The hell do you think you’re going to learn by asking other ignorant people?
If you want to understand what it is like to have a given disability, search out materials written by and for people who have experienced those disabilities. If you get a chance to ask a disabled person about how that disability affects them, without being a boring, insensitive, dehumanising dickhead, do so.
Don’t ask a bunch of people without those disabilities to debate which would be most awful. And do not pretend it’s about educating yourself when you’re addressing your question to people who are mostly as clueless as you are. You’re not going to learn anything useful at all and you can’t possibly have imagined you would. You’re just adding to the mountains of awful dehumanising bullshit that is already out there.
I don’t know what the fuck is going on in your head but my objection is to dehumanising discussions of disabled people. How is that so very hard to understand?
The client told him to cut corners. He acted unprofessionally by not refusing to do so. From an earlier report:
In response to the lawsuit, Gullacher and his companies agreed that they hadn’t done a geotechnical investigation, but insisted that was at the client’s request.
“The RM provided the instruction that no geotechnical investigation should be obtained as the RM was concerned about the additional cost and delay,” says Gullacher and Inertia’s statement of defence.
“Inertia admits that a portion of the bridge collapsed,” the statement says, “but denies that its design or specifications caused the collapse and puts the plaintiff to strict proof thereof.”
Inertia says the RM may bear some blame because it decided to forgo the geotechnical work. It also says that after the bridge was built, the RM “installed gravel on the bridge to a depth of 13 to 16 inches with an average depth of 14 inches, which far exceeded the specified load.”
Both parties share responsibility here. He’s incompetent and unethical and should not be allowed to continue to practice at all. The relevant professional bodies need to issue clear instructions, and strike off any practitioner that just shrugs and does what the client wants. (Yes, it is a problem in my entirely different field too.)
Green hydrogen has a lot of advantages for cars compared to batteries: quick refuelling, much less weight, better range. Compared to CO2 emitting fuels (including non-green hydrogen), no contest.
It’s especially good for heavy vehicles. It’s the only way we can currently use non-carbon fuels for air travel. It’s much more feasible for trucking than batteries.
Green hydrogen is more like a kind of battery than a fuel. It’s a good way to store renewable energy that cannot be used immediately, or that needs to be used off-grid. How hydrogen is transforming these tiny Scottish islands
quick refueling only matters if your travel distance exceeds your battery’s range (which for 95% of driving is less than 100 miles)
This is such a non-argument. I cannot have one car for short distances and another one for road trips.
There are no electric cars that can get me to my Dad’s and back without recharging. He does at least have off-road parking but he doesn’t have a safe charging point. I don’t have off-road parking so charging at home is not possible. Yes, I can pay over the odds to charge while I do my supermarket shop, but I wouldn’t usually use my car for the supermarket shop and I don’t want to use my car for the supermarket shop. The only option for long journeys is to take an annoyingly long break.
Hydrogen is very inefficient, for sure. But there’s no other way to get an electric plane that can replace existing passenger aircraft. Batteries are a non-starter for heavy transport because they’re too big and too heavy to be practical. That’s why we’ve been rolling out hydrogen buses for a couple of years now.
I go to my Dad’s by train as often as possible but prices have doubled since the pandemic and there are usually two of us. It’s become impossibly expensive, which is why we bought a car last year after ten years without one. It does not get used for short journeys because the bus and the tram still work well enough, as do our feet and our bikes.
We cannot electrify our bus routes, unless we make them entirely useless for most people. Come on. I live where I do because it’s close to the tram station. But most people need a bus to get them to a tram station. And I usually need one when I get off the tram.
And I agree that a lot of plane travel is entirely unnecessary. But I’m not about to tell people that they can’t move to another country without waving goodbye forever to everyone they left back home. It’s an obscene proposition.
We have got to have solutions that actually work. Green hydrogen ticks a lot of vital boxes. We just need to be very clear that the only acceptable hydrogen is Green. I know a lot of the hatred for it comes from Big Carbon trying to hijack it. But the baby should not be thrown out with the bathwater,
It’s how you’re supposed to ride. You get ahead of the traffic at every possible opportunity because it’s safer that way.
We don’t have legally required bicycle tests but that motorcyclist is doing what they’re supposed to as well. While you probably wouldn’t want to be changing lanes quite as frequently on your test, you would fail the test if you sat in traffic rather than overtaking it where possible. If the traffic was speeding instead of stationary, you’d fail your test if you stuck to the speed limit regardless. If you leave the examiner behind, it’s their job to catch up to you.
