That's nice, but how does that help people who, to this day, can't get any 'NBN' other than satellite?
By that token, I would also recommend the one-season X-Files spin-off 'The Lone Gunmen'. It can come across as a bit hokey for the first few episodes, but they found their pace and it became really enjoyable. I don't think it was ever meant to be more than a single - and, by then-current standards, short - season but I really enjoyed it. The show blended the comic relief of the three geeks from the main series with some more serious storytelling and even had an episode with a plot that resembled a later real-life world-changing event.
Ich bin 2004 ausgewandert, und habe beide Stücke noch in Erinnerung als vor meiner Auswanderung geschehen.
Scheisse, ich werde alt...
Devil's advocacy is supposed to be, ultimately, constructive to the discussion. If that's what you're doing, then good on you. A lot of people just do it to throw a spanner in the works.
Boss announces he will break the law.
The prices will stay the same. Manufacturers will just make more profit.
'Born in the USA' did not 'fail to convey' what it was about. It was just wilfully misinterpreted.
Wouldn't be the first time he has 'crossed legal lines'.
However, wouldn't it be great if it was the last time?
These people never walk back their bullshit. When called out on it, they will double down. When proven wrong, they will change the topic. But they need to be seen as strong, and right. Admitting that you're wrong or even apologising is neither - it's weak, and it can create doubt. If they were wrong about this, then what else are they wrong about?
They radicalise their followers with lies and falsehoods, and they can only keep that up if they are not seen as being wrong about what they say. They spread their lies with confidence and zeal, and if reality disagrees, then reality is wrong.
It is surprisingly easy to not order things off of Amazon, too.
There is absolutely nothing complex about this matter. A woman had a physical advantage over another woman, and is immediately suspected of not being a 'real woman'. This shit is as old as time itself, and it would never happen to a man.
Good on this kid for going to such lengths to verify his hypothesis and show a serious weakness in railway infrastructure. I hope he goes on to become a serious railway enthusiast and advocate for safe, efficient rail.
However, there are way too many factors in the number of derailments and safety incidents in US rail operations to pin them down to this one issue. Once the major operators embarked on a journey to squeeze more and more money out of the business, a lot of things happened. Trains became longer - excessively so. Used to be that a train 1.4 miles long was considered massive. These days they are the norm. Can you imagine a train so long that, in hilly terrain, sections of it are being dragged uphill while other sections are pushing downhill?
Reductions in staff, motive power fleets and maintenance have led to trains being badly composed, with loads being distributed in a less than optimal way. An old railway man once told me that the only time he broke a train was when he, in a rush and under pressure, agreed to attach a rake of fully loaded freight cars to the end of a train of empties. Unequal load distribution played a role in a number major derailment incidents, among them a derailment in Hyndman, PA, which required the town to be evacuated for several days.
ProPublica have a series of articles regarding rail safety, and specifically one about the dangers of long trains. So while the worn out springs certainly don't help, they are only one of many things that are impacting rail safety, and probably not even the lowest hanging fruit.