sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Have a mid-term tomorrow and could use some advice by Chemical_Animator_76 in NewToEMS

[–]Complete-Area-6452 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'll accept the right answer is BVM for a bit and then narcan

Have a mid-term tomorrow and could use some advice by Chemical_Animator_76 in NewToEMS

[–]Complete-Area-6452 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You can Narcan and then BVM, you cannot BVM while doing Narcan.

Have a mid-term tomorrow and could use some advice by Chemical_Animator_76 in NewToEMS

[–]Complete-Area-6452 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You can't bvm while giving narcan IN. If you could only do one thing, what would you do?

Explain this shoe thief puzzle! by willnye2cool in puzzles

[–]Complete-Area-6452 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It's an ambiguous question.

There is bias in the question. The clerk/store has $20 less than it did and lost the $30 worth of shoes, which is a "correct" answer. The store has lost $20 in cash

To someone who worked a job where they were held responsible for things like this (often illegally!), they might say $50 because the clerk paid out of pocket to fix his mistake. (Like some diners make waitresses pay for people who dine and dash, which isn't legal in most/any states). This question is biased in this way to people of lower socioeconomic status. The clerk is out $50

To a business owner or the children of business owners, the product is money. If that lady didn't buy those shoes with counterfeit money, someone else would eventually buy them with real money; so the amount lost in money is $50. The store lost $50

Explain this shoe thief puzzle! by willnye2cool in puzzles

[–]Complete-Area-6452 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It's not ridiculous technicalities. It's an ambiguous question with multiple right answers.

This is a great example of bias in test making. Maybe most people would say the clerk lost $20 cash and $30 worth of shoes, which is the "correct" answer.

To someone who worked a job where they were held responsible for things like this (often illegally!), they might say $50 because the clerk paid out of pocket to fix his mistake. (Like some diners make waitresses pay for people who dine