potato3732842

The point is that they implicitly expect private entities/individuals to be able to own and deploy "go toe to toe with the the state equivilent" quality units (though I don't think they expected the same quantity at that quality).

they'd just take a bit longer to have identified the members of the insurrection

They'd have had to enjoin more parties, probably to include state agencies. Any party can push back, stall or blow the whistle if they feel something wrong and risky to them is happening. Which is exactly the opposite of what the feds want. They want to act unilaterally, on anything and everything.

It was mostly a joke, since these sorts of groups have always, like going back 40+yr, been magnets for law enforcement who always seem to push them to do illegal things.

Second, the incident I'm referencing is well documented. You should look it up. It's basically the "feds radicalize then arrest muslim man, pat themselves on back for catching terrorist" playbook but for white people.

I’m not sure the expense has been worth simply delaying the inevitable.

Now that I'm jaded I ask myself how many government and private sector jobs were "created" (in sarcasm quotes because broken windows fallacy) washing all those boats for free over the years and whether they even expected to prevent the spread or if the spread is the justification for expansion.

Literally every industry is like this.

Academia is basically a reputation laundering industry. If the cigarette people said smokes good or the oil people you'd never believe them. But they and their competitors fund labs at universities, and sure those universities may publish stuff they don't like from time to time, but overall things are gonna trend toward "not harmful to benefactors". And then what gets published gets used as the basis for decisions on how to direct your tax dollars, deploy state violence for or against certain things, etc, etc. And of course (some of) the academics want to do research that drives humanity forward or whatever, but they're basically stuck selling their labor to (after several layers in between) the donors for decades in order to eek out a little bit of what they want.

It's not just "how the sausage is made" that's the problem. It's who you're sourcing the ingredients for, who you're paying off for the permit to run the factory, who's supplying you labor. You can't fix this with minor process adjustments.

where are the well regulated militias?

They keep getting arrested because some fed informants show up and convince them to kidnap a governor of whatever before they can become "Well regulated".

What I find confusing about this comment is that to me, authoritarian and libertarian are opposites, but have only to do with individual freedoms, not the political system.

"Do whatever the F you want as long as you don't challenge the state" isn't that incompatible at first glance and might work ok if you have a low touch state. Where it gets obviously incompatible is when you have eastern european style oligarchs and western style administrative state and state favored businesses and industries that leverage state violence to stifle competition.

I don't think it's possible to have an authoritarian government in a modern society that doesn't trend in one of those directions.

A landlord insulates the tenant from price volatility. A tenant will never have to just eat a $20k roof one month.

Ain't no different than leasing bajillion dollar process equipment.

I don't see any difference between individuals and monopolies on violence ("states") doing this, as long as they both have sufficient levels of certainty.

This peasant is faulty. He's not indoctrinated enough. Someone nab him and send him for reeducation. /s

You need "a little bit" of politician/judge/enforcer lynching to keep the government in line the same way they make a big show of "a little bit" of kicking in people's doors at 4am to keep the peasants in line.

hey needed just ten minutes to inflate the balloon and an additional three minutes to heat the air.

That's faster than most professionals by a substantial margin. I guess when it matters you make it work.

Once again this is a take predicated on bad assumptions.

If you're just doing something and intend to meet or exceed the rules then dealing with government enforcement apparatus is pure overhead. You were always gonna do the right thing so you gain zero upside and have to deal with a potentially capricious and unaccountable (in any practical way) enforcer which is a huge downside.

Second, the rules are chock full of 10,000ft ivory tower view type stuff that makes statistical sense but is inefficient compared to using judgment. But you can't use judgement because the whole point of code is to make everything quantitative so that idiots can inspect other idiots and parties can more efficiently bicker in court and whatnot.

People who conflate "not actively regulated and inspected with government permission being given before stuff even happens" with "sub par" as if that's not reductive at best is exactly how we got here.

In "communism works because the cows are spherical, friction is 0 and gravity is 10" example land sure.

In reality building code is how a huge amount of back handed regulation is done. When the powers that be can't make a particular rule, because of other laws, or because of precedent to the contrary, or because the peasants wouldn't stand for it, what they do is they adopt a ridiculous code and then slap a "can be waived at the discretion of board X" on it. This way they can make the thing they don't like a non-starter economically for most people.

In my city you can park a semi trailer as storage. But it counts as a "structure" and because it's not a commercially manufactured shed, car port, stick framed garage or litany of other exemptions you have to go through the "everything else" process which includes all the "normal code shit" that any other non-exempt structure would hav to go through like an engineered foundation and snow loads and all sorts of other stuff that's just inappropriate. They have a similar set of BS they use to prevent DIYers from erecting kit buildings.

Individual regulations, each reasonable in isolation...

