We are on schedule. People seem to need to get a reminder every few generations why authoritarians are terrible at running the country. Sometimes the process is peaceful. Sometimes it isn’t.
But the blame is not 100% on the authoritarians. The „we’ll refuse to do anything about your living conditions so you’ll radicalise and vote in somebody radical” is part of the cycle too.
I’m guessing this list is defined by Mac users who all got taught em dash somewhere similar or for similar reasons. It is only easy to use on a Mac. But I wonder what is the 2nd common influence of users using it?
As per the wiki article someone else listed — the compose key was available on keyboards back in the 1980s (notably it was invented only 5 years after the Space Cadet keyboard was invented!).
Some DOS applications did have support for it. The reason it wasn't included is baffling, and it's especially baffling to me that other operating systems never adopted it, simply because
compose a '
is VASTLY more user friendly to type than:
alt-+
1F600
which I have met some windows users who memorize that combo for things like the copyright symbol (which is simply:)
The compose key feels mandatory for anyone who wants to type their native langauge on an US-english layout. The combination[0] is "Compose--." though: –
As it should be. I wish this convention were present across more software, “-“ “- -“ and “- - -“ should be the UI norm for entering proper dashes in text input controls.
Though it does still require nominating a key to map to Compose. And is not generally meaningfully documented. So I’d only call it easy for the sorts of people that care enough to find it.
But then, long before I had a Compose key, in my benighted days of using Windows, I figured out such codes as Alt+0151. 0150, 0151, 0153, 0169, 0176… a surprising number of them I still remember after not having typed them in a dozen years.
In electrical engineering I'm still using a few alt codes daily, like 248 (degree sign), 234 (Omega), 230 (mu), and 241 (plus or minus). I'd love to add 0151 to the repertoire, but I don't want people to think I used AI to write stuff....
My favourite android keyboard has a compose key and also a lot of good defaults in long touch on keys (including en and em under dash). Only downside is last android update causes the keyboard to be overlapped in landscape mode. A problem with a number of alternative keyboards out there.
https://github.com/klausw/hackerskeyboard/issues/957
And whether the user cares to ‘write properly’ to boot. I love using dashes to break up sentences - but I rarely take the time to use the proper dashes, unless I’m writing professionally. I treat capitalization the same way - I rarely capitalize the first letter of a paragraph. I treat ‘rules’ like that as typographic aesthetic design conventions - optional depending on context.
I recently learned to use Option + Shift + `-` (dash) on macOS to type it and use it since then because somebody smarter than me told me that this is the correct one to use (please correct them if you know better :D).
I've been typing "—" since middle school 25 years ago. It's trivial on a mac and always has been (at least since OSX, not sure about classic). Some folks are just too narrow-minded to give others the benefit of the doubt.
Funny thing only yesterday I saw a great thread on reddit where people shared stories of their older relatives becoming obsessed about trans people (not in a healthy way) alike to how some became obsessed with the qanon conspiracy before.
I actually have a neighbor who now has a trans girl at 13 years old, since about 10. I knew the child from infancy. So as conspiratorial as it could be, I am literally watching a neighbor destroy their child month by month. It's not a conspiracy.
I have a trans kid at 15. Living their best life. Knew the kid from day one (today’s their 15th birthday).
Guess what? It’s all their choice, suggestion, etc. While I’d prefer their original name (I mean, I chose that for a reason), everything else is obvious and right in retrospect.
Instead of just /watching/ a neighbor, you could /be/ a neighbor and get to know them. You might feel differently about your preconceptions when you actually know the human.
I do actually know them. I'm nice as can be and help the family with their cars. But what's being done to that kid is terrible and most likely permanent. I don't think a kid is old enough to know if this stuff should be done to them.
See, this is what I was going at above. You are not really concerned about wellbeing of the children. You are just obsessed about this single (manufactured) issue.
I use the insane, gross, evil thing they approve of to remind them that while they throw around the bigot word at normal people, they are the true gross evil in the world, but regardless of that, just their non approval of healthy sane normal people makes them the bigots.
Oh for sure, I'm the mad Men because I think children shouldn't be given surgery and life-altering hormones based on thoughts they have as children. Your position is so terrible that there's nothing you can say that will make it ever make any kind of sense.
I don't think you'll get anywhere arguing with these people, especially the ones who've bought into this cult to the extent that they've transed their own children.
They have to convince themselves they've done the right thing, because the alternative is horrifying.
You don't need to watch Netflix series. There is a transcript of entire conversation between Stockthon and David Lochridge where the former scolds the latter for taking his safety concerns outside of company and firing him:
>Not at all, because carbon fiber is better compression than tension. And that's what nobody understands. It's completely opposite of what everyone else says. Everyone's, oh, carbon fiber can't handle compression. They're full of shit, and I've proven they're full of shit. If you want to see that, you take a look at the third scale model that we tested.
