exploded mummy posted:

https://twitter.com/BillyCorben/status/974372505954803712?s=19

Xaris posted:

its florida, im sure theres a law preventing shielding construction companies from liability or something lolworthy

Main Paineframe posted:

Florida

also it seems that the bridge was built using a new methodology called Accelerated Bridge Construction, which the university was a big proponent of and had an entire center devoted to researching, so the bidding process probably wasn't quite on the up-and-up. hard to tell how much of it is really new and how much is just buzzwords, tho

Main Paineframe posted:

Florida

also it seems that the bridge was built using a new methodology called Accelerated Bridge Construction, which the university was a big proponent of and had an entire center devoted to researching, so the bidding process probably wasn't quite on the up-and-up. hard to tell how much of it is really new and how much is just buzzwords, tho

Sagebrush posted:

this reminds me of how the F-35 was designed with some kind of innovative new project management strategy called Concurrent Development that is meant to save time and money and basically it means you start production on the aircraft before the development is finished. e.g. you to manufacture the wings when the design is finished and then you start to work on the engine while the wings are ramping up production and so on. if you need to make changes later bc the engine couldn't make the power you want and you need bigger wings or w/e then you just go back afterwards and retrofit the modified parts to the old airframes. easy!

if you're thinking "but wouldn't that be likely to make things cost more and take longer?" then you are smarter than the entire pentagon

exploded mummy posted:

that isn't concurrent development

quote:

“Concurrency” is a term in Pentagon parlance that means putting something into production while it’s still in testing, or not even tested really at all. The fruition of this crazy concept is the cumulative result of one of the best sales jobs of all time by defense contractors, an over-eager Department of Defense leadership and a low-information, special-interest obsessed Congress. It has nearly shattered the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program and now this cancer has migrated to an even more volatile place, aboard America’s $17B next generation supercarrier, the USS Gerald R. Ford.

The idea that a weapons manufacturer, aided by computer modeling, modern material science and other fragmented improvements in design and construction techniques realized over the last 20 years, can design something so complex yet so perfect on the first try, that testing it is more of a formality than a necessity, is totally strange. This bizarre notion literally goes against every historical trend when it comes to weapons procurement, including many hard learned and expensive lessons of the past. Furthermore, it goes against basic logic. Why purchase something en masse, especially something very expensive, extremely complex, and something that has huge national defense implications, without even verifying its effectiveness first?

Somehow, the DoD, defense contractors and Congress suddenly believed that they could collectively field game changing weapons that were flawless right out of the box, even though they have never really done such a thing before.

It was, and remains, totally absurd.

A concept created out of thin air. A bucket full of half measures that were sold as a panacea for defense procurement woes. In other words, the epitome of “tell them what they want to hear.”

A great business strategy but a horrific defense strategy.

H.P. Hovercraft posted:

hahahahahaha wtf

CommunistPancake posted:

Just-In-Timeberlake posted:

It barely lasted 100 hours, much less 100 years.

Sagebrush posted:

this reminds me of how the F-35 was designed with some kind of innovative new project management strategy called Concurrent Development that is meant to save time and money and basically it means you start production on the aircraft before the development is finished. e.g. you to manufacture the wings when the design is finished and then you start to work on the engine while the wings are ramping up production and so on. if you need to make changes later bc the engine couldn't make the power you want and you need bigger wings or w/e then you just go back afterwards and retrofit the modified parts to the old airframes. easy!

if you're thinking "but wouldn't that be likely to make things cost more and take longer?" then you are smarter than the entire pentagon

hobbesmaster posted:

https://twitter.com/billycorben/status/974378131720204288?s=21

civil engineers aren’t real engineers, just like computer programmers

infernal machines posted:

Xaris posted:

its florida, im sure theres a law preventing shielding construction companies from liability or something lolworthy

Endless Mike posted:

this was installed on sunday

https://twitter.com/BoingBoing/status/974355316111486976

quote:

Rihanna posted an Instagram Story today to denounce Snapchat after the platform showed an offensive ad featuring the artist to users. The ad was for a smartphone game called Would You Rather that appeared inside Snapchat over the weekend asking users if they would rather slap Rihanna or punch Chris Brown.

cinci zoo sniper posted:

good loving job snapchat https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/15/17124472/snapchat-advertisement-domestic-violence-rihanna-chris-brown

Alhazred posted:

How many slaps do you think she deserves for the blasphemous act of "posing suggestively"?

poptart_fairy posted:

None at all. A dope slap for doing so on religious sites wouldn't be unwarranted though, I think.

infernal machines posted:

savage

infernal machines posted:

people just won't stop hitting blameless self-driving vehicles: tori edition

Just-In-Timeberlake posted:

god loving drat it i hate to have to defend uber but that lady is 100% at fault and that headline is pretty much the inverse of what happened

quote:

The driver of the other car was Jessica McLemore, a mother of three children

Just-In-Timeberlake posted:

god loving drat it i hate to have to defend uber but that lady is 100% at fault and that headline is pretty much the inverse of what happened

Shaggar posted:

also I like the other article they link where a self driving car aborts a lane change because it would have been unsafe and side swipes a motorcycle that illegally entered the half of the lane the car had just left.

infernal machines posted:

literally so stupid they have to wear helmets

Sagebrush posted:

here is my favorite story about mpg idiocy

in canada, all the dealerships used to advertise cars' fuel efficiency in mpg. yeah we buy fuel in litres and drive in kilometres, but canada only went fully metric in the 80s so most adults are still aware of what a gallon and a mile are. furthermore, we get a ton of american tv and other media, so we're used to seeing those figures, and in any case few people really use the numbers to try and work out how much fuel they need or whatever -- it's just for comparing one car against another. it worked fine and everyone knew that a 10mpg car was bad and a 35mpg one was good.

BUT about fifteen years ago the canadian government said NO! we are a metric nation and you must use metric figures for all sales and advertising! and the metric units for fuel consumption are litres per 100km, l/100km! so all the dealers had to switch over to displaying fuel consumption this way.

everyone hated that. it's an extremely confusing way of writing it (no one cares how many litres of fuel they have to buy to go 100km; if they were doing the calculations, it would be how many kilometres they can go on one litres) and the nature of the ratio makes it very nonlinear at the common ranges. a car that gets 3l/100km is way, way better than one that uses 5l/100km, but one that does 17l is not that different from one that does 20l. mathematically this makes sense but to an average human it is obscure and confusing. furthermore, no one had any idea what the new units meant, or whether their car that gets 11l/100km is better or worse than their old jeep that did 14mpg.

so there was a big angry response from both consumers and dealers. eventually, the government did give in. they said "okay, fine, you still have to put the l/100km figure on the sticker, but you can use miles per gallon as well if you want..."

"...BUT we are not some kind of god damned americans so you cannot use that goddamned american gallon! we still think of ourselves as british subjects so you will use the IMPERIAL gallon when writing the mpg figures! yes, that will make everyone happy. now shut up and don't bother us again!"

and so the result now is that cars in canada have their fuel consumption posted in l/100km, which no one on the planet understands, and their fuel economy in mpg_imp, which is a 20% larger figure than the american mpg number and thus not directly comparable to any statistics from that country.

fin

Optimus_Rhyme posted:

https://twitter.com/chRIHssy/status/974390531865432067?s=19

infernal machines posted:

people just won't stop hitting blameless self-driving vehicles: tori edition

Pittsburgh Fentanyl Cloud posted:

Lol Canada is so hosed up and dumb