On Fri, 01 Nov 2024 17:41:04 GMT, Scott Alfter wrote:

> In article <vg1dko$2unm0$1@dont-email.me>,
> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>On 1 Nov 2024 01:35:10 GMT, rbowman wrote:
>>
>>> First off, in the US a 350cc bike is considered marginal to ride down
>>> to the Stop'n'Rob for a sixpack.
>>
>>That’s the USA for you: they love to build huge, gutless engines. They
>>should take lessons from the Italians: 100bhp/litre is typical for their
>>engines.
>
> ...which is why they break all the time. Fix It Again, Tony! :-P

I have some experience with Alfa-Romeos. Italian engineering is very, um,
creative. A lot of panache. I didn't learn and later bought a Fiat Spyder.
We had fun between its trips to the hospital. I got to really like the
Mustang loaner and finally told them to keep the damn Spyder. At that
point they were so sick of seeing me we worked out a deal.

rbowman <bowman@montana.com> writes:
>On Fri, 01 Nov 2024 17:41:04 GMT, Scott Alfter wrote:
>
>> In article <vg1dko$2unm0$1@dont-email.me>,
>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>>On 1 Nov 2024 01:35:10 GMT, rbowman wrote:
>>>
>>>> First off, in the US a 350cc bike is considered marginal to ride down
>>>> to the Stop'n'Rob for a sixpack.
>>>
>>>That’s the USA for you: they love to build huge, gutless engines. They
>>>should take lessons from the Italians: 100bhp/litre is typical for their
>>>engines.
>>
>> ...which is why they break all the time. Fix It Again, Tony! :-P
>
>I have some experience with Alfa-Romeos. Italian engineering is very, um,
>creative. A lot of panache. I didn't learn and later bought a Fiat Spyder.
>We had fun between its trips to the hospital. I got to really like the
>Mustang loaner and finally told them to keep the damn Spyder. At that
>point they were so sick of seeing me we worked out a deal.
>

Italian engineering also produces Ferrari (who also makes Masarati) and some pretty
fast trains.

On 1 Nov 2024 18:06:27 GMT, rbowman wrote:

> Goddard was dismissed as a crank ...

The problem was, he was extremely possessive of his “intellectual
property” and wanted to patent everything (following in the footsteps of
the Wright Brothers, no doubt). So he didn’t collaborate with other
researchers, and his work ended up being a dead end.

On Fri, 01 Nov 2024 17:45:46 GMT, Scott Alfter wrote:

> In article <vg0n6s$2qq89$8@dont-email.me>,
> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> The USA makes a big deal of wanting to close its borders to illegal
>> migrants coming in, but when it comes to stopping illegal guns getting
>> out, suddenly they’re not so keen.
>
> You can thank [politicians I don’t like] for that ...

This has been going on for decades, exactly the same under different
administrations.

On Fri, 1 Nov 2024 02:45:56 -0400, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:

> On 11/1/24 12:14 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> On Thu, 31 Oct 2024 23:57:11 -0400, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/31/24 2:20 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 31 Oct 2024 01:35:23 -0400, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 10/30/24 10:21 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The trouble with unnormalized fields is: how do you do updates? You
>>>>>> have to delete all the values and insert them all again.
>>>>>
>>>>> Updates CAN be annoying.
>>>>
>>>> Easy way to remove the annoyance: normalize your field values.
>>>
>>> But the 'easy' way removes some of your flexibility and reasoning
>>> ability in the process.
>>
>> No it doesn’t. Prove me wrong.
>
> This can't be "proven" per-se ... it's a matter of how you "feel"
> about how data should be represented to best effect/clarity. Call it
> 'religion' if you want ...

“Religion” is when followers are rewarded for believing in doctrine, not
just in the absence of evidence, but directly contrary to the evidence.

In other words, I think you’ve just admitted my point.

