Comment Re:of course the question not asked: why? (Score 1) 29
FTFY
FTFY
Good for you.
Now...
When can we fecking buy it?
Right. NASA, coordinating Boeing, Lockheed, North American, Rockwell, etc. were the first movers
I'm not sure about the others, but NASA and Boeing were both claiming that reusable rockets would never be economical. The ESA called it a pipe dream. Several pundits throughout the industry wrote up numerous articles about it, right up until spacex began lowering the price to numbers that these guys were saying was impossible.
Curious thing, that pretty much all of these (except the NASA report on it) can now only be found on the internet archive, wouldn't you say?
crazy American units
I haven't seen anybody do a manned moon landing in metric yet.
You know, your grandstanding would be funny if it was not so pathetic and clueless. Calling this very basic and very limited discovery "infinite" is really just what an asshole does that cannot admit being wrong.
Actually, you are the ignorant one here because you want to justify your denial. Because scientists are aware they are just human, there are a lot of safeguards in place. The first one being the scientific principle. But I guess you lack insight into what that actually does and why it was created.
Global warming is a settled issue but we are spending millions of dollars on studies to confirm it on the theory that what is lacking is proof.
This nicely illustrates how deep your ignorance goes. This is not why these studies are done. The reason they are done is to refine and get more detail. That will be invaluable for evaluating the impact of things that could still be done and to prepare for the effects.
I am sure if we continue to apply the fundamental principles of "greed", "arrogance", "selfishness" and "stupidity", we can make 4C or even more!
Tables are not knowledge. They are data. They are "basics" for nothing knowledge-wise. What they do is they produce a nice, meaningless rote-learning exercise that can be examined easily to produce an entirely meaningless grades. They are nothing but a waste of time and create a false impression of "something having been learned". Hence, no, we have absolutely no issue if a kid cannot answer "12x11" from _memory_. If an older kid cannot find out what 12x11 is or does not see that it is somewhere "a bit more than 100" and accepts a false result that is one order of magnitude (or more) off, then we have an issue.
It is fascinating how many people mistake data memorization for "learning". Obviously, when you teach actual understanding, then most kids do not do so well. May explain why worthless memorization is still a favorite of many "teachers". May also explain why Math teaching fails routinely and most people fear Math. Math is actually very easy on this level.
"Infinite discovery" is a fact to you? You really need to cut back on the drugs...
Well, if people were at least honest about it. But instead they push lie after lie and that makes things a lot worse. On the plus side, we are learning how incapable humans are, both as individuals and as groups.
Seems you have no clue how Science actually works. You know what would happen to climate scientists that did what you claim? Loss of job, in bad cases loss of their PhD. You know why you do not read about that happening? Because these people do not do it. All published and peer-reviewed models say pretty much the same, and hence one being radically different would be immediately obvious ans subjected to intense scrutiny.
Paying a lot more than makes sense is part of the experience.
Also, the only realistic way to create a true "unintended acceleration" without pedal misapplication is something getting stuck in the pedal or the pedal getting stuck down, which is not actually a subtle thing (again, these things have happened, but they're dwarfed by how often people hit the wrong pedal). Just sensor readings alone don't cut it. As a general rule, pedals have multiple sensors reading the pedal position (typically 2-3). They have to agree with each other, or the target acceleration is set to zero. A sensor failure doesn't cut it. Also, Hall-effect sensors are highly reliable.
Oh, and there's one more "failure mechanism" which should be mentioned, which is: creep. Some EVs are set to creep or have creep modes, to mimic how an ICE vehicle creeps forward when one lifts their foot off the brakes. If someone forgets they have this on, it can lead to "unintended acceleration" reports. There have been cases where for example the driver gets in an accident, but not intense enough to trigger the accident sensors, and the car keeps "trying to drive" after the accident (aka, creep is engaged). People really should not engage creep mode, IMHO - the fact that ICEs creep forward is a bug, not a feature.
All the person in these "runaways" had to do was lift their foot off the accelerator. Or even leave their foot on the accelerator and just press the brakes, as the brakes can overpower the motor (think of how fast you accelerate when you slam on the pedal at highway speeds vs. how fast you slow down when you slam on the brakes).
Regulatory agencies the world over are constantly getting reports of "runaway unintended acceleration". Nearly every time they investigate, the person mixed up the pedal and the brake. When the car starts accelerating, in their panic they push said "brake" (actually the pedal) harder, and keep pushing it to the floor trying to stop the car. In their panic, people almost never reevaluate whether they're actually pushing the right pedal. It's particularly common among the elderly and the inebriated, and represents 16 thousand crashes per year in the US alone.
If your car starts accelerating when you're "braking", get out of your panic, lift your foot up, then make sure you *actually* put it on the brake, and you'll be fine.
"Text processing has made it possible to right-justify any idea, even one which cannot be justified on any other grounds." -- J. Finnegan, USC.