Every single one of these rules that amounts to death by a thousand cuts preventing these sorts of businesses (as well as many others) will be rabidly defended by many/most if presented in the abstract. That sort of inability to reason about the forest based on what you're doing to the trees is the root problem. And it's a social/ideological/moral one, even if it expresses itself via governments.

It's no more "reasonable in isolation" to peddle rules than it is to justify littering in the park because they don't take effect in isolation. If everyone does it everything goes to crap and we all know it so we don't let anyone justify littering in the park using the effect in isolation.

I owned a machine shop, and I'm the founder of a mid sized CNC gear factory. I think I know my way around bearings, lubrication, press fits and other such bits & pieces.

Then you have no excuse for having such a nuance free opinion for you must know things are often not obvious at "first glance of pictures someone else took" which is what we're all doing here.

I'm doing the exact opposite of what you claim. I am just taking the bits of evidence already available and rejecting root causes that would require those bits of evidence to not exist, which is entirely valid, this still leaves a massive amount of uncertainty which I have underlined on more than one occasion.

I disagree. You are acting like this is a cut and dry situation wherein the Boeing advice that this was not safety critical is just wrong on it's face. That assessment was made 15yr ago (perhaps by "old good boeing" engineers) and on a part already under a lot of scrutiny from the other MD11 that lost an engine. Sure they could be wrong, but I wouldn't bet on it so confidently.

This bearing moves a few degrees. It's not like the engine is doing loops around the pylon. It's possible that for whatever reason the bearing stopped doing bearing things as well as it should. Now, this is a plane, everything is light, aluminum and made to flex to varying degrees. It's hard to say where exactly the movement was taking place in lieu of the bearing. Without specific knowledge it's hard to say how the failure happened. Maybe things got loose and failed from stress concentration. Maybe the movement happened in the wing assembly and the force+vibration of making that happen caused the engine mount to fail. You don't know. I don't know. Nobody in these comments know with a sufficiently low chance of being wrong to point the finger in any one direction.

To act like "well of course when the bearing wore/failed/whatever it ripped its mount right in two because now the force was concentrated and the part it was concentrated on was sus to begin with" is to confidently oversimplify the situation.

Engine pylons, landing gear, control surfaces, these are key systems, not the "built to within an inch of their life because they gotta be light" like a lot of other things on an airliner (though I admit the MD11 is a particularly questionable application of this heuristic)

Big planes generally don't fall out of the sky because one party misleadingly labeled something in the service literature. I would be very surprised if there weren't also maintenance failing of some sort here.

I wonder on what basis Boeing thought that damage to a load-bearing part could be safely ignored?

Usually this is because the design constraints are complex and in satisfying one you wind up having orders of magnitude more overkill than you need on others.

For example, in situations involving hollow shafts with through shafts or perhaps fluid passages often times you wind up with insanely huge for the load bearing supporting the outer most part because it simply needs to be that big in order to fit around the shaft and have space for reasonable sized roller elements for the speed and realistic race thicknesses, etc. Sure you could go custom, but $$, sure you could use needles or balls, but maybe the stuff on either side has reasons it shouldn't be hard like a race and that might add assembly/construction cost. Now say this overkill bearing is held up by a big web in a big honkin cast housing, because the housing needs to be like that for structural reasons (say it's a specialty pump or maybe this housing is load bearing in the overall assembly, like a tractor's gearbox). Now, say this bearing is in some more complex gearbox that has lubrication windage problems. A valid fix might be to go and cut out a chunk of the web that holds this bearing. Sure it's only supported by 300deg now instead of 360, but it was so overkill to begin with that doesn't matter.

Edit: better example: You can roach dozens of automotive cartridge style wheel bearings without hurting the knuckle it presses into because the knuckle has to be so strong to withstand suspension forces you basically can't apply enough force via the wheel failure to break it and the assembly becomes unserviceable faster than you can get to the point of damaging it by wearing through it.

Edit2: You also need to consider the cost of QA and testing. Sometimes it's cheaper to do a simple overkill waste of material design than something than to do speed holes and engineered webs, etc, etc, because all those features add testing cost as well as manufacturing cost and (especially in ye olden days of the slide rule) make it harder to predict stuff like resonance, exact failure mode, etc, etc and every feature has to be QA'd to some extent. And this all needs to be balanced against expected production volume.

You can't in good conscience advertise a complex assembly as fit for some purpose without knowing how close the component widgets are to their various modes of failure.

That's 20+yr later and an entirely different generation of politicians though, a far cry from the "we'll just slip this in here so we can harass the red man" that the person above is alleging. And it was done with state backed forces, not like they would have been handicapped by lack of a 2a.