On Fri, 1 Nov 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 31/10/2024 20:21, D wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 31 Oct 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> On 31/10/2024 18:17, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>> On 2024-10-31, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> If you reject 'white mans' knowledge on racist grounds, well bye bye hi
>>>>> tech.
>>>>>
>>>>> And I suspect that is what will happen. If the chinese dont take over,
>>>>> the barbarians will. And will be welcomed by those who have been taught
>>>>> to hate their own culture and fear science.
>>>>
>>>> It's odd, though, how these barbarians, however anti-tech they may be,
>>>> manage to hold on to enough technology to create weapons.
>>>>
>>> Or are they simply paying someone else?
>>> Only the Iranians have any technological nous.
>>> Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Morocco, Algeria..,Somalia...
>>>
>>> Not exactly putting men on the moon are they?
>>
>> Wouldn't those countries mostly just buy AK-47:s from russia?
>
> I have it on good authority that they indeed do, but their ability to
> actually score a hit depends on the will of Allah. They just point it in the
> general direction of the alleged enemy and loose off
>
> Besides what are they going to give back in exchange?

Mercenaries? Oil? Drugs? Votes in the UN? ;)

On Fri, 1 Nov 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 01/11/2024 01:40, rbowman wrote:
>> On Thu, 31 Oct 2024 19:50:38 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 31 Oct 2024 09:43:57 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>
>>>> "What's the name of this (picking up a cross head screwdriver) in Zulu"
>>>> "We don't have a name for it".
>>>
>>> I suppose “AK-47” is not a term that needs translating. ;)
>>
>> When a Brit get's too prideful about Zulus mention thr Battle of
>> Isandlwana.
>
> No pride involved. Zulus are pretty damn good people as far as I am
> concerned.
> Intelligent and courageous.
>
> No one ever sold Zulus into slavery...

Were Zulus ever sold into slavery?

Yes, the Zulu people were indeed subjected to slavery, particularly during
the 19th century. The context of their enslavement is tied to various
socio-political and economic factors that characterized the region during
this period.

Historical Context of Zulu Enslavement

The Zulu kingdom, established by King Shaka in the early 19th century,
became a powerful entity in southeastern Africa. However, as European
colonial interests expanded in southern Africa, the dynamics of power
shifted significantly. The British and other colonial powers sought
control over land and labor, leading to conflicts with indigenous groups,
including the Zulus.

Slave Trade Dynamics

During the late 18th and early 19th centuries, there was a significant
demand for labor in plantations across the Americas and on islands such as
Mauritius and Réunion. This demand fueled a slave trade that affected many
African communities. While much of this trade involved individuals from
coastal regions or areas further north, it also extended into southern
Africa.

The Zulu people were not immune to these practices. After military
conflicts such as the Anglo-Zulu War (1879), many Zulus were captured and
sold into slavery or forced labor. The chaos resulting from these
conflicts often led to raids by both colonial forces and rival African
groups seeking to capture individuals for sale or forced labor.

Impact of Colonial Policies

Colonial policies further exacerbated the situation for the Zulu people.
The British implemented systems that facilitated the capture and sale of
Africans into servitude. For instance, after defeating Cetshwayo in 1879,
many Zulus were displaced from their lands and subjected to harsh labor
conditions under colonial rule.

Additionally, during this period, some Zulus were sold into slavery within
South Africa itself or exported to other regions where they would work
under brutal conditions on plantations or in domestic servitude.

Conclusion

In summary, while traditional forms of slavery may not have been prevalent
among the Zulu before European contact, significant numbers of Zulus were
indeed sold into slavery during the colonial era due to warfare,
displacement caused by conflict, and economic exploitation by colonial
powers.

On Fri, 1 Nov 2024, rbowman wrote:

> On Fri, 1 Nov 2024 10:36:54 +0100, D wrote:
>
>> Apart from the fact that the US had rocket research going on in
>> parallel,
>> Germany and the US are very much part of the same cultural hemisphere,
>> so I don't think that is a good counter argument.
>>
>> Relying on Mr. von Braun no doubt accelerated the research.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
> Robert_H._Goddard#Lack_of_vision_in_the_United_States
>
> Goddard was dismissed as a crank; real physicists didn't get their hands
> dirty. He had to scramble for funding and to attract any interest.
> Meanwhile Germany was pounding Britain with V-2s.
>

The development of rocket technology in the United States has a complex
history that involves contributions from various scientists and engineers,
both domestic and foreign. While Wernher von Braun is often credited as a
pivotal figure in American rocketry, particularly for his role in the
Apollo program and the development of the Saturn V rocket, it is essential
to recognize that U.S. rocket technology did not solely rely on his
expertise or contributions.

