darkpuma

91 ms·

871.
by darkpuma 8y ago
The startup of an F-22 using it's jet fuel starter is pretty wild: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JUO-D2-OfDQ
872.
by darkpuma 8y ago
The SR-71 cruised at Mach 3.2. Scramjets have been demonstrated to do Mach >5, and theoretically might be capable of something between Mach 17 to Mach 25(!!!) Scramjets do need air, although something to consider is that the faster
873.
by darkpuma 8y ago
This article from that link ( https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/mar/14/knife-and-we... ) suggests 21 thousand knife incidents in 2018 across all of England and Wales, the combined population of whic
874.
by darkpuma 8y ago
Aye, the Lockheed A-12. It was apparently the 12th iteration of the CIA's "Archangel" program, hence "A-12." Knowing the CIA, that designation may have been misdirection too. 'Main battle tanks' are c
875.
by darkpuma 8y ago
There are some (mostly Brazilians) who would disqualify the Wright Flyer as the first airplane on the grounds that it took off from a rail. Is the engine breathing air really an essential part of the "airplane" definition? Sol
876.
by darkpuma 8y ago
> I was surprised to find the plane can be flown solo [1], Doubtlessly a consequence of the A-12 being flown solo. The SR-71 was a derivative of the A-12.
877.
by darkpuma 8y ago
That's a damn shame because the X-32 is easily one of the world's cutest airplanes.
878.
by darkpuma 8y ago
> "Is there any single piece of technology that's more retro-futuristic than the SR-71?" Maybe not more , but up there with it are the Concorde, and the H&K G11. Also, if you like the SR-71, check out the A-12. The
879.
by darkpuma 8y ago
That doesn't sound very reasonable to me. Is my pocket not a perfectly reasonable place to put my leatherman? It takes many seconds to unfold it and then unfold the blade, it's not exactly a switchblade. I'm not doing d
880.
by darkpuma 8y ago
Sounds like the leatherman I had as a teenager would be illegal then; that's pretty nuts. The most dangerous thing I ever did with it was take apart a microwave oven, and that didn't even involve the blade.
881.
by darkpuma 8y ago
I don't know what it's like to be you, but IPOs and being a billionaire are well outside my sphere of experience.
882.
by darkpuma 8y ago
Oh I know. And there are people who prefer being hermits. There are also people who would rather spend time with strangers than go a minute alone. The preferences people have run the full gamut between hyper-social and hermit.
883.
by darkpuma 8y ago
> "once it's been used a few times the language can be adapted to sound more like your nature voice" My natural voice? Is that my violent one?
884.
by darkpuma 8y ago
> "because nobody likes spending time with people in person as default." That's very far from true.
885.
by darkpuma 8y ago
The problem is what you're describing has more in common with Catholicism (particularly penances) than it does with Stoicism. The article is poorly argued. For instance, the article provides no real evidence that Dorsy gives a shit
886.
by darkpuma 8y ago
Does seeing other people suffer cause you to suffer? Probably, right? Unless you're some sort of psychopath who has no capacity for empathy. Therefore a stoic is encouraged to alleviate the suffering of others, when it's poss
887.
by darkpuma 8y ago
That take is not one Paul and many other Christians throughout history seems to agree with. In Philippians he describes there being virtue in suffering as it brings you closer to the experience of Christ on the cross. The practice of &#
888.
by darkpuma 8y ago
Right, finding virtue in suffering is more a trait of Christianity than Stoicism. Stoicism doesn't think suffering is virtuous. Stoicism's approach to suffering is giving you the tools to endure suffering you can't avoid,
889.
by darkpuma 8y ago
> "Russian citizens are also wildly enthusiastic about Vladimir Putin." As far as I'm aware, that's a bit out of date. It also, I believe, comes from a misconception concerning human nature, namely that popularity
890.
by darkpuma 8y ago
The FTC's FAQ page on COPPA compliance concurs: https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/business-center/guidance/com... > If you choose to block children under 13 on your general audience site or service, you
891.
by darkpuma 8y ago
> "They should have simply said "No children under 13" and made a date of birth selector making it impossible to select a date younger than 13." I don't believe the FTC would consider this compliance, since suc
892.
by darkpuma 8y ago
> So true. [...] But, [I disagree] Help me out here, is this the power of NVC?
893.
by darkpuma 8y ago
That doesn't really solve the problem, only reduces the magnitude of it. You'd still have 30 year olds entering something like 2010 as their birth date just because they're impatient, didn't care to provide their real
894.
by darkpuma 8y ago
You could ask for a CC or something like that, which wouldn't be bulletproof but probably reasonably good enough. But I think you'd still have the EFF complaining that not everybody has a credit card, particularly teenagers, jus
895.
by darkpuma 8y ago
Yes, it should instead be compared to white collar crime. Fraud, perhaps. Wait, is this still an analogy?
896.
by darkpuma 8y ago
Are you sure your not just mentally filtering it out? I see "[checkbox] I agree that I am 13 years old or the legal guardian blah blah blah" pretty frequently on signup pages.
897.
by darkpuma 8y ago
Sure. But even if they did that form right, they'd still have some adults flip the year a few years, some falling short of 13. At that point they get banned because that's what the FTC requires, so what procedure do you use to
898.
by darkpuma 8y ago
What's the minimum age do you think? You've got toddlers running around with ipads. I know they use youtube, they might be using tiktok as well.
899.
by darkpuma 8y ago
It seems to be TikTok should be castigated for the first two mistakes (allowing children on their platform, and implementing the birth date dialog poorly.) However their response to that second error seems sane to me. If they're goi
900.
by darkpuma 8y ago
When the NYT is cheer-leading for the next foreign war, will they get kicked off Twitter to? I sincerely doubt it. America's newspaper of record has a track record of being wrong during the onset of wars, parroting whatever Washingto

More ›