- Joined
- Nov 4, 2024
Cathode ray dude? Here is a post with him earlier ITT:I have him confiused with another who does the same content and now I can't remember that name
Probably as much "woman" as Cathode Ray Dude's "girlfriend."
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Cathode ray dude? Here is a post with him earlier ITT:I have him confiused with another who does the same content and now I can't remember that name
Probably as much "woman" as Cathode Ray Dude's "girlfriend."
Over here we have an influx of ukrainians who fled the war and they took their possesions with them. Now I don't know what are the traffic laws in Ukraine but (most of?) their cars have US-style indicator lights on the rear.The next video in my subscriptions was him seething like a redditor that car's rear turn signals weren't yellow and claiming it would cause tons of deaths.
of course the Indian faggot would just accuse people of having troon boyfriends. and literally everyone here just assumes and gives the stickers. shame on all of you. especially SaidNoOneEverThis guy's "partner" is a hilarious troon. They tried to do a few videos and even a new channel but then wiped all history of it from the web after the backlash.
EDIT: I am mistaken and have him confused with another YT techfag - please unhighlight while I wander off in shame
I legitimately have no idea what movie you're talking about, that's literally just the common name of the scenario named after the original scientist who concieved of it. Does it really even matter if it's been in a movie when it's still a real, mathematically rigourous, concern? It also doesn't really matter how low the orbit is; when things collide in space going tens of thousands of kph the fragments don't just plummet Earth-wards, they are launched in all directions regardless of what orbital zone they were originally placed in. Could it be "better" to be in the very low range? Maybe? But I doubt it would really change much if there are enough of them there and some catastrophic collision were to occur which sent debris into higher orbits in amounts sufficient enough to interfere with satellites in the LEO range or further. Regardless of what arbitrary zone they are placed in, putting too many satellites into space could have very dangerous consequences; full stop. Also Elon hasn't just been discussing Starlink, he at some point said he wants to launch a million satellites into orbit as part of some sort of orbital AI data cluster. Like a data center circling the planet explicitly for AI. Not sure what was the rationale given as to WHY though, maybe to save money on energy costs by using solar or something?
You are both wrong, stop being retarded. The first thing to understand is that the amount of time it takes something to deorbit naturally is astronomically different depending on how much air resistance it encounters. And the amount of air resistance something encounters depends on it's altitude because the further from earth it is the more sparse the atmosphere is. For example 500km (starlink satellite) will deorbit on it's own in about 5 years. Something in geostationary orbit (old TV satellite) is tens of thousands of years.Kessler syndrome is pretty much fake, and even if it killed all the satellites it would only last about five years.
'But muh collisions' you say. Well the other thing to understand is that because of the energies involved in orbit when things explode or crash into each other they turn into a cloud of debris... in the same orbit. And being in the same orbit they are subject to the same amount of air resistance and will deorbit naturally on roughly the same timescale. Because of this starlink is not really a risk for long-term kessler syndrome. In fact if it happened to starlink it would resolve in a couple years and we would probably get robust regulation regarding space debris as a result so it might be a net positive. If nothing goes wrong until there's tons of shit in GEO and something happens up there it could be much worse.At the altitude starlink satellites orbit at the debris would deorbit within a year or two.

We aren't talking about an astroid belt, frankly that comparison is fucking farcical. You're making claims that are directly contradictory unless all of the "debris" are actually satellite seeking weapons. Satelitrs aren't that big, if there is so much junk that you can't have satellites then the cloud is going to interact with its self. You cant have it both ways,Secondly even if everything is turned into a debris shower with millions or billions of pieces total collisions will still be relatively rare. Asteroid belts are not like they're depicted in the movies.
You can have it "both ways" when one way is 'a single collision with an active satellite the size of a football field that has a years or decades long lifespan is catastrophic' and the other way is 'the collision chance per year for one piece of debris the size of a ball bearing is very low * millions or billions'.We aren't talking about an astroid belt, frankly that comparison is fucking farcical. You're making claims that are directly contradictory unless all of the "debris" are actually satellite seeking weapons. Satelitrs aren't that big, if there is so much junk that you can't have satellites then the cloud is going to interact with its self. You cant have it both ways,
Its even better when you find out his wife is a failed influencer because she got paralyzed in a drunk driving accident.He started one of his main channel videos with BLM nonsense when the riots kicked off in 2020. He also whined a lot about America not allowing Huawei phones, for reasons obvious to everyone but him. That guy's insufferable enough for me to keep on my Don't Recommend This Channel list.
