/organizations who are causing the problem.


asdaaaaaaaa t1_jbjev4n wrote

>Why hire these idiots that can barely do police work.

Because that's what they're hired for. Police aren't meant to protect people or actually solve crimes, otherwise the government would be as concerned with these current problems as they were of "terrorism" or the "war" on drugs. If the government or people in charge are actually motivated or care about something, a lot can be done and has been done with previous issues. If nothing's being done, that tells me that it's simply not a problem they want to handle/fix.


asdaaaaaaaa t1_jbe6j4m wrote


asdaaaaaaaa t1_jaqp3ap wrote

>Draft behind semis if you want even better mpg, your car not having to overcome the wind makes the car have to barely work.

They also tend to drive more reliably towards saving fuel than zipping around, changing speed or lanes all the time, and doing other things that would waste more fuel.


asdaaaaaaaa t1_jaqow6v wrote

>I wonder what pressure we can use to for our local airlines to get on the list?

The real issue is setting up and affording the more boring stuff I'd imagine, infrastructure/training for fueling and maintenance, possibly being certified if they're not already. Those things are nice, but we don't choose fuel types because they're a bit quieter, we go with what's stable, available and cheap. If it provides multiple benefits along with better cost, I don't see why companies wouldn't switch eventually.


asdaaaaaaaa t1_jad0g81 wrote

Sadly, no matter how skilled and equipped the Ukrainian military is, it's still incredibly draining on both resources and the actual people to continue fighting for so long at such intensity. Hopefully those that need it are getting at least small breaks or are cycling out for a couple days, stuff like that can have a huge impact on performance/moral over the long term. That being said, in some situations there's simply not much you can do, especially if the enemy is continuously throwing human wave attacks. Still, Ukraine is performing amazingly all things considered, just need to keep the intel, resources and support flowing.


asdaaaaaaaa t1_ja83fa2 wrote

Yeah, your gun will really stop a car. You do realize if you start shooting/threatening at someone, I'd be betting they'd want to run you down irregardless for their own safety. I wouldn't blame them either, there's not many scenarios where introducing a gun actually helps your safety. Especially when you're so sure of yourself, you seem like the type of person to flash a gun because someone cut you off.