|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:You're right, they can be Flintstones instead. And fly on pterodactyls! Also your dishwasher is a talking animal but that seems like a fair tradeoff. I wanna say that like a decade or so on usenet I read some insane theory that the Jetsons existed in the same world as the Flintstones, but were members of the elite who lived in cities in the sky while the Flintstones were part of a regressed underclass. But I really want capsule-bed planes and we can have trained cavebears to lift cripples into the upper levels
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 23:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 20:56 |
|
|
bongwizzard posted:I wanna say that like a decade or so on usenet I read some insane theory that the Jetsons existed in the same world as the Flintstones, but were members of the elite who lived in cities in the sky while the Flintstones were part of a regressed underclass. That was the very theory I was referencing! I've never been on usenet though so it must have escaped out into the normie internet
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 23:29
|
|
|
You guys still talking about United? https://twitter.com/CNN/status/869675914858291201
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 23:31
|
|
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:That was the very theory I was referencing! I've never been on usenet though so it must have escaped out into the normie internet It was very impressive back in the day when all we had before was access to the idiocy of our actual friends. Global idiocy was amazingly heady stuff.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 23:36
|
|
|
bongwizzard posted:I wanna say that like a decade or so on usenet I read some insane theory that the Jetsons existed in the same world as the Flintstones, but were members of the elite who lived in cities in the sky while the Flintstones were part of a regressed underclass. Thats kind of the plot from the Jetsons Flintstones crossover. They walk behind a bolder and find each other's world. This might be wrong, but I remember something similar as a kid when I saw it.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 23:55
|
|
|
Sexual Aluminum posted:Thats kind of the plot from the Jetsons Flintstones crossover. They walk behind a bolder and find each other's world. I think there was more than one crossover. The one I remember involved Elroy building a time machine and the companies that both Fred and George worked at having problems that they solved with something from the other one's time. It was a really, really bad movie. I think there was another one (or maybe it was some show episodes?) where the Flintstones were in the future and they and the Jetsons got kidnapped by aliens or villains or something and the leader threatened to throw them in a bottomless pit. I do remember seeing a movie or a show or something where the Jetsons decide to see what's below the clouds and I think that's one of the crossovers? I don't know; Hanna-Barbara stuff from the 80's all kind of blurs together because it was all minimal effort garbage you were supposed to plunk the kids in front of so they'd get mesmerized by the pretty colors and bad jokes and shut up for a while. It made little sense because the world of the Jetsons was supposed to be so horribly polluted at the surface that they had to live in the clouds. Granted Hanna-Barbara didn't care much about consistency and just made poo poo up as they went as cheaply as they could.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 00:05
|
|
|
bongwizzard posted:I wanna say that like a decade or so on usenet I read some insane theory that the Jetsons existed in the same world as the Flintstones, but were members of the elite who lived in cities in the sky while the Flintstones were part of a regressed underclass. That's literally the Kingdom of Zeal from Chrono Trigger
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 01:18
|
|
|
The MSJ posted:
Hahaha. Hope it didnt hurt anyone but the product name is very apt " Cuoco volcanic cookware"
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 01:41
|
|
|
Koyaanisgoatse posted:That's literally the Kingdom of Zeal from Chrono Trigger Or, y'know, The Time Machine by H G Wells
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 01:49
|
|
|
I thought the Jetsons/Flintstones same universe evidence came from that alien (Gizmo?) being in both. Like how the show Arrested Development and St. Elsewhere exist in the same universe because the detective from Homicide was on both shows. There's a gritty Flintstones comic book that's pretty good. Fred is dealing with some serious PTSD after burning the Tree People from their homes in the Great War.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 01:52
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:He's absolutely correct, though. People have options that provide larger seats and more comforts, but given that option they choose to buy cheaper seats with less comfort. This is a case where the market has spoken loudly and clearly and an airline that said "we're going to pack in fewer seats, even though that means we need to charge more for tickets" would fail and be bought out by an airline that would cram more seats in. Part of that, I suspect, is that the jump in price between sardine class and business class is huge for an incremental increase in comfort, and the jump in price for first class is huger still. How many people would be willing to pay an extra 10-20% for slightly more legroom and recline but aren't willing to pay 300% more to move to business class or 800% more for first class?