Car taxes subsidize every other form of transport. That's how cheap and ubiquitous they really are once they stop taking the money out of the cookie jar. Asphalt roads are the cheapest form of passage that they pave dirt roads because its cheaper than sending equipment to repair them every year.A lot of travel is subsidized, fuel for cars, cars themselves and roads. So you can subsidize trains or metros as well.
They aren't cool, they are romantic. An idolized vision of a time and place long since passed. Its why Europe loves them. Trains are just really expensive busses that can't do anything a bus can do, like detour. They have all the downsides of motor vehicles and airplane travel and zero upside.At the one hand trains are cool. They're big and efficient. They're more comfortable than buses and are pretty fast. Lovely to just sit in one and read a book, while the train gets you to your destination. If you care about electrification, you can run lines over them. No need for massive batteries. A good train connection replaced air travel from north to south in Italy. The flight simply wasn't feasible any more once the train was in place.
Or you can stop wasting money and do things correctly. Why is that never the answer ?Accept you're going to burn a ton of money on subsidies, it's not going to be profitable, and your benefits will be indirect (better transport for your citizens, less cars on roads
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_submarine_K-43Contrary to popular perception, the Chakra was partially manned and controlled by the Soviet crew, who reportedly did not allow Indians into the missile room and into the reactor compartment despite repeated Indian requests and efforts, the soviets refused. The submarine also encountered multiple equipment failures and corrosions due to operating in the hot, humid and saline waters of the Indian Ocean. The quality of spare parts and services from the Soviet Navy was lackluster, with several batches being sent with poor quality controls, leading to a fire while docked. This incident is believed to be a reason for the termination of the contract after 3 years by India.
Asphalt roads need a lot of maintenance, that's why in cities they use brick roads.Car taxes subsidize every other form of transport. That's how cheap and ubiquitous they really are once they stop taking the money out of the cookie jar. Asphalt roads are the cheapest form of passage that they pave dirt roads because its cheaper than sending equipment to repair them every year.
They're resource efficient in moving shit from A to B.zero upside.
Because cars are space inefficient and cars end up benefitting from trains removing a bunch of daily commuters.do things correctly. Why is that never the answer ?
okay, youre just retardedThey aren't cool
Just say you're a European urbanite, nigga.Asphalt roads need a lot of maintenance, that's why in cities they use brick roads.
They're resource efficient in moving shit from A to B.
Because cars are space inefficient and cars end up benefitting from trains removing a bunch of daily commuters.
okay, youre just retarded
At least in the US, I don't think anybody has built a brick street for.normal traffic in a hundred years.Asphalt roads need a lot of maintenance, that's why in cities they use brick roads
We are talking about passenger traffic not freight.Asphalt roads need a lot of maintenance, that's why in cities they use brick roads.
Yeah the one good thing trains are great at, which has nothing to do with any of your arguments.They're resource efficient in moving shit from A to B.
Oh look a eurocuck who hates cars can't help but showcase it. Passenger trains cause more traffic in most places because they are under utilized since everyone would prefer to use cars if they could afford to. So urbanists attempt to tax and legislate them out of existence to force people to use public transport. Its never about efficiency. Its about forcing other people to pay for their passion projects no matter the cost. Youve already admitted it.Because cars are space inefficient and cars end up benefitting from trains removing a bunch of daily commuters.
Its ok your apartment isn't big enough for a model train set so you take it out on everyone.okay, youre just retarded
And hotels. Gives me issues sometimes when I'm over there. I don't particularly care about all this outlet and plug spergery, but I do like the stability of the eurocuck CEE 7.Ever trued to plug something in at a airport? That's the only time I've had a socket that was a blown out whore.
Dunno, pretty sure we're allowed to do that. Yeah, it's not more than a few bucks and minutes, but it'd still annoy me if I had to do that regularly just because the outlet wears out. I've only done it when the outlet broke.I know Euro and Canada cucks aren't allowed to do more than plug in a cord without a license, but changing outlets is less than a few dollars and a couple minutes of your time.
I don't think i'd call every ten or twenty years (depending on usage) "on the regular" but i know i'd call a loose outlet "broken".Yeah, it's not more than a few bucks and minutes, but it'd still annoy me if I had to do that regularly just because the outlet wears out. I've only done it when the outlet broke.
Yeah I meant when the outlet is actually cracked or something since they don't really get loose here.I don't think i'd call every ten or twenty years (depending on usage) "on the regular" but i know i'd call a loose outlet "broken".
You don't wait until something falls apart on the inside to replace it, that's the behavior of a nigger who rents out a crackhouse.