Before von Braun’s arrival in the United States after World War II, there
were already significant developments in rocketry. The American rocketry
movement can be traced back to pioneers such as Robert H. Goddard, who is
often referred to as the “father of modern rocketry.” Goddard successfully
launched the world’s first liquid-fueled rocket on March 16, 1926. His
work laid foundational principles for future rocket designs and propulsion
systems.

_In addition to Goddard_, other figures like Hermann Oberth (whose writings
inspired von Braun) and various amateur rocketry groups contributed to
early advancements. The Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), established
during World War II, was another critical site for rocket research and
development independent of von Braun.

In summary, the US would have gotten there eventually, but as per my
original statement, relying on Mr. von Braun no doubt accelerated the
research.

On Fri, 1 Nov 2024 22:34:25 +0100, D wrote:

> In summary, the US would have gotten there eventually, but as per my
> original statement, relying on Mr. von Braun no doubt accelerated the
> research.

Yeah eventually. Sometimes it helps to get the information from the
horse's mouth.

During WWI Germany used Zepplins to attack Britain. They were susceptible
to ground fire or being shot down by British aircraft. The answer was a
new design called Height Climbers that could operate over 20,000 feet,
well above the ceiling of the aircraft of the day. There were problems
with the engines and breathing apparatus but overall they were successful.
Design decisions had been made to allow them to operate at that altitude.

The Allies managed to capture L-49 and the US made several attempts based
on the L-49. The first was the ZR-1 Shenandoah. It worked for a while
before breaking up in a squall.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Shenandoah_(ZR-1)

ZR-2 started as a British R.38 class. It didn't end well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R38-class_airship

ZR-3, the USS Los Angeles, managed to retire in on piece.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Los_Angeles_(ZR-3)

ZRS-4, the USS Akron, was destroyed in a thunderstorm.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Akron

ZRS-5, the USS Macon, broike up off Point Sur.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Macon_(ZRS-5)

There wasn't a ZRS-6. The Navy had had enough.

Many think most of the problems came from copying an ultralight design
that wasn't meant to be durable. Even when they brought in German
engineers they may have not been very forthcoming considering the screwing
Germany got a Versailles.

fwiw, Howard Hughes' 'Hell's Angels' features a Zepplin and aircraft duel.
At one point when the Zepplin captain is trying to gain altitude and has
jettisoned everything the crew lines up and jumps for the good of the
Fatherland.

No CGI in that movie, just a few dead stunt pilots and a lot of crashed
planes.

On Fri, 01 Nov 2024 19:02:32 GMT, Scott Lurndal wrote:

> Italian engineering also produces Ferrari (who also makes Masarati) and
> some pretty fast trains.

I looked at a well-used California in the early '70s. I was young and
foolish but not that foolish. A rich kid at RPI had a Ferrari. It doesn't
get too cold in Italy so the 3 Webers were free of any encumbrances like
chokes. Not a car for upstate NY winters.

They do make pretty stuff.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadillac_Allant%C3%A9

A neighbor had one in his driveway and when I went by and saw the Cadillac
emblem I did a double take. The design is a little dated but it was the
best looking Caddy I'd ever seen so I had to go over and find out what it
was.

Always able to screw up a free lunch Cadillac had shoved the ill-fated
Northstar engine into it.

On Fri, 1 Nov 2024 22:30:39 +0100, D wrote:

> During the late 18th and early 19th centuries, there was a significant
> demand for labor in plantations across the Americas and on islands such
> as Mauritius and Réunion. This demand fueled a slave trade that affected
> many African communities. While much of this trade involved individuals
> from coastal regions or areas further north, it also extended into
> southern Africa.