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 02:27
|
|
|
Hey Mr CEO Get this, Most people aint got a bunch of money to just blow. Shocking, I know.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 03:13
|
|
|
ToxicFrog posted:Part of that, I suspect, is that the jump in price between sardine class and business class is huge for an incremental increase in comfort, and the jump in price for first class is huger still. How many people would be willing to pay an extra 10-20% for slightly more legroom and recline but aren't willing to pay 300% more to move to business class or 800% more for first class? This is why premium economy exists though?
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 03:20
|
|
|
Johnny Aztec posted:Hey Mr CEO Get this, Most people aint got a bunch of money to just blow. But all my friends and neighbours burn c-notes to ward off the winter cold and drive half-a-million-dollar sports cars? Doesn't everyone? 
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 03:41
|
|
|
Gum posted:Or, y'know, The Time Machine by H G Wells That's nothing like Zeal or the Jetsons. If you're gonna try the smug literary reference, maybe read the book first?
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 04:47
|
|
|
jojoinnit posted:This is why premium economy exists though? Which was a 100% increase for me for a six hour flight, for about two inches more room on my last flight.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 05:39
|
|
|
jojoinnit posted:This is why premium economy exists though? Okay well here's a pretty fundamental lesson that will unlock a lot of mysterious "bad choices" you tut at people making in life. 1. How many "premium economy" seats does a plane have? 2. How many passengers does a plane have? Even if every single coach passenger was willing and able to pay for premium economy, there aren't enough seats to go around. Increased interest will make the seats more expensive, but it won't make more of them. Just generally, when you look around the world and see a thing that confers some advantage in life, take a minute to check if people have already taken all the available openings before you roll your eyes at the people who don't have the thing. "College is expensive? Just get scholarships!" is meaningless if there aren't enough scholarships to go around. "Short on money? Just get a better job!" doesn't do much if there are no openings. Airlines haven't increased their fleet sizes to match the growth in population. They're content to abuse their customers and whine that they aren't making enough money instead of investing in infrastructure that scales with population and demand the way transit should. And people on planes aren't all going to Disney World either. In a country as big as the US, getting on an airplane is the only way some people can see their families. Sometimes you have to do something even if you can't afford to do it well.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 05:57
|
|
|
Obviously the air travel solution is a stadium field sized area filed with roomy plastic lawn chairs, the whole sealed compartment suspended by chains from a jet propelled dirigible. Pack 'em in and let them fight survivor style over access to the food and drinks carts protected by steward-gladiators.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 10:04
|
|
|
Byzantine posted:That's nothing like Zeal or the Jetsons. If you're gonna try the smug literary reference, maybe read the book first?  It actually is quite like zeal, and its not like the jetsons, but it IS like the "Jetsons and Flintstones are part of the same world" theory idea being talked about. Dude. I mean poo poo chrono trigger is literally about a guy in a time machine who travels to a point where society exists in two fractured castes, those above who live in splendor and those below who toil in dirt. There's some slight differences; Zeal is in the past not the future, the earthbound don't actually work for those who live in zeal they just aren't helped by them, slightly different from the Morlocks, etc. but holy poo poo are you nitpicking.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 11:28
|
|
|
The Eloi don't live in splendor, though. They're barely-sapient cattle the Morlocks kill for meat.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 14:23
|
|
|
Byzantine posted:The Eloi don't live in splendor, though. They're barely-sapient cattle the Morlocks kill for meat. Yeah, the morlocks living underground is more like a metaphor for their depravity than anything else. Thematically they have a lot more in common with vampires or other horror creatures that live in the darkness than they do with two-tiered societies where the oppressed masses live in mud while the rich live in sky-castles.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 15:12
|
|
