Triumph

Not going to dispute whether the government did it or not. But if you want to understand how the steel beams failed, you need to understand the process of annealing. The short version is that High tensile steel at +800F is very bad. Fire Proofing steel only slows the process but won't stop steel from annealing.

Just so you know, creating a unified equation to calculate the final shape of an amorphus material such as cookie dough during the manufacturing process is impossible. In a system like I am describing no one would own an idea. That is to say, two guilds, or even two inventors could claim the same invention. The difference is that a patent system monopolizes one idea, a "guild system" would monopolize a catalog of ideas. And admittably there would be problems, but overall I think it would at least be competitive with the patent system.

Firstly mathematically quantifying scones is hella complex had a math major friend interned for a cookie company. Second your rubber material sounds cool. As to the patent system. I honestly think that if there were no patent system there would be an inventors's guilds. Basically inventors and entrepeneur would band together for a fee to market new ideas and intellectual properties to companies. That's my thought, idk if it would be better or worse than the patent system.

I just don't believe your claim. Material Science is so far beyond simple chemistry, that I can't take anyone serious when they suggest they came up with something new by simply changing the ratios of household chemicals when synthesising a material. Tires have to be able to handle extreme heat & cold, years of wear and tear, and most importantly do all of that within a safety margin. So when you say you stumbled on some new, revolutionary material in one of the most highly researched, tested and competitive fields of material related commodities, I am skeptical.

I wish to touch base on the benevolent dictator point, because it is simply not historically true. As hard as it is to not look emotionally at dictatorship as a complete negative, it is not true. USA military generals were given dictatorial powers in Japan and West Germany following WWII and in the South after the civil war. They literally had the power to murder people under martial law, with no questions asked. They are prime examples of benevolent dictatorships. If you compare that to America's attempt to set up benevolent Democracies in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Iran, and Afghanistan you really have to question what is the better way of dealing with a nation immediately after an invasion or revolution.

The big problem new drivers have is information overload. What's to the left of me, what's to the right of me, behind, in front, am I too close, what switch does what, omg, did I miss the sign for the road I need to turn onto, and then dealing with a person yelling at you. People who have been driving for awhile, who are used to processing all the information, don't remember what that is like. So to some extend ignore them when they make something complex sound simple. So...the first and most important trick for when you are feeling information overload, is to concentrate on what is in front of you and what is behind you. Keep it as simple as accelerator, brake, and steering to stay in your lane. Just ignore everything else, and wait until you need to turn or stop at a signbefore you worry about what is to the side of you. Once you get the hang of staying in your lane and controling your speed, other things will magically get a lot easier. My only other tip is to get comfortable with the car before you even turn it on. Go through motions of going back and forth from the brake to the gas pedal, using your turn signals, and looking in the mirrors. Just to make things less awkward when you are driving, and it isn't going to hurt anything while the car is off.

the clip is terrible quality, but south park's TSA (toilet safety administration) offers all the reasons you can ever need to this question.

There is a reason why we have doors on toilet stalls... Who do you trust enough, to watch you poop? I can't think of anyone either. On a side note, I understand that casinos already us this technology to run off people who can make money counting card playing poker, even though that is a legal way to play the game.

DAMN Whities keeping us European Americans down! (I got to claim the race card just now and it feels so good )

Honestly I don't think anyone knows, or perhaps it is the sum of a whole with too many minor reasons to pick on one as example. To be sure, the Left has been heavily invested in protecting muslims up until now. If someone were to say "Nazism is the motherload of bad ideas" no one would rush to defend that statement. "Well it's only the radical Nazis that want to send Jews to death camps". If the general public were to examine the ideology of Islam and not like what they saw, they might call into question other groups the Left has protected behind the shield of political correctness, such as feminists and Jesse Jackson blacks. I think this is the correct link

There is a better chance of all of us living on Mars in the next ten years than solar road ways working. The law of conservation of energy just doesn't give a fuck how cool something is.

Maybe a silly question, when is the last time you complimented your husband? Like a true heartfelt compliment or thank you without it being a way to start a conversation that you steered into therapist talk or your needs?

Anger is to love as a shadow is to a light. A person that loves nothing will never feel angry. I bring this up, because the truly damning thing that people do to you when they tell you not to get angry is to diminish the love you have for yourself or the object of your affection. We get angry when someone attacks something we love. That's natural, what is unnatural is to not get angry when that happens. If I can be so bold as to give a tiny bit of advice, it is to concentrate on the things you love. And let your emotions take their natural course when people attack those things.

just ask them What percent of the total GDP should be paid as minimum wage? isn't that how they should figure what the minimum wage should be?

My apologies, I took your first post as an insult when I shouldn't have.