With a whole continent full of indigenous labor they imported Africans.
The truth is while the Cherokee didn't have a problem enslaving people
from other tribes they saw the value of buying Africans instead. When they
headed to Oklahoma on the Trail of Tears they took their African slaves
with them.

The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes:
> I have it on good authority that they indeed do, but their ability to
> actually score a hit depends on the will of Allah. They just point it
> in the general direction of the alleged enemy and loose off

US in the two wars exhausted an enormous stockpile of .50 caliber, some
dating back to ww2. I asked some people involved and they said that
policy was "suppressing fire" ... at slightest provocation until
ammunition was exhausted ... keeping enemy heads down and minimizing
returned fire.

--
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970

On 11/1/24 4:56 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Nov 2024 02:45:56 -0400, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>
>> On 11/1/24 12:14 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>> On Thu, 31 Oct 2024 23:57:11 -0400, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 10/31/24 2:20 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, 31 Oct 2024 01:35:23 -0400, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 10/30/24 10:21 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The trouble with unnormalized fields is: how do you do updates? You
>>>>>>> have to delete all the values and insert them all again.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Updates CAN be annoying.
>>>>>
>>>>> Easy way to remove the annoyance: normalize your field values.
>>>>
>>>> But the 'easy' way removes some of your flexibility and reasoning
>>>> ability in the process.
>>>
>>> No it doesn’t. Prove me wrong.
>>
>> This can't be "proven" per-se ... it's a matter of how you "feel"
>> about how data should be represented to best effect/clarity. Call it
>> 'religion' if you want ...
>
> “Religion” is when followers are rewarded for believing in doctrine, not
> just in the absence of evidence, but directly contrary to the evidence.
>
> In other words, I think you’ve just admitted my point.

And you just admitted mine :-)

I don't think there's any distinct "advantage" these
days in either flat-file or MV. Plusses and minuses
for each approach. It's all a matter of how you FEEL
data should be structured/stored.

In short, 'religion'.

But I'm pretty libertine, so you can have your
religion so long as you tolerate mine :-)

On Fri, 01 Nov 2024 16:14:20 -1000, Lynn Wheeler wrote:

> US in the two wars exhausted an enormous stockpile of .50 caliber, some
> dating back to ww2. I asked some people involved and they said that
> policy was "suppressing fire" ... at slightest provocation until
> ammunition was exhausted ... keeping enemy heads down and minimizing
> returned fire.

https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/hope_on_the_battlefield

This is a short article by Dave Grossman. He has also written a couple of
books like'On Combat: The Psychology and Physiology of Deadly Conflict in
War and in Peace' and ' Warrior Mindset: Mental Toughness Skills for a
Nation's Peacekeepers'.

He draws on Marshall, whose study of WWII troop effectiveness is
controversial and other sources. The basic premise is many soldiers are
very reluctant to put their sights on a living human and shoot to kill.
Marshall claimed only 25% of the troops even fired their weapons which
critics say if improbable. Much harder to pin down is how many fire in the
general direction of the enemy. Like the technique of only one live round
for a firing squad they would rather not know if they killed anyone.

Historically snipers weren't very popular. Their effectiveness was
appreciated but the job description is 'cold-blooded killer'. Grossman
goes into some of the modern desensitization techniques to train soldiers
to do what they are supposed to do and how to handle the fallout.

On Sat, 2 Nov 2024 01:19:13 -0400, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:

> On 11/1/24 4:56 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 1 Nov 2024 02:45:56 -0400, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/1/24 12:14 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, 31 Oct 2024 23:57:11 -0400, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 10/31/24 2:20 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, 31 Oct 2024 01:35:23 -0400, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 10/30/24 10:21 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The trouble with unnormalized fields is: how do you do updates?
>>>>>>>> You have to delete all the values and insert them all again.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Updates CAN be annoying.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Easy way to remove the annoyance: normalize your field values.
>>>>>
>>>>> But the 'easy' way removes some of your flexibility and reasoning
>>>>> ability in the process.
>>>>
>>>> No it doesn’t. Prove me wrong.
>>>
>>> This can't be "proven" per-se ... it's a matter of how you "feel"
>>> about how data should be represented to best effect/clarity. Call it
>>> 'religion' if you want ...
>>
>> “Religion” is when followers are rewarded for believing in doctrine,
>> not just in the absence of evidence, but directly contrary to the
>> evidence.
>>
>> In other words, I think you’ve just admitted my point.
>
> And you just admitted mine :-)

The fact of normalized attributes being easier to update isn’t a religious
issue: it’s a well-established foundation element of database theory. It’s
the reason why we have first normal form. And subsequent higher normal
forms impose further restrictions which in their turn make other kinds of
updates easier.