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:Even if every single coach passenger was willing and able to pay for premium economy, there aren't enough seats to go around. Increased interest will make the seats more expensive, but it won't make more of them. Of course it will. If every single coach passenger was willing and able to pay for premium economy, airlines would increase the supply of premium economy seats. This isn't Ferraris we're talking about, it's not the air of exclusivity that people are paying for such that they'd stop paying for them if they were more available, this is regular old market segmentation where you want to charge every individual as much as that individual is williing to pay for a seat on your plane. If everyone were willing to pay for the more expensive segment, you'd see the offerings in that segment grow and the lower segment shrink. The major airlines would change their seating, upstarts like JetBlue would run entire planes full of the things, because if the market segments change the offerings would change. Assuming competence on the part of the airlines, of course, which admittedly is questionable for a number of them. But people aren't willing to pay for premium economy. Or business class, or first class. Seriously, *people have options to buy nicer seats*. And most of them don't. They also have the option to fly on airlines that don't charge additional fees for checked baggage, or don't charge you for snacks, and so on. And most of them don't, and shop purely on the cheapest ticket that will get them to their destination even if it's less comfortable than an alternative, more expensive ticket. Some of them can't, in which case I'm not sure what the complaint is other than "Ugh, all these poors are making air travel miserable," but many of them just don't think it's worth it. They'll *complain* about it, because complaining is fun, but they won't actually vote with their wallets. Tiny Brontosaurus posted:Airlines haven't increased their fleet sizes to match the growth in population. For one thing, planes have gotten bigger and more efficient and reliable, so a growing population over more routes can be served with a constant number of planes. If the airlines had added more seats solely by adding more airframes, then the overhead per seat would go up dramatically and air travel would be vastly more expensive. Which would be great, if your objective is keeping poors from taking up your legroom. Second, fleet sizes have definitely increased long-term as population has: http://www.boeing.com/commercial/market/long-term-market/traffic-and-market-outlook/ quote:In 2015, there were approximately 22,510 jet airplanes in service, a number that is expected to double over the next 20 years to an in-service fleet of 45,240 airplanes. To achieve that, 39,620 new airplanes will be needed, and 28,140 of them, or 71 percent of the total, will be single-aisle airplanes. https://books.google.com/books?id=n...%20year&f=false quote:Based on the backlog of aircraft orders and the projections of air carrier traffic, seat capacity, load factors, fleet requirements, and aircraft productivity, the U.S. commercial air carrier passenger fleet is projected to increase from an inventory of 4,964 aircraft in 2000 to 8,503 aircraft by 2012. This involves a net addition to the fleet (after requirements of obsolete aircraft) of approximately 295 aircraft annually. That projection wasn't met (big recession probably had something to do with that), but in 2014 the US commercial aircraft fleet was 7,064 airplanes. Using 2000 as a starting point, the population went from 282 million to 319 million, an increase of 13%. Commercial airplanes in service increased by 42%. Fleet growth *more* than kept pace with population growth.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 15:52
|
|
|
Dispatching overly enthusiastic sock puppets to shill for airlines on dead gay comedy forums is a pretty dumb marketing move, yeah.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 16:01
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:But people aren't willing to pay for premium economy. Or business class, or first class. Seriously, *people have options to buy nicer seats*. And most of them don't.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 17:12
|
|
|
Croccers posted:Just because I have the option to buy a Ferrari doesn't mean I can actually afford a Ferrari. Equality of opportunity is what really counts 
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 17:25
|
|
|
Croccers posted:Just because I have the option to buy a Ferrari doesn't mean I can actually afford a Ferrari. The very next part of my post, the bit you snipped: "Some of them can't, in which case I'm not sure what the complaint is other than "Ugh, all these poors are making air travel miserable," but many of them just don't think it's worth it." http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IS.AIR.PSGR That's a 900% increase in air travel since 1970, during a period of time the population has only doubled. And it's not just a small fraction of wealthy people taking a lot of flights: http://www.airspacemag.com/daily-planet/how-much-worlds-population-has-flown-airplane-180957719/ That is air travel becoming immensely more affordable for a tremendous number of people. If all planes had nothing but business-class legroom, that couldn't happen. Phanatic has a new favorite as of 17:31 on May 31, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 17:28