Jesus Christ, I met people like him in previous jobs when I worked in Aerospace. Don't need to know nothing but a giant ego and connections to get a job managing engineers.
It didn't implode on next dive, it was much worse.
On dive 80 during surfacing people heard a "loud bang" from the submersible (according to a witness it sounded like a gunfire).
They looked at their "RTMS" system and found recording of loud noise from the hull. But only three days later they did the dive 81 (with customers). After this dive their tension sensors shown that their carbon hull no longer compresses under pressure like it used to. They then made plan to inspect the hull after dive 83. But instead they left Titan winter on the parking lot in Saint Johns where it was not protected from any exposure because that was cheaper.
During summer they hauled it for a dive 88 (I don't know why they jumped from 81 to 88, prolly cancelled dives because of the weather?). During hauling it become loose and started knocking against the hauling platform (LARS) because of the waves. Day later they did a dive where it imploded.
On side note, they had no way to access and inspect the carbon hull without having to completely dissemble vehicle, and that too was considered too pricy to do.
This was a disaster of organization with messianic CEO dismissing all concerns with bravado and legal treats that got what was coming to them. If you want to, here's transcript of him scolding and then laying out one of engineers because they took safety concerns outside of the company:
"Not at all, because carbon fiber is better compression then tension. And that's what nobody understands. It's completely opposite of what everyone else says. Everyone's, oh, carbon fiber can't handle compression. They're full of shit, and I've proven they're full of shit."
"Now, if it fails, then you have to stop, and it's -- again, this is not something that just happens all of a sudden. It doesn't just implode. It screams like a mother before it implodes."
- Man crushed by an instantly imploding submersible
Right next to the O-rings will survive in temperatures colder than they were designed. At least Rush's backside cashed the check his mouth wrote where as the NASA engineers were still around after their decision. Does that make one better/worse than the other? Rush took other people with him though when he cashed that check.
Why? There’s already a plentiful list of disastrously wrong arrogant cocksure assholes. Still doesn’t stop people from thinking they’re the Steve Jobs flavor of arrogant cocksure asshole.
Being weaker in compression than in tension is not the same as being unable to handle compression. 40% of carbon fiber's tensile strength is still comparable to the compressive strength of high strength steel.
As 95% of the carbon fiber market is T300, and as T300 hasn't changed in the years since, I think it holds up.
Long story short, raw carbon fiber has a high compressive strength, but it's still just ~40% of its tensile strength. Carbon fiber composite single-plies or tapes have a reduced, but still reasonably high, compressive strength. When you get to multi-ply 0/90° or 0/45/90° composite laminates, "allowable" A-Basis (<1% likelihood of failure) compressive strength is very low -- around 400MPa -- well under the compressive strength of good steel.
And that's under ideal conditions. You've got to apply knock-downs for ply angle, moisture, through-thickness shear, impact damage, and manufacturing defects.
...Hence the Titan sub failed at a compressive load of something like 200MPa.
I'm not accusing you of this, but one of the issues with carbon fiber is that people see on a specsheet that it has, e.g., a "tensile strength = 4000MPa" and they assume that composite parts will exhibit a practical tensile strength of 4000MPa. The properties of CFRP -- CF composites with epoxy or PEEK or whatever -- are always way reduced, and sometimes quite difficult to pin down.
That said, the tensile strength of CF is always high, as a rule of thumb. Its compressive strength really isn't.
I would not call 400 MPa "very low" that's better than the best structural steel. Further, the important thing is the specific strength. CFRP has a density 5 times lower than steel, meaning you can use 5 times as much for the same weight, bearing 5 times the load. A good steel has a compressive strength around 1000 MPa, the best superalloys have compressive strength around 1500 MPa, the same weight of CFRP can withstand the equivalent of around 2000 MPa.
Sure this is idealized, but so is the strength of steel.
The concern with carbon fiber is its potential for delamination, not its compressive strength. Titan's failure was after delamination.
400 MPa is not better than the best structural steel. And 1000 MPa is way higher than the best structural steel (compressive strength and tensile strength are essentially equal for steel). Most structural steel has an ultimate tensile strength of around 500 MPa. Ultimate tensile strength is the comparable strength parameter when discussing rupture/fracture.
400 MPa is better than the best structural steel. 1000 MPa is not for structural steel, it is for high grade steel, the sort you make submarines out of. Why would I list 400 and 1000 for the same value?
Steel is weaker in compression than tension. It's more isotropic than say concrete, but the difference is meaningful in practice.
We're not discussing rupture here. That's for when the pressure is higher internally than externally. We are discussing a submarine, which is a pressure vessel under compression which must also remain buoyant. The specific yield compressive strength is the value which matters.