On 2 Nov 2024 05:48:10 GMT, rbowman wrote:

> Grossman goes into some of the modern desensitization techniques to
> train soldiers to do what they are supposed to do and how to handle the
> fallout.

Fun fact: the crime rate among ex-soldiers is higher than among the
general populace.

I guess there are limits to how much “fallout” you can “handle” ...

On 11/2/24 2:18 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Sat, 2 Nov 2024 01:19:13 -0400, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>
>> On 11/1/24 4:56 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, 1 Nov 2024 02:45:56 -0400, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 11/1/24 12:14 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, 31 Oct 2024 23:57:11 -0400, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 10/31/24 2:20 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, 31 Oct 2024 01:35:23 -0400, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 10/30/24 10:21 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The trouble with unnormalized fields is: how do you do updates?
>>>>>>>>> You have to delete all the values and insert them all again.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Updates CAN be annoying.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Easy way to remove the annoyance: normalize your field values.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But the 'easy' way removes some of your flexibility and reasoning
>>>>>> ability in the process.
>>>>>
>>>>> No it doesn’t. Prove me wrong.
>>>>
>>>> This can't be "proven" per-se ... it's a matter of how you "feel"
>>>> about how data should be represented to best effect/clarity. Call it
>>>> 'religion' if you want ...
>>>
>>> “Religion” is when followers are rewarded for believing in doctrine,
>>> not just in the absence of evidence, but directly contrary to the
>>> evidence.
>>>
>>> In other words, I think you’ve just admitted my point.
>>
>> And you just admitted mine :-)
>
> The fact of normalized attributes being easier to update isn’t a religious
> issue: it’s a well-established foundation element of database theory.

I disagree.

> It’s
> the reason why we have first normal form. And subsequent higher normal
> forms impose further restrictions which in their turn make other kinds of
> updates easier.

Still crusading for your religion I see :-)

Do you sell burkha's ?

IMHO, MV is still the 'best', 'most logical',
'most compact'.

You're not gonna convert me to your heresy ! :-)

Oh wait, have to turn off the hour-long ad for
Shark vacuum cleaners ... another attempted
religion ......... all worship Hoover !!!

You seem obsessed with this word "normal"/"normalized".
Nothing normal about a mistaken paradigm. It's just
theological propaganda.

As said before, at this point, the CPU/Time equation
between accessing/analyzing/updating flat -vs- MV is
about nil. One is as good as another from an objective
standpoint. It's just a matter of "feel", how you think,
as to which is really "better". I don't care about who
is "winning", doesn't affect my eval.

On Sat, 2 Nov 2024 06:21:18 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> On 2 Nov 2024 05:48:10 GMT, rbowman wrote:
>
>> Grossman goes into some of the modern desensitization techniques to
>> train soldiers to do what they are supposed to do and how to handle the
>> fallout.
>
> Fun fact: the crime rate among ex-soldiers is higher than among the
> general populace.
>
> I guess there are limits to how much “fallout” you can “handle” ...

A good study would look at who enlists in the all-volunteer army. I wonder
how many judges still offer a choice of the county jail or enlisting?

