Ah, a youngling.

My first programming language was Basic; my second, assembly; third, C. I didn’t get to new-fangled languages like Pascal until i was in college, long after I’d learned the only really useful fundamentals of programming and computer software.

Everything else is just gloss, convenience, and bloat.

I’m saying that I’m claustrophobic, and being in a submarine is a nightmare scenario, regardless of how safe it is.

Also: while I don’t know the selection process for US Navy submarines, my experience with the military is that you can have an opinion about how you want to be posted, but no actual decision-making ability. So I may hope to fly Navy jets, but the Navy can simply say: “fuck you, you’re going to be stationed on a submarine,” and there’s little I could do about it.

Also: accidents happen, subs sink, regardless of the country. It’s pretty high on my list of ways not to die, just below Nutty Putty cave and getting sucked into Bolton Strid.

Also: submarines are weapons of war, so there’s a non-zero chance someone, at some point, will be trying to make you sink.

Also: I was saying that were I a Chinese submarine crew, an incident like this would not fill me with confidence about my posting.

Absolutely. I mean, people drown in shallow water all the time; if it flooded, it wouldn’t matter if it were 20m or 200m; you’d still be dead.

But it was a best case for China, since recovery was about as easy as it could possibly be.

Also, in dock, there’s a better chance that it wasn’t fully manned, or that it didn’t flood and they could get folks out. I’m no submarineologist, but it’s difficult to imagine a case where a submarine sank at dock without flooding, though, so my guess is some people died.

Man, imagine being a kid seeing this happen. It’d either be a cool memory, or lifelong psychological trauma.

Bestiality, at least; the name doesn’t necessarily imply vore, though.

I haven’t been on Reddit in years; did they change the rules? Vote manipulation, or encouraging it, is still an account ban offense, right?

And boating (which is actually illegal, in Minnesota, at least), although you mostly end up killing only yourself.

And bicycling, where drunk bicyclists are almost more of a hazard to pedestrians than cars, if to less effect. You might only be put in the hospital, but bicyclists are not required to carry insurance, so good luck recouping your medical costs.

This.

I think people tend to think about doing things while they’re in control that fuck the other party, often forgetting that - at some point - power is going to flip and they’ll be the underdogs. That said, Republicans tend to abuse these procedural instruments more.

But you have the right answer: the filibuster can be useful, if it’s not easy to use and requires true dedication. Right now, it’s just a spike strip (mostly) conservatives throw down whenever they want to throw a tantrum.

I hate videos that could have been articles (talking heads), and I did not watch this.

However, I have an opinion: in probably countless ways.

1. 3D-ification, which is already a thing
2. AI-powered user interaction with the film, a-la camera control
3. Upscaling to 128k resolution, whenever that becomes common
4. Immersion. Be one of the characters (although, this might just be a variation on #2)

As deep learning hardware and software improves and gets cheaper, I expect doing any or all of these to become increasingly common, and far cheaper than buying the IP and reshooting it, and studios will turn to these as cheap ways to milk the cash cow. Someone will inevitably film another re-imagining, whether with real people or (eventually) entirely deep learning from script to direction to actors; but that won’t stop copyright holders of a given film from trying ways to get people to rebuy new versions of old films.

The possibility of being stationed in a submarine is one of the many reasons I did not choose to join the Navy; it’s a nightmare scenario. This sort of incident makes me feel sorry for Chinese submarine crews - it’s a bad situation made worse by destroying any shred of confidence in the engineers.

The dozer has an enclosed compartment, but that like like a pretty violent tumble. Was the driver’s compartment (which isn’t really identifiable) enough to protect the driver, or is s/he now part of the machine?

Also: Badger 288 would have simple eaten the dozer, and added it to the souls its already reaped.

No, no; it means that all Lemmy users are now on Tumblr.

I… I don’t get this. The trains are functioning as batteries? Regenerative braking is nice, but why is only a third going to power the trains themselves? Why not 100%? TFA says they’re issuing the “spare electricity” in the grid; “spare?”

These aren’t perpetual motion machines; they’re not violating the third law, and they consume more energy than they produce. Most off these article is about the (obvious) benefits of adding regenerative braking to subways around the world, regardless of cost; what confuses me is: why are they spending money and effort to route regenerative braking into other uses, which is what the title literally says (“trains”, not “train power grid”). It seems like an inefficient and circuitous way to tap other demands into a subway power grid.

Unless what’s really happening is that Barcelona is just tapping other demands into the (robust) subway power grid, and coincidentally adding regenerative braking, and someone decided to make the wild conceptual link that the power being fed back into the grid by braking is part of the overall power being used by new sinks. Which is like saying that my piss is being used to provide drinking water, because it goes back into the overall water cycle one way or another.

You can’t improve on perfection.

Should I add a /s? I’m not sure myself whether this is /s

I, for one, have never seen that bumper sticker. So you’re good with me.

They should have kept them there, like badges. Collected more and gotten totally blinged out. It should have a badge for WWII.

$70 isn’t going to get you much of an espresso machine, unless you’re talking about a moka pot, and I’d challenge you on that one. You can make very fine espresso with a moka pot.

And Aeropress aren’t known for making espresso; there’s not enough pressure from proper espresso extraction, and I’d expect espresso from an Aeropress to be under extracted and pretty horrible, Aeropress advertising notwithstanding. Most people use their Aeropress to make coffee; it’s apples to oranges.

Oh. But, the glass isn’t for longevity. It’s to provide insulation and prevent the plastic from (imperceptively) breaking down and leaking microplastics into your coffee. I didn’t mean the plastic would fail. In fact, I’d expect the plastic to last longer than the glass, just by the sheer probability of accidents over the lifetime of the device.

Ah, yes, but that’s just packaging. Did you ever stop to consider how they are harvested and processed to give them that crunch?

I can’t speak for other Americans (USA, in particular, which is who I assume you meant), but for me it’s the nature of the oligarchical regime and their views on individualism. I’ve read the Chinese CSL, and spent a couple of days in a session presented by international lawyers and security professionals explaining what it meant for our business, how we needed to navigate it, and how it was being implemented. It’s scary.

Information is power; specific information about you is power over you. It’s control.

As for the government, I think it’s more a matter of the fact that China is far more well positioned and equipped to surveil US assets. Russia is bumbling, pre-occupied, and doesn’t make any computer components we use. Chinese chips, on the other hand, are in everything. The US is worried that, in a conflict, we could discover that China is able to simply… turn off all of the F35s. Or shut down or coopt firing systems on our war ships. Or disable coms or NV gear of ground troops. All of our modern equipment is computerized to more or lesser degree, and the failure of even seemingly simple resisters, sourced from China, could result in misoperation of gear, at best. If the espionage is more sophisticated, with more important components, it’s conceivable China could locate and monitor assets; missiles which ignore counter measures and always hit because the target is broadcasting a homing signal.

Most off these hypotheticals are probably not within the realm of current technology, and that what access China is able to embed in computer components is far more limited. But we don’t really know, and it’s far more dangerous to underestimate than to overestimate capabilities.