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:Of course it will. If every single coach passenger was willing and able to pay for premium economy, airlines would increase the supply of premium economy seats. This isn't Ferraris we're talking about, it's not the air of exclusivity that people are paying for such that they'd stop paying for them if they were more available, this is regular old market segmentation where you want to charge every individual as much as that individual is williing to pay for a seat on your plane. If everyone were willing to pay for the more expensive segment, you'd see the offerings in that segment grow and the lower segment shrink. The major airlines would change their seating, upstarts like JetBlue would run entire planes full of the things, because if the market segments change the offerings would change. Assuming competence on the part of the airlines, of course, which admittedly is questionable for a number of them. People aren't able, you dumb gently caress. They aren't able. People in America are very, very, very poor. And no, this isn't Ferraris we're talking about, because plane seats don't just roll off an assembly line, they have to fit in planes, which are finite in size and number. You seeing a lot of empty airplanes these days? Poor Southwest flying around with its free checked baggage compartments empty? First class seats gathering dust? No, all the nice poo poo gets bought up just fine, and then you and your marketing-diseased mind scramble to rationalize post-hoc why people stop buying stuff when it's sold out. Do you seriously think that the sub-$100 difference between economy and premium economy is enough to influence the layout of an airplane? Like you (and good christ I hope you're getting paid for this shilling) keep whining, airline tickets have gotten cheaper. Airlines could have just kept prices the same and made every seat "premium economy," but they didn't. They see more profit in abusing their customers and they know they can get away with it forever because incredibly stupid, ignorant people like you will never, ever, ever be able to understand the concept of "not enough to go around," so if somebody doesn't have something it's always their fault. Tiny Brontosaurus has a new favorite as of 18:29 on May 31, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:26
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IS.AIR.PSGR This is especially loving stupid too because guess what else happened since 1970? Mass exodus from most small towns and consolidation of employment opportunities in urban centers. Nearly everyone in the country has to move far away from their families to support themselves now, and they have to keep moving when jobs dry up. People didn't fly as much back in the day because they didn't have to.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:32
|
|
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:People aren't able, you dumb gently caress. could have just kept prices the same and made every seat "premium economy," but they didn't. No they couldn't, idiot, because then to meet the same demand for flights they'd need more planes, which means more engines, more pilots and flight crew, more maintenance, more ramp space, and a whole bunch of other things which would drive up the cost of tickets, which means all those poor people you say you're so concerned about wouldn't be able to afford the seats in the first place. I know you haven't the slightest loving idea about how economics works and how people respond to incentives, but could you stop pretending you're actually interested in helping the poor when the actual actions you espouse would result in making things like air travel unaffordable for them just so you could have a bit more legroom? Tiny Brontosaurus posted:. People didn't fly as much back in the day because they didn't have to. Yeah, the fact that a ticket back then cost double what it does today in constant dollars has nothing to do with it. https://www.theatlantic.com/please-...F273506%2F#seen Phanatic has a new favorite as of 18:41 on May 31, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:38
|
|
|
I hope United-senpai notices Phanatic and they go out on a date.  It's nice to see someone stand up for the poor, destitute airline executives in today's America.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:43
|
|
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:And no, this isn't Ferraris we're talking about, because plane seats don't just roll off an assembly line, they have to fit in planes, which are finite in size and number. Uh, yeah, plane seats do roll off an assembly line, I've seen them in person, I used to have to go to one periodically for an old job. A lot of engineering goes into airline seats, and several companies manufacture them, they're usually customized to fit certain aircraft, as well as the airline's standards. So two different airlines with the same aircraft can have seats that look the same, but they're usually subtly and not so subtly different. The reason that we can't have pod style seating is because of how seats are installed in an aircraft. The seats are built to attach to the seat tracks, which are part of the airframe to keep the seats in one place the entire flight. In order for a pod style seat to work, there would likely need to be a seat track in the top of the fuselage, but as far as I know no current aircraft have any structure like that. There's also the issue with the airframe itself, airplanes flex, and they flex a lot, it's part of the design. The bigger issue you're getting at is more likely that US airlines aren't buying new aircraft, and when they do, they pack it as full as possible with the cheapest seating possible. If you want to fly in nice seats, fly internationally (I would know, I designed parts of those seats).  