nunuvit

Mocking a politician is protected political speech. Complaining that the politician you support has been mocked violates the no-politics rule here. Your understanding of what's allowed is completely backwards.

The first page of the summary explains how there are already exceptions for recording police.

Because of the cost? You're really making me guess at your reasoning.

Gotcha. Most of the system-level information is under less restrictive control than ITAR or MTCR, but the effect is the same.

Honestly though, the information isn't all that juicy. What most people would find interesting has been out there for a long time. The hardware in any rocket looks basically the same since Saturn V, and the only remarkable thing about the software is that it's organized.

Is there anything you'd like me to point you to?

The purpose of the medallion is to create a guild. In practice, the coexistence of ride-sharing defeats that purpose, subjecting all drivers to the risk of unlivable wages, and penalizing guild members with dues.

I agree with you that it sucks, and I don't see any disagreement with what I said. Again, the medallion only goes as far as ensuring that all drivers get a sustainable wage. Ride share has driver attrition because they don't. Whether it's a fair system is a different question.

No idea. Perhaps someone who's still affiliated can answer.

How can you have extra revenue if you're not earning a living?

They wouldn't make a more detailed manual for customers that they couldn't show to those customers. They do provide more detailed interface and system documentation, but they don't share the restricted implementation details. Even for internal use, they'd want to confine the controlled information to a smaller subset of documents because otherwise it's difficult to circulate information.

The guide is just an overview to help potential customers ("users") decide if the Ariane 5 would work for their payload and mission. Nothing to do with Arianespace operating the rocket.

I know people who work in mission operations, where they're basically on a Skype call with the ISS all day. Several years ago, there was one astronaut in particular who had to be frequently reminded to cover up. Once they're up there, no one can prevent them from doing what they want, especially if it's their last flight. They're professional in the sense of completing the mission, but they're humans with pilot personalities and nearly zero privacy to begin with.

Medallions artificially restricted supply so that drivers could reliably earn a living. Does Uber achieve that goal?

It's not a conspiracy. Fly ash contains heavy metals that would leach out of the cement. There are more challenges remaining to be solved than the Wikipedia article suggests.

Old article from 2017. More advances were published earlier this year:

https://news.mit.edu/2023/roman-concrete-durability-lime-cas...

I interpreted it normally. It seems you wrote it wrong.

I'm not criticizing you for asking. That phrasing is accusational and expresses annoyance, I'm reading it normally.

Deadline? You wrote as if they were stalling or an unreasonably long time has passed, when hardly any time had passed at all.

It hasn't even been an hour. Chill tf out.

Is a single comment really a "discussion"?

I think italic is better than cursive. It has all the good parts like speed, plus it's actually legible.

https://sites.google.com/view/briem/handwriting/what-exactly...

It's not a bias. It's just the scope of the book.

You're all over the place. Nobody said it was difficult.

It's irrelevant to calling it a masterstroke market strategy, which is what the sentence you quoted is about.

The F360 businesses strategy is to sell subscriptions to companies. The free and cheap tiers are a lure for their target market which they're gradually reeling in. Don't get personally invested in it for fun unless you can sustain the financial investment.

Why are you taking the sentence out of context to change its meaning? TFA says it was a good business move by Microsoft for Microsoft because it fragmented the competition which had been consolidating around CORBA. What happened to it afterwards is irrelevant.

Congress used their constitutional authority to delegate certain decisions to an office administered by the executive branch because they decided they would be ineffective at legislating on the individual issues. The court is replacing that legislation with an injunction forcing Congress to legislate on the individual issues. Congress can eventually legislate a check on judicial overreach, but the damage here is done.

By "national vote", do you mean a ballot referendum or a congressional bill?

I don't want to debate this particular decision, but I do want to point out that you're taking some dubious legal concepts for granted.

There are opposing legal philosophies on how to interpret amendments 9 and 10, which say that people have rights and the government has powers. The question is always how to resolve when the two are in conflict.

Current SCOTUS majority holds an extremist view that when government exercises an unenumerated power, it essentially cancels the existence of an unenumerated right. That's why they look for historical laws that support their desired outcomes. Until recently, this was a fringe idea because it means the state governments get dibs on your unenumerated rights.

You're entitled to your opinion on this approach, but don't expect everyone to take that reasoning seriously.

I think it's probably just considered not worthwhile enough at the moment. We'll probably get them one day. Rockets have cameras, after all.

I want to be clear I'm agreeing with you that some cameras would be useful in general. I think my only disagreements are that eyeballs are fine for this scenario, and that "more" isn't always meaningfully useful or necessarily better.

I'm sure there are at least a few camera placements that would be worthwhile.

To answer your earlier question, not to split hairs, but I disagree with "always". You can inadvertently increase risk when trying to reduce it, or unwittingly prioritize things that offer less bang for your buck. That's why risk analysis is important.