• 2 Posts
  • 95 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 25th, 2023

help-circle





  • Also not only would they need more satellites, but satellites more densely in any area with multitude of customers. Which eventually hits RF interference saturation.

    Radio signal has only so much bandwidth in certain amount of frequency band. Infact being high up and far away makes it worse. Since more receivers hit the beam of the satellite transmission. One would have to acquire more radio bands, but we’ll unused global satellite transmission bands don’t grow in trees.

    Tighter transmitters and better filtering receivers can help, but usually at great expense and in the end eventually one hits a limit of “can’t cheat laws of physics”



  • However this isn’t about your anecdotal experience. This is about what level of service they can guarantee as minimum and overall to meet the conditions of the subsidy.

    I would also note this isn’t reinstatement matter. FCC refused to give them the subsidy in the first place with this decision. What SpaceX are trying to spin as reneg on previous decision is them making the short list of companies to be considered. Well, getting short listed is not same as being selected fully.

    They passed the criterion for the short list check, but the final authorization and selection included more wide and more through checking on the promises of companies to meet criterion and SpaceX failed the more through final round of scrutiny before being awarded the subsidy.

    Government having awarded bad money previously isn’t fixed by following up bad awards with more bad awards. SpaceX exactly failed since previously money was handed out too losely and FCC has tightened the scrutiny on subsidy awards to not follow up bad money with more bad money.

    Nobody is prevented from buying Starlink, this just means Starlink isn’t getting subsidized with tax payer money.



  • Just it will, it it makes the lesser of two evils to turn to be actually good, instead of lesser evil.

    Ones power in democracy isn’t in given ones vote It is in withholding it. Your vote is your hostage and the political party is the hostage negotiator trying to get it from you.

    If you give away the hostage before the bargaining even begins, you have no leverage. You are nobody, non-entity. Your opinion and your interests don’t matter. Since you always release the hostage, before the negotiating starts.

    At some point in comparative lesser of two evils must come the moment of “in absolute measures the evil is too much, even the lesser evil”. Withold vote and the egotistical lesser evil, who doesn’t want to lose to the greater evil has to listen to your concerns and turn course.

    Until the first moment you withhold vote, they can happily slide in behind the greater evil just two microns behind them in the evil slide.



  • Then again not like the “very shoot ourselves in the foot, but just little bit, instead of lot” on decades long repeat leads to anything good.

    If ones vote is to be taken for granted, you have no power. Only way you can hold your own side accountable is by threatening to withhold the vote.

    That is bargaining. Voting Democrat nomatter what and after that asking could they please do something, that is begging. Begging rarely works as well as bargaining.

    Damned if you do, damned if you don’t. Joys of two party system.

    Most likely people just get apathy and instead of flipping to Trump, they simply stay home. Which is the other bargain. What you offer for me to bother to go from my home to the voting station in the first place.

    That is their play “you can’t take us for granted anymore, we care about our vote and bargaining power on long term enough to suffer on short term to buy long term relevance”.

    Whether it works is different matter. I don’t know, if democratic leadership has the where with all to take their left flank of voters as anything but given serval supporters to be kept in line with “but we are only little bit bad, those guys are really really bad”.



  • Specially in say foggy conditions and little bit distance. At which point you won’t clearly maybe differentiate individual elements and more like that’s the rear and “block of light in middle, left and right”. At which point it all little blending one might infact be under impression “the light intensity lowered at the rear, huh, not braking then, did they have they parking break dragging they released or something… ohhhjj shuiiiiiit no it is braking hard”.

    My two cents from here north of Europe and land of snow, rain, fog and occasional white out conditions.


  • They are always on the case first. They have feelers through all the various church state separation orgs. As soon as one of the likes of freedom from religion foundation, ACLU etc. Hear about a case, someone is bound to send Lucien a message and would you look at that within days they have found a local Satanist to have standing.

    Lucien sends smiling letter to the local government with “I heard there was religious freedom on offer, just give us a week we have the Baphomet statue dusted off from the temple and on the way there. It takes like 2 meters by 2 meters and 3 meters tall. You have free lawn available?”


  • More like he knows Lucian Grieves of the Satanic Temple has already prefilled a letter with his lawyer friend to have St. Lucifer’s Preparatory Academy financed by Oklahoma state funds. Just waiting for the Catholic funding to be upheld and the letter gets mailed. Along with affidavit from a local Oklahoma Satanist who is absolutely enthusiastic about having their child schooled at St. Lucifers.

    Like protestant vs Catholic is least of their problems. They have to finance a Wiccan Coven school, Muslim masrada, scientologist school, a norse Viking academy and so on.

    Since as the rule goes: can’t start making rulings on which religions are in and which are out.


  • Slashed tire doesn’t justify threatening with deadly force. Since that is what it was. How are the protesters to know its a replica airsoft gun from distance and not a real firearm. Person was injured since this person caused a fearing their lives scattering and rampage of people.

    Hence why he is in charge for menacing charge. Since that is what it is and why it is a crime. Since society knows just threatening with deadly force causes panic and leads to injuries and damage.

    The right response to “someone slashed my tire” us to call the cops and should one catch the perpetrator red handed, take out the obiguitous camera phone and take evidence footage of the likely by now running away perpetrator and turn that evidence over to police. That call insurance company.



  • But the thing is Democrats could change their strategy. Since frankly (I don’t know why, seems stupid given how small and hard to catch segment it is) Democrat strategy is to chase the middle of “moderate Republicans and fence sitters”.

    When I would hazard a guess, if they instead adopted are strategy of exactly focusing on non-voters with democrat leaning would bring them lot of votes.

    In general blaming the voter is a bad idea. It is way easier for party to qdapt to voter sentiments with their strategy, than it is for a party to change the emotional and mental state of millions of voters. In this case it is really the customer aka the voter is always right. If one can’t convince voter to vote, it is the candidates fault. To play otherwise is to say millions of people ought to adapt to single or couple persons whims. It shouldn’t be that way and in general it isn’t that way.

    Since in practice, if person is apathetic they won’t vote. No amount of “but that is stupid of you” will fix it. Apathy is emotional matter, not matter of logic. As much as some consultant might try to assume humans are rational, no they aren’t. Humans are inherently emotional beings and party wanting to succeed must adapt to that.

    Only way out of apathy isn’t fear, it just makes apathy deeper. The way out is hope, promise of prosperity and then delivering on that promise. Since to not do so is to cause betrayed expectations and doubly deep apathy.


  • Well depending on how they count was there a flip or are the ratios different since certain amount of people have moved to the “not likely voter” category. So instead of flip, there is apathy among democratic voters.

    Since they say among black voters, not among black population. Those are two different things and it matters which is it. All voting eligible persons, regardless of likelihood to vote, or just likely voters.

    Since voter/not voter is not a fixed grouping, there is constant movement over that line.