On Sat, 2 Nov 2024, rbowman wrote:

> On Fri, 1 Nov 2024 22:34:25 +0100, D wrote:
>
>> In summary, the US would have gotten there eventually, but as per my
>> original statement, relying on Mr. von Braun no doubt accelerated the
>> research.
>
> Yeah eventually. Sometimes it helps to get the information from the
> horse's mouth.
>
> During WWI Germany used Zepplins to attack Britain. They were susceptible
> to ground fire or being shot down by British aircraft. The answer was a
> new design called Height Climbers that could operate over 20,000 feet,
> well above the ceiling of the aircraft of the day. There were problems
> with the engines and breathing apparatus but overall they were successful.
> Design decisions had been made to allow them to operate at that altitude.
>
> The Allies managed to capture L-49 and the US made several attempts based
> on the L-49. The first was the ZR-1 Shenandoah. It worked for a while
> before breaking up in a squall.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Shenandoah_(ZR-1)
>
> ZR-2 started as a British R.38 class. It didn't end well.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R38-class_airship
>
> ZR-3, the USS Los Angeles, managed to retire in on piece.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Los_Angeles_(ZR-3)
>
>
> ZRS-4, the USS Akron, was destroyed in a thunderstorm.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Akron
>
> ZRS-5, the USS Macon, broike up off Point Sur.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Macon_(ZRS-5)
>
> There wasn't a ZRS-6. The Navy had had enough.
>
> Many think most of the problems came from copying an ultralight design
> that wasn't meant to be durable. Even when they brought in German
> engineers they may have not been very forthcoming considering the screwing
> Germany got a Versailles.
>
>
> fwiw, Howard Hughes' 'Hell's Angels' features a Zepplin and aircraft duel.
> At one point when the Zepplin captain is trying to gain altitude and has
> jettisoned everything the crew lines up and jumps for the good of the
> Fatherland.
>
> No CGI in that movie, just a few dead stunt pilots and a lot of crashed
> planes.

Fascinating!

One of my visions is to start an airline company based on modern
zeppelins. Instead of sitting in a small metal/carbon fibre tube for 8 to
14 hours, I'd like the experience of crossing the ocean to be more like a
cruise ship. It might take 1 to 3 days or so, but you could walk around,
and enjoy a Michelin star restaurant on board.

I just need to reach Branson or Musk and the thing should be done! ;)

After that, the space elevator!

On Sat, 2 Nov 2024, rbowman wrote:

> On Fri, 01 Nov 2024 19:02:32 GMT, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>
>> Italian engineering also produces Ferrari (who also makes Masarati) and
>> some pretty fast trains.
>
> I looked at a well-used California in the early '70s. I was young and
> foolish but not that foolish. A rich kid at RPI had a Ferrari. It doesn't
> get too cold in Italy so the 3 Webers were free of any encumbrances like
> chokes. Not a car for upstate NY winters.
>
> They do make pretty stuff.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadillac_Allant%C3%A9
>
> A neighbor had one in his driveway and when I went by and saw the Cadillac
> emblem I did a double take. The design is a little dated but it was the
> best looking Caddy I'd ever seen so I had to go over and find out what it
> was.
>
> Always able to screw up a free lunch Cadillac had shoved the ill-fated
> Northstar engine into it.
>

In terms of american sports cars, is the Chevrolet Corvette any good
compared with, say a Porsche?

On Sat, 2 Nov 2024, rbowman wrote:

> On Fri, 1 Nov 2024 22:30:39 +0100, D wrote:
>
>> During the late 18th and early 19th centuries, there was a significant
>> demand for labor in plantations across the Americas and on islands such
>> as Mauritius and Réunion. This demand fueled a slave trade that affected
>> many African communities. While much of this trade involved individuals
>> from coastal regions or areas further north, it also extended into
>> southern Africa.
>
> With a whole continent full of indigenous labor they imported Africans.
> The truth is while the Cherokee didn't have a problem enslaving people
> from other tribes they saw the value of buying Africans instead. When they
> headed to Oklahoma on the Trail of Tears they took their African slaves
> with them.

Really? So indians bought negro slaves? Had no idea! In europe, indians
can do no wrong, and their history is held up as a paragon of eco-friendly
and just, which was crushed by the bad white man.

