No my irritation was with how it was written. Why break the rhythm when listing 3 things? Why mention Vietnam and the Philippines and then immediately move on? The writing was very disjointed.
Some of the embedded links were useful and interesting, others just went to random pages that had nothing to do with what was discussed.
A lot of countries are promoting cash again. If the infrastructure can have problems like that all by itself imagine what it would be like if there was a coordinated and deliberate strike on the server centers, towers and satellites and I’m not just talking about hackers. Bombers will fuck your shit up permanently.
Japan’s MHI, Germany’s Siemens, and GE Vernova
I’ve heard of Japan and Germany but where is GE?
A report by the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA) notes the effect this is having in Southeast Asian countries like Vietnam and the Philippines.
What is the effect? Why bring it up if you don’t want to discuss it?
What a poorly written article. I couldn’t follow the author’s incomplete thoughts for much of it.
If your alarm clock needs an internet connection then you need an old alarm clock.
You tax dollars at work. Let’s spend a month investigating something the DA immediately shuts down.
Your primary complaint is that the police wasted their time? I’m sure they’ll get better at identifying what cases are worth pursuing with time and experience.
I love how all of facebook’s privacy settings are set to ‘use and abuse me’ and periodically get reset to such every now and again. It used to tell you what shopping your friends did, like if your boyfriend bought an engagement ring. When asked if he thought this was a good thing Zuckerberg’s answer was basically, “Yes.”
There’s a movement in Spain and people put stickers in their shop windows that say, “You can use my phone” so kids can call home without the need to carry their own phone.
This is world news. Which world capital are you talking about?
I’m criticising the headline not the article.
Oh yes those infamous left wingers like Clinton and Starmer. If only those of us on the right could have convinced them to be sympathetic to Gazans earlier!
What a weird headline. In what sense are we too early?
Check out the map men video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtBV3GgQLg8
They’re terrified that if people are allowed free time and personal wealth again there will be a 2nd hippy movement that will loudly oppose their wars and power structures.
Trains are designed to operate for 30 or more years so the turnover is slower than cars, which have an average age of 12 in USA.
12 foot ladder- https://archive.ph/iZqnd
12 foot ladder- https://archive.ph/XRppG
A somewhat shallow look at China’s HSR network that nevertheless provides some insights into how new lines are transforming some regions.
I don’t understand why western media is so reluctant to acknowledge the broader social, economic and political benefits these lines are intended to provide. Failing to consider such questions means they will never understand China.
I read an article about China’s HSR that stated that a line with a top speed of 350km/h was 90% more expensive to build than a line built for 250km/h. The trains don’t spend much time at top speed during short journeys either. https://www.economist.com/china/2017/01/13/china-has-built-the-worlds-largest-bullet-train-network
A cubic meter of air weighs 1kg according to a Big, Bigger, Biggest episode about France’s TGV. Japan’s new Maglev is significantly smaller than the Shinkansen and the tunnels it runs through are 20% bigger since standard HSR already has problems with tunnel boom that can be mitigated at the tunnel entrance and exit. I also wonder how trains traveling in opposite directions will handle passing each other at 1000km/h given China is already working on next gen trains with that speed as a goal.
Doubling the speed turns a 4 hour journey into a 2 hour journey saving you 2 hours. Double speed again and it drops to 1 hour so you only save 1 hour, double again and you save 30 minutes. So the time saving is cut in half each time.
Concorde only flew 2 routes; NYC to London and NYC to Paris so in exchange for training pilots and engineers and securing supply chains for the aircraft you got a tiny return on investment. BA also kept a spare aircraft permanently parked in New York that could step in if there were any problems with the primary craft, another significant expense.
Installing lie flat beds and suites in standard jumbo jets provided similar profits with way fewer headaches.
Thanks for sharing. It was interesting to learn something new.