FiskFisk33

joined 2 years ago
[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 2 points 2 years ago

to make some glorified cheap knockoff without any of the original vision?
no thanks.

[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 8 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Their theoretical energy density are half of what lithium achieves. While their price and ecology probably makes sense in some cases, good luck marketing an ev with half the range, or a cellphone that lasts half a day.

[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 10 points 2 years ago

they are also in the lawsuit, the article just chose to misleadingly play the less juicy bits down

[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 3 points 2 years ago (3 children)

I'd like to think I oppose the opposers, if nothing else just to get to use the word antidisestablishmentarianism.

[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 97 points 2 years ago (31 children)

That's ridiculous, but I think the title makes it sound a lot more ridiculous than it actually is.

[the lawsuit] also named several private property management companies allegedly responsible for the bridge and adjoining land.

If he could just drive off a collapsed bridge without any warnings someone has clearly not taken their responsibility.

If there's a lack of signage and road blocks, and the map says the road is fine, I can see how one would make such an error.

I don't agree google maps should be held accountable here, but if this bridge has been collapsed for a decade, I can see why someone would want to at least pose the question.

[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

something tells me this might not be your genre, but it fits the description https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPIevbgmHo4

[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 8 points 2 years ago (1 children)

why minimum price and not a higher carbon tax?

wouldn't a minimum price mean airlines can't sell of tickets to half full flight extra cheaply, meaning more half full flights?

[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 7 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 20 points 2 years ago (5 children)

I'm sitting here in complete silence typing this comment out, I'm not using my speech. I am however using written words.

[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

you sure about that? if they enforce bag weight they won't need to put max weight stickers in the actual plane. It's not like anyone would humor them if there were anyways..

[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 13 points 2 years ago

If they put the limit at 8kg you would make the same argument about 9.

I'm not saying they're not rent seeking, I trust them as far as I could throw them, but this is a false comparison. The weight limit of the overhead compartment and the total passenger weight of the plane are two completely different things.

view more: ‹ prev next ›