On Sat, 2 Nov 2024, rbowman wrote:

> On Fri, 01 Nov 2024 16:14:20 -1000, Lynn Wheeler wrote:
>
>> US in the two wars exhausted an enormous stockpile of .50 caliber, some
>> dating back to ww2. I asked some people involved and they said that
>> policy was "suppressing fire" ... at slightest provocation until
>> ammunition was exhausted ... keeping enemy heads down and minimizing
>> returned fire.
>
> https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/hope_on_the_battlefield
>
> This is a short article by Dave Grossman. He has also written a couple of
> books like'On Combat: The Psychology and Physiology of Deadly Conflict in
> War and in Peace' and ' Warrior Mindset: Mental Toughness Skills for a
> Nation's Peacekeepers'.
>
> He draws on Marshall, whose study of WWII troop effectiveness is
> controversial and other sources. The basic premise is many soldiers are
> very reluctant to put their sights on a living human and shoot to kill.
> Marshall claimed only 25% of the troops even fired their weapons which
> critics say if improbable. Much harder to pin down is how many fire in the
> general direction of the enemy. Like the technique of only one live round
> for a firing squad they would rather not know if they killed anyone.
>
> Historically snipers weren't very popular. Their effectiveness was
> appreciated but the job description is 'cold-blooded killer'. Grossman
> goes into some of the modern desensitization techniques to train soldiers
> to do what they are supposed to do and how to handle the fallout.

What techniques are those? I only remember one thing I've read somewhere,
and that is that the US military stopped using regular round targets for
shooting practice, and switched to human shaped targes. Apparently it did
shift the kill-needle a little bit in a more favourable direction.

I also read somewhere that 1% of the population has no natural barrier to
killing other people, and that those types of people are the ones that the
military is looking for to join special forces and snipers.

I do not know if this is a fact though, so could very well be something I
just read or heard somewhere.

On 01/11/2024 17:41, Scott Alfter wrote:
> In article <vg1dko$2unm0$1@dont-email.me>,
> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>> On 1 Nov 2024 01:35:10 GMT, rbowman wrote:
>>
>>> First off, in the US a 350cc bike is considered marginal to ride down to
>>> the Stop'n'Rob for a sixpack.
>>
>> That’s the USA for you: they love to build huge, gutless engines. They
>> should take lessons from the Italians: 100bhp/litre is typical for their
>> engines.
>
> ...which is why they break all the time. Fix It Again, Tony! :-P
>
I have spent some time out of sheer curiosity understanding the US
vehicle market.
It is dominated by :

- long distances
- wide roads
- no corners
- cheap fuel.
- automatic gearboxes
- climate extremes

And that is why big lazy slow torquey high capacity engines that will
last several hundred thousand miles are in use. Along with massive
aircon and tractor like suspension.

Its a perfectly adequate solution to their particular conditions.

--
"When one man dies it's a tragedy. When thousands die it's statistics."

Josef Stalin

On 01/11/2024 18:06, rbowman wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Nov 2024 10:36:54 +0100, D wrote:
>
>> Apart from the fact that the US had rocket research going on in
>> parallel,
>> Germany and the US are very much part of the same cultural hemisphere,
>> so I don't think that is a good counter argument.
>>
>> Relying on Mr. von Braun no doubt accelerated the research.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
> Robert_H._Goddard#Lack_of_vision_in_the_United_States
>
> Goddard was dismissed as a crank; real physicists didn't get their hands
> dirty. He had to scramble for funding and to attract any interest.
> Meanwhile Germany was pounding Britain with V-2s.
>
Americans aren't really that good at inventing stuff.

What they are good at is taking a design and throwing money at it to
create a mass produced product that will sell to an enormous marketplace
that all speaks the same language. Mostly.

--
"When one man dies it's a tragedy. When thousands die it's statistics."

Josef Stalin

On 02/11/2024 10:40, D wrote:
> I'd like the experience of crossing the ocean to be more like a cruise
> ship. It might take 1 to 3 days or so, but you could walk around, and
> enjoy a Michelin star restaurant on board.

Not in an airship. What you want is a nuclear powered passenger liner.

Weight no problem. Massive horsepower no problem. Should be able to
cruise over 50mph.

So probably 2 days to make the trip.

--
The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to
rule.
– H. L. Mencken, American journalist, 1880-1956