Framing this as "literally anyone who works" vs "everyone above that" is a dishonest slight of hand to distract from the fact that the top slice of that category spent decades peddling policy that made things worse for the bottom half (and in many cases kicked them into the non working dependent/welfare class) because it made asset values go up and those whiny blue collar types were just backwards and dumb anyway (or whatever they told themselves to justify it).

I would bet that's true just on a statistical level - but my point is that plenty of people still feel that way, or at least have felt that way recently enough about the underlying problem that won't cause them to riot.

Exactly. If people you hate are getting in a fight you're staying right there on the porch and that's how a lot of the country feels right now.

The point of the second amendment was, in no small part, so that the central government wouldn't deny the states the means to commit genocide against the indigenous population on their own,

What kind of revisionist history is this?

The feds were telling the states "screw off, we do the negotiating" before the ink was even dry on that. Steamrolling the natives was never really a seriously contested job or a point of political contention, the feds were always gonna be the ones to do it.

Yes, this tends to be really effective, especially when you're fighting the upper-class, which is more or less what's happening here as far as I can tell.

You're not fighting the upper class. It's the blue collar workers and the people who hire them who support ICE and strict immigration.

You've got three groups here. Federal cops, undocumented immigrants and the kind of people who turn out to protest the former acting against the latter. Very few people in this country finds any one of these groups particularly sympathetic and there's wide demographic swaths of the country that actively hate two if not all three of them. So yeah, everyone sees stuff that's very, very, wrong here, but nobody's really in any rush to intervene except the people who already are protesting.

A political solution will likely come of this, as everyone with a brain knows that the preconditions for all this shit are something that need to be prevented in the future.

Edit. To be clear, I'm talking about the people who are actually physically involved here.

I read that as people support science, but not so much that they're willing to support academia along the way.

If I lived in the mountains of Colorado and servicing ranches or something of course I'd be buying for those conditions. But a standard city in the northern US or Canada? Meh. Total waste of money for a fleet vehicle. These sorts of locations are where something like 99% of all vehicle miles are put on.

I'm not talking about places that can be written off because "the boonies are a rounding error".

I'm talking about some guy who owns a plumbing business in Boston and wants to reduce the number of days per year that conditions make things sketchy. $3k per truck or $4k per van is absolutely chump change compared to the PITA of having to add more buffer to winter scheduling to account for delays and inconvenience.

for personal use now that I can afford it? AWD is on all my vehicles. It's a magical technology since it allows turning your brain off, and making some situations comically easy to navigate. But I'm not optimizing for cost efficiency or practicality there - I'm optimizing for luxury and convenience.

Baffling that someone who readily admits that "you can turn your brain off" doesn't see why people who either have to drive their own work vehicle every day, or put a vehicle in the hands of an employee wouldn't value that even higher.

Uh, it should be? The ability to confidently stop is far more important than to go

First off, this is the principal skinner "everyone else is wrong" take.

Second, it's just not how things work in practice. In practice what happens if you have a FWD car that can't "just go" you wind up driving way harder to make up for it. Stuff like hitting hills at speed and trying to take on-ramps at the limit of traction because you are having to work around the limitation of being unable to actually put power to the ground when you need to. Say nothing of all the sketchy situations that happen at the margin of that (backing down a hill you couldn't go up, getting stuck less than graceful merges, etc).

You also missed another key reason to get snow tires: many (most?) vehicles do not come with AWD even as an option

I don't think that's anywhere near true for the US market.

It's almost always the engineers, analysts and MBA spreadsheet pushers and other people removed from the physical consequences outputting these mistakes because it's way easier to not notice a misplaced decimal or incorrect value when you deal in pure numbers and know what they "should" be than you are the person actually figuring out how to make it happen the difference between needing 26666666.667 and 266666666.667 <units> of <widget> is pretty meaningful. Engineers don't output these mistakes as often as analysts or whatever because they work in organizations that invest more in catching them, not because they make them all that much less.

Whether talking weight or bulk a decimal place is approximately the difference between needing a wheelbarrow, a truck, a semi truck, a freight train and a ship.

The F-series is the best selling car family in the US. Some of them are using it for its intended purpose sure, the majority are just using it as parent said, a luxobarge.

A F550 box truck and a crew cab shortbed F150 are both F-series as well as everything in between.

If not the best selling it had better be damn close with all the different vehicles that exist under that one nameplate.

If you look at the cybertruck's architecture it basically is the "top end" of that line.

It's a big car platform with a bed. It's the "top of the line" for "car based" pickups like the old Subarus, the Maverick/SantaCruz and Ridgeline.

While it nominally competes with the F150 it doesn't really. Same as how the Ridgeline nominally competes with the Ranger, but doesn't really.

I think it's a real shame the cyber truck never took off. While gimmicky I think the longevity of it's absolutely stupid thick(er than typical) gauge stainless body would have put pressure on other OEMs to stop building shitty truck beds that dent and rust if you look at them funy.