When someone says "structural steel" they are normally talking about something similar to A572. A572 comes in multiple grades, with grade 42 being the lowest. Grade 42 has a yield strength of 42 ksi (hence grade 42) and a rupture strength of 60 ksi by spec. 60 ksi is 414 MPa. Even A36 (which is basically the weakest structural steel commercially available nowadays) has a rupture strength of around 60 ksi and a yield strength of 36 ksi. Hence, even the weakest "structural steels" have a rupture strength of around 400 MPa.
When I use the word "rupture" I am talking about the material property, not the specific submarine loading condition at play. When comparing steel, which is a ductile material, to carbon fiber, which is a brittle material, you should use the steel's rupture strength instead of yield strength. Steel is for all intents and purposes an isotropic material, and the difference between tensile strength and compressive strength is not material in practice (because steel in compression is nearly always governed by macro-scale geometric issues leading to buckling rather than the material strength in compression being exceeded).
The '~' is important: composites are in general very difficult to predict, and under compression even more so.
(To build some intuition: carbon fibre, is just that, i.e. a fabric. No-one expects to be able to push on the edges of a sheet of fabric get any real resistance at all. If you then embed that it a plastic, i.e. make a composite, the plastic is mainly what makes it hold its shape. It's only really made stronger in tension by the fibers in it, why would you expect the compression to be better?)
> But instead they left Titan winter on the parking lot in Saint Johns where it was not protected from any exposure because that was cheaper.
This came up in the hearings. It's standard practice to do this but it's probably different leaving say the metallic Antipodes [1] outside than carbon fiber.
The report here more or less outright says that leaving it outside was a major factor in the incident. The incident on dive 80 was adjudged to be partial delamination of the carbon fiber layers, and leaving it outside subjected it to freeze-thaw cycles that propagated the delamination into near-total delamination, which promptly failed the next time the hull was pressurized. Although there is also the aborted dive 87, which subjected to the submersible to a lot of percussive damage via wave action.
One wonders if any of these people have ever heard the term, "Don't poke the bear."
Reading this is like watching someone gamble their life savings away because they know the next round/hand is gonna be the one where they win it all back.
Some real gems here and learned some things I wasn't aware of.
> "Now, if it fails, then you have to stop, and it's -- again, this is not something that just happens all of a sudden. It doesn't just implode. It screams like a mother before it implodes."
> On dive 80 during surfacing people heard a "loud bang" from the submersible (according to a witness it sounded like a gunfire)
Well, there you go.
> But instead they left Titan <during the> winter on the parking lot in Saint Johns where it was not protected from any exposure because that was cheaper.
> During hauling it become loose and started knocking against the hauling platform (LARS) because of the waves. Day later they did a dive where it imploded.
Early on, it was made clear that carbon fiber hulls could not easily be inspected for integrity issues like metal hulls can be. I'm not an expert, but I'm guessing sensitive instruments have been around for a while for the purpose of inspection. Having a hull you cannot easily inspect would/should make most people/companies nervous.
This transcript is of CEO Stockton Rush interviewing redacted "Director of Marine Operations"? Do I have that right?
Why is there a transcript of the CEO interviewing one of his own employees, apparently in front of the NTSB, from 2018?
Edit: the transcript is between Stockton Rush and his former director of marine operations, David Lochridge, plus three other staff. [...] Lochridge: "That meeting turned out to be a two-hour, 10-minute discussion… on my termination and how my disagreements with the organisation, with regards to safety, didn't matter." [...] The 2018 meeting was recorded.
> They then made plan to inspect the hull after dive 83. But instead they left Titan winter on the parking lot in Saint Johns where it was not protected from any exposure because that was cheaper.
The things I'm working on have a much lower (zero?) chance of death but this is a tale as old as time. _Looks longingly into the backlog..._
> This was a disaster of organization with messianic CEO dismissing all concerns with bravado
While I love this list, I do not like that you are blaming everything on CEO.
This company followed current ethical policies, and used them to exclude actual experts and skilled people. CEO operated in environment that supports this behaviour, and only cares about irelevant metrics!
Its fair to blame Stockthon because he fired or treated to sue everyone who didn’t buy into his spiel about this being revolutionary disruption of private submarines. Leves of staff rotation were insane in this company, their lead eng. at the time of implosion was a software dev because everybody else left or was laid off.
High staff rotation is typical for such companies. Qualified person with other options, will not work in such toxic company, after CEO had racist and ageist rant!
My point is where such companies get funding?! They produce garbage and should go bankrupt pretty fast! But somehow "investors" kept feeding them money, because they are super "ethical"!
his critics were silenced? bro they were loud as hell and consistently so.
the dude did everything he could to fly under the radar, but only just enough. it is why the report is so damning -- much of what he did was just blatantly, balls-out bad, and all of the signs were there consistently.
But that person is right. Co owners, board and even layer that knowingly helped to relatiate against whistle blower with fake accusations are all guilty too. At least in the ethical sense.
Rush is dead, so it is comfortable for the above to blame only him.
The board knew about the issues. The layer knew the accusation is fake and designed to shut up the whistleblower.
reply