Explore our other sites
  • kotaku
  • quartz
  • theroot
  • theinventory
    jgw
    jgw
    jgw

    I think in a lot of Ford’s durability tests, the truck was equipped with their factory-applied spray-on bedliner. The GM ad makes a point that aluminum and steel are very different materials, and that’s very true. In the same way that a metal-polymer composite (which is what a bed with a spray-on liner is) is a very

    A spray-on bedliner could be considered a metal-polymer composite bed.

    Frequency. Having trips more often is a better solution than having bigger vehicles unless you’re reaching capacity limitations. This is true of air travel, public transport, many things. It improves the passenger experience (not forced into long waits or specific times), and eases connections (you don’t have to

    Tell that to Air Canada. Their 77Ws carry substantially more passengers than they used to carry on their now-retired 744s.

    A few operators have ran 737NGs on transatlantic routes. SAS ran all-business class from Houston to Oslo (oil money, you know).

    So, ‘yes’, in a word. The military is beyond the reproach of the rule of law, you say. In and of itself, I’d find that a horrendous answer. I was expecting you to present a denial and sidestep the issue, rather than embrace and re-commit your rejection of one of the most important pillars of modern democracy.

    It

    This is, indeed, a very poor example. But many freely available designs are extremely capable, and comparable to modern proprietary products (albeit not yet in the world of tractors to my knowledge). The design of the M1911 pistol in the public domain; you can make your own if you want (with respect to intellectual

    I think this is a very appropriate response. These are the exact same rights members of the free-software movement have been fighting for since the 1970s. It, unfortunately, didn’t get much traction when it was “nerds” looking for the right to modify their own software, and had to wait until people were looking for

    Is your post literally “fuck civilian control of the military”?

    This ruling doesn’t say anything about areas of the ocean being off-limits to Naval sonar. It says current practice is inappropriate an unproportional. For instance, using lower-power sonar arrays at closer physical intervals can provide equivalent coverage at more acceptable sound levels, likely at the expense of

    Like ten thousand spoons when all you need is a knife, know what I’m saying?

    I just said the image choice was ironic for the message it was trying to convey; I didn’t say anything about what I thought of the message itself.

    Part of the irony is that the technology we’re using to illustrate how antiquated and out of date the systems are is itself twenty years more advanced than what is actually used.

    Not Gypsy Danger, sir. She’s analog — nuclear.

    “Central” Canada

    I definitely wouldn’t call the Eurocopter 145 ‘large’. Even in their own product literature they call it small. Civilian helicopters usually don’t get past ‘medium’, outside of the oil and gas and forest service industries. Bell calls its 525 - a 20-seat civilian-focused aircraft - a medium-sized helicopter.

    Dynamics is the study forces and motion. Aerodynamics is the study of the forces acting on and motion of air. Certainly an aircraft engine generates a huge amount of motion and force and, therefore, is substantially more aerodynamic? :P

    “Aerodynamics” doesn’t mean low drag. “Aerodynamics” means the thing exists in the atmosphere and that the motion of air is governed by physical laws. In and of itself, aerodynamics does not exist on a spectrum of good or bad. Such words relate to the design goals of the engineer and how well a system meets those

    I despise the phrase “aerodynamic” used to mean “lowest drag”. It’s like saying a particular engine is the “most physics”, when you really mean it’s powerful. Many physical features, both in nature and in engineered products, are there to produce large amounts of drag. Does a parachute that is designed from the outset

    Technology is the ultimate agnostic. It doesn’t exist on a spectrum of good or bad. It exists on spectrums of appropriate to inappropriate, well-implemented to poorly implemented. Which are, of course, spectrums which describe the designer, and not the technology.