They’re not cars and they’re not supposed to pretend that they are. The road rules are different and they’re intended to make bikes of all types less vulnerable to all the cars which might kill them by getting away from them as soon as possible.
Shared paths require cyclists to stop at every side road, which is bullshit. They have right of way on the road itself so they will obviously use it instead.
Also, pedestrians don’t read road signs so they often think you’re not allowed to be on the shared path. I’ve seen cyclists get assaulted for using them and had plenty of people shouting at me for doing what I’m allowed (but not legally required) to do.
They’re just a cheap and lazy way to pretend there is cycling infrastructure when there isn’t, really.
Those are the rules of the road. Cyclists (pedal or motor) are not supposed to sit in traffic, they’re supposed to get ahead of it as quickly as possible.
The cyclist (and motorcyclist) is following the rules. Rules designed to put them in less danger than sitting in traffic.
Here’s rule 88 of the Highway code, which simply assumes you’re going to filter because it is safer to filter (and your motorcycle instructor will have told you to filter, and your test examiner will fail you if you do not filter).
Rule 88
Manoeuvring. You should be aware of what is behind and to the sides before manoeuvring. Look behind you; use mirrors if they are fitted. When in traffic queues look out for pedestrians crossing between vehicles and vehicles emerging from junctions or changing lanes. Position yourself so that drivers in front can see you in their mirrors. Additionally, when filtering in slow-moving traffic, take care and keep your speed low.
It’ll depend on the jurisdiction. But ‘intent’ for murder does not mean “pre-planned”. Heat of the moment intention to do serious harm is enough for a murder conviction in the UK (and, I believe, the US).
In this case, the prosecution accused her of pre-planning as well as intent, and the jury agreed with one or both arguments.
Russo, the judge, delivered a scalding description of the case before she read out the verdict, saying Shirilla had a “mission” she executed with “precision” that fateful day — and “the mission was death.”
“The [crash] video clearly shows the purpose and intent of the defendant. She chose a course of death and destruction that day,” Russo said.
“She morphs from a responsible driver to literal hell on wheels as she makes her way down the street,” Russo said, saying Shirilla made a calculated decision to drive that morning, when not many people would be around, on an obscure route she did not routinely take.
Prosecutor Michael O’Malley told NBC affiliate WKYC of Cleveland that the crash video was damning, saying, “The intent was obvious upon seeing that video that there was only one goal.”
Honestly, it’s very very similar. AFAICT she was trying to punish him. It has all the hallmarks of an abusive relationship. And an all too common outcome.
I assume you’re getting downvoted because it looks like you’re posting an unhinged rightwing talking point rather than a debunking of an unhinged rightwing talking point.
Like it or not, this is your politics now. Ignoring them will not make them go away.
For example, on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter, former Arizona gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake posted that, “The FDA has now admitted that Doctors CAN prescribe Ivermectin to treat COVID.” Conservative activist Charlie Kirk posted the same statement, wondering how many lives could have been saved had the admission come sooner.
I’m not going to enforce it. It’s entirely possible that the US givt does not enforce it despite requiring it. But they usually only ignore taxes for very rich people, who can dodge them anyway, so I’d expect them to enforce it?
Would you rather be illiterate or have no legs?
Discuss.
The placement of the stove would make me not want to cook (lemm.ee)
CBC: Sask. engineer slapped with an 18-month suspension after designing bridge that collapsed hours after opening (www.cbc.ca)
How to Produce Green Hydrogen for $1/kg (terraformindustries.wordpress.com)
Short version: cheap electricity + water
Overtaking 500 cars on a bicycle! (youtu.be)
'Hell on wheels': Teen convicted of crashing car at 100 mph, killing boyfriend and friend (www.nbcnews.com)
“This was not reckless driving. This was murder,” the judge said before she read out Mackenzie Shirilla’s verdict Monday afternoon.
British Museum worker sacked over missing treasures (www.bbc.com)
The museum dismisses a member of staff and police are investigating after items go missing.
Thousands of scientists are cutting back on Twitter, seeding angst and uncertainty (www.nature.com)
Did FDA Recently 'Admit' That Doctors Can Prescribe Ivermectin For COVID-19? (www.snopes.com)
Snopes.com
Woman Is Awarded $1.2 Billion in ‘Revenge Porn’ Lawsuit (www.nytimes.com)