See you have it completely ass-backwards... after the first prototypes they ran the numbers and Tesla cars were going to cost over $500,000 to break even. But to be marketable to the general public (who apparently is rich as fuck just not quite as rich) they wanted to be able to sell them for $200,000. Politicians to the rescue with subsidies. Now everyone gets to pay for rich enviromentalists' dream cars. And speaking of laptops and cell phones... how long do their batteries last before you need a new one. Yeah, guess how long the most expensive component on a half a million dollar car is going to last before it needs a new one? I'm not anti-wealthy, just anti-stupid which maybe why you don't seem to like me. Why do you guys think the major car companies aren't interested in electric cars? Cuz they can't produce them. Fuck no, because they can't mass produce them. It is just logistially impossible at this time. They are so stupidly expensive for a car with very practical limitations on range that the average driver would refuse to buy because it can't drive to grandma's house and back on christmas day. Reaching dead ends in technology happens all the time. Sometimes the technology doesn't work, sometimes it's a safety issue, sometimes there isn't enough of a required material, and sometimes it's just a practicality issue. The best thing to do is shelve it, until such time someone finds a solution to the dead end. The free market is the best way of doing that.

It is extremely cool. But also extremely wasteful. If given the choice between producing 1 Tesla car or 1000 laptops or 10,000 cellphones you would choose a car that only a rich man could afford? Yay those of us who can look on in envy while pedalling a bicycle. The easy solution to all of this is to simply find an alternative battery. But their not going to do that while they are being subsidized. Two motors is nothing new, big deisel scrapers have a front and rear engine...they figured it out in the 70s.

this one's been taken down :/ Rhetoric is to repeat the arguments and conclusions of others. Like a parrot talking, it hears something and repeats it. Although in this instance I would have preferred the parrot What I did was relay personal experiences, something immune to criticism. My analysis of the conversations I've had can be questioned but not the fact that I had them. And finally... what discussion? It requires two people of relatively similar intelligence to have a discussion. This conversation was more like me scolding a dog for pissing on the carpet.

Dual electric motors was something I hypothosized years ago in college. As you don't need fuel, carburetor, and exhaust for an electric motor it is much easier to have two. The weight gained by an extra motor can easily be made up for by losing the power train. And a second motor mean much much better efficience compared to the energy lost through friction in the power train. They just had to resolve the issue of running two motors off the same battery and program the motors to be in sync for maximum efficiency. I still hate Tesla though. If I remember the batteries are insanely expensive as there is a shortage on litium without new sources to mine it from. And they get government subsidies to artificially being costs down and make it profitable. My info is dated though.

good luck

I don't accuse, this is, ..."they kill their unborn children, bomb wedding parties, arrest people for smoking plants they like, and they strap machine guns to their dumbest children and indoctrinate them in public school to kill many innocents to make political statements. They hit their children, and yell at them. Their actions show nothing of love in them." ...emotionally charged rhetoric. I've been in two islamic countries. I talked to as many people as I could. Evil shit fills their daily conversation. The care nothing about the land, dump trucks drops tons of shit just off the edge of the highways. They consider foreign women less than animals, since they can't be married their only use is as fuck toys. And their great ambition in life is to become wealthy so they can replace the wealthy assholes who made their life miserable and start their own harem. They are the most self-centered culture I have run into. I have twice as many Muslim friends as I do black friends. All of it would be forgivable or at least tolerable, but they really do want to subdue the rest of the world and force everyone else to live their way or die. I seem overzealous, but that is because I believe total war is the only way to wage war. Mourning innocent lives, mistakes made and being politically correct needs to come after the war is won. Losing is the only unforgivable outcome. As much as we would like to avoid it, we are in a war.

I love how you offer a emotionally charged argument in return, that can only be effective if the very people you are condemning to be without compassion, do infact have compassion and virtue and find the very crimes you charge them with doing, disgusting. You need to stop looking at the rhetoric and look at the actual actions of the nations. The USA could easily invade, bomb, and nuke ISIS out of existence. We can do it but we don't because we find it morally reprehensible, and the portions of our society that would do it, are met with overwhelming oppositions by the masses. We instead waste a lot of time & money trying to find peaceful ways to resolve this insanity. By contrast, the muslim nations WOULD invade, bomb, and nuke the USA out of existance if they could. Their moderates don't find it so morally wrong to oppose the muslims who would do it. There is not enough opposition by the masses to stop the murder of innocent, rape of women, and out right genocide of nonmuslims. Since they can't have their way completely, they do the next best thing with acts of terror. So yeah, I'm a bit biased.

Guess I haven't heard your callin. I worry if you are around each other that you would feed each other's demons. Then it would be harder to start a new life.

Love? What do these violent muslims at war with us, love? They kill their own daughter for going out with an american boy. Behead a neighbor for leaving islam. And strap bombs to the mentally disturbed to kill themselves with as many innocents as possible to make a political statement. Their actions show nothing of love in them, so I will not consider them to have any. Do you have as much empathy for a corrupt politician trying to grow the power of the state into his own tyranny?

I've had a few arguments with people who'd tell me I am prejudiced against muslims. I tell them "no shit, but when 80 year old white women start strapping bombs to themselves and blowing up planes and bus, I'll start hating old white women for no good reason too." There is this huge emotional defensive barrier to being politically correct. An exercise to do for yourself is take out the words "islam" & "muslim" in that conversation and put in the word "Nazi", and their conversation will sound stupid as fuck. Not all Nazis support killing jews... those are the small number radical Nazis. //end rant