zz0rr

there's a book on this, "How Boeing Defied the Airbus Challenge: An Insider's Account"

I don't know if it lays out the safety math but it goes very deep on twin engine safety and some of the fights over the a340 vs. 777 regulations

I'm not commenting on "permaculture bad" or anything like that. I've studied it and it's very interesting and I do think it's a good use of our water. That said, in the western us, you're going to have to start with trying to get water rights. It may be impossible to do this depending on your water district's situation and current management, so the rights themselves are more interesting to me than swales or whatever.

I like this sort of thing but in Oregon (and I think most places) you can't just create a lake and use it for irrigation without permission. even collecting rainwater is considered use of a public resource and needs permission outside of very narrow bounds. I know someone who was able to get permission for a mid-stream lake but even then it's not unlimited, it only applied to X acres for Y purpose and could be restricted in dry years.

so the video maybe shouldn't be a message about "just plop down a pond!" - it should be more about how to navigate local water rights to actually get permission. and I think this should be something that should be permitted more frequently, I think it's usually a good use of the public resource, but that's where it has to start

I've watched a lot of Munro (and even bought one of their retail reports for fun) and the thing that most bothered me that looked like tesla bias was when he was doing side-by-side stats comparisons of all of the mid-size crossovers like the id.4, mach-e, and tesla y. he kept on harping about the epa range in the comparison and never once mentioned the methodology of the epa estimate and the fact that manufacturers have a lot of leeway to conduct the test themselves - and either overreport or underreport the epa range. this was really glaring to me because tesla is known to stretch their range estimates (as do other manufacturers), but some manufacturers seem to deliberately underreport (mercedes, porsche, ford with some models of the mach-e for example). given that he's in the business of competitive analysis he HAS to know this, but he never said a word about it, which I think made tesla look a little better than it should have. it's one thing to just present the epa range and leave it at that, but he was using it as the basis for a ton of discussion and derived numbers and basically putting down the non-tesla cars... all without mentioning the limits of the number

I think this is the video I'm remembering, but he reused charts like this a lot https://youtu.be/p0kFZ9CVLNg?t=512

see this for some real-world testing, there's lots like it and the results usually skew a certain way for each car. for example, there's about a 20% delta in epa vs. tested range for the tesla y LR and mach-e standard range in his chart. the tesla artificially looks 20% better! and this delta was well-known at the time of his video https://insideevs.com/reviews/443791/ev-range-test-results/

to your question about conflicts of interest, owning a stock is a conflict of interest. nobody needs to show that something is happening inside his head, the circumstances exist and that's it. I think he's usually pretty good and I still watch the videos, and he trades on his reputation and I still regard him as a good source. but I'm still glad to learn that he's sold the stock

"...it is a risky business for a senior politician to put on public record an estimate of future events which, if wide of the mark, would provide ammunition to his adversaries. Similarly, a President who announces specific policy goals affords the public a measure of his failure if he falls short of his hopes. Hence it is common practice for officials to define foreign policy goals in the broad generalities of peace, prosperity, cooperation, and good will—unimpeachable as ideals but of little use in determining the specific objective we are likely to pursue and the time, place, and intensity of our efforts"

Maxwell Taylor quoted here: https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA486290.pdf

the problem you're alluding to isn't new: political leaders aren't likely to make the clear statement of aims you want them to make (see the quote). You should consider the fact that they might not make a clear statement, but 100% could still could be the goal.

My view is that the original ground scheme of maneuver (a strike at kyiv) points to a goal of replacing the ukrainian government with a russian puppet government, essentially a "100%" or unlimited war aim.

that's pretty meta, the original book "Men Against Fire" likely had major parts based on embellished or falsified interviews

https://books.google.com/books?id=azoGuGbwJK0C&pg=PT8&lpg=PT...

I think you're comparing tesla global sales to gm us sales. gm global sales are about 8M/year

I have no idea about the interference claim, but incidental radiation within an ISM band is allowed to a great degree, that's the idea of ISM. The device may have been tuned to switch in that band to keep it affordable.

edit- I think I mis remembered this, I can't find an easy to interpret rule or graph that gives an incidental radiation pass unless you're a specific category like wireless charger. it could also be explained by conducted emissions into the laptop that other devices do better with, or just a legal level of interference that happens to be at the high end

here's James Mattis's take on the difference between civilian courts and military courts:

> ...remember that the Uniform Code of Military Justice is established under the U.S. Constitution, because our framers knew that those we give weapons to in this country have to be governed by a different set of regulations than the population at large.

> And under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which was the latest in a history of these rules that came out in the late 1940s and modified often since then, the defense is actually stronger. The defendants' rights are actually stronger in a military court than in a civilian court. Just read F. Lee Bailey's book, "The Defense Never Rests." And as one of the most aggressive defense counsels in our history, he said he would rather a court--defend--defend in a military court than a civilian court in his book.

> And the reason is you have more rights in order to prevent the military court system becoming what you and I would call a "kangaroo court." So, you give the defense more rights. And when that court acts, you--for most of us in the military who have an intimate knowledge of it, we have a great deal of confidence that justice has been adhered to, in the true sense of what justice is all about toward a person accused of a crime by the government.

this is a good interview, worth reading in full:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/washington-post-live/2019/12/...

vertical winglets are ways to get more lift:drag out of a wing that's constrained by some width limit (airport gate spacing) or an existing wing design that you don't want to redo. they don't generate lift. for a clean sheet design you can do better with a "scimitar" wingtip that actually provides some lift and might weigh the same as a winglet. see 787. also the navy p8 which has the most efficient wing of any existing 737, and doesn't have vertical winglets (because it doesn't typically park at a gate they could go wider with these little triangular extensions)

> BMI <25 mg/kg²

can someone parse those units? BMI is usually presented as kg/m^2

edit - it's just a typo, the rest of the paper uses the right units