EDIT: Don't forget that in order to install anything inside of an aircraft, it has to fit through the door, they're not built like a house where you can just crane things in through the roof. Iron Crowned has a new favorite as of 18:52 on May 31, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:46
|
|
|
Iron Crowned posted:Uh, yeah, Christ loving lord I knew some goony idiot was going to take that literally. Congrats on being the one. Thanks for showing up to blow everyone's minds that manufactured products are manufactured. I can't believe I lived my whole life up to this point thinking the chair fairy made airplane seats happen. Aren't you the guy who stalks strippers? Phanatic posted:No they couldn't, idiot, because then to meet the same demand for flights they'd need more planes, which means more engines, more pilots and flight crew, more maintenance, more ramp space, and a whole bunch of other things which would drive up the cost of tickets, which means all those poor people you say you're so concerned about wouldn't be able to afford the seats in the first place. Yes, you pathetic loving shill. They DO need more planes. That is literally what they should be doing to fulfill their public duty adequately as a part of the transportation system. But they don't bother, because they make plenty of money as is and they know you're always right there to suck their cocks about it whenever they get criticized. Phanatic posted:Yeah, the fact that a ticket back then cost double what it does today in constant dollars has nothing to do with it. You are the dumbest motherfucker alive.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 19:06
|
|
|
calm down little bronto, phanatic is a dumbass but he's making you look like a loving clown
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 19:12
|
|
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:
Way to completely ignore the fact that they have been vastly increasing fleet sizes, far faster than the rate of population growth, in utter contradiction to your know-nothing assertions. A rational individual would look at this new information and incorporate it into her worldview, possibly leading to education and a change in viewpoint, but you're a loving nutbag and therefore just ignored it. And as for plenty of money, 2016 was the first time in years that profit margins even got near double digits. Back in 2014 they were making an average of a whole $6 per seat. Net margins for 1Q 2017 are under 5% for the industry as a whole. Moreover, the *airports* are a bottleneck. No matter how many planes get built and bought, that doesn't matter if there's not a gate for them to pull up at, and major airports are almost all already pushing the limits of capacity, which leads to the brittle cascading failures and cancellations that we see. Do you think Southwest air builds airports? Do you think if United doubled its fleet size that those planes would have places to land and take off from? You probably do, you idiot. Or do you think it will help poor people when their land gets eminent-domained to build more airports? Because it's sure not going to be Bezos or Pfizer whose land gets taken. Stop talking about things you demonstrably know nothing about.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 19:16
|
|
|
Slime posted:calm down little bronto, phanatic is a dumbass but he's making you look like a loving clown Tiny Brontosaurus Is Right
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 19:29
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:agglalaglglgaagglllaglggll drag me down the aisle daddy Make your money somewhere else, rentboy.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 19:38
|
|
|
Man $6 per seat really seems lo- quote:United Flights daily: 4500 * 365 * avg seats per plane: 210 * $6 a seat = $2.07 billion Poor struggling carriers :'(
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 20:18
|
|
|
Xen Tricks posted:Man $6 per seat really seems lo- If they had taken that $6/seat and put that money into additional airframes and made no profit at all, how many more A340s do you think that would buy them? Remember, you also need to pay for crew and O&M. That's not getting anyone more legroom.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 20:23
|
|
|
It would buy at least 20 with room left over, and also I forgot that the solitary sole source of income for an airline is ticket prices
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 20:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 20:56 |
|
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:You are the dumbest motherfucker alive. Turn on your monitor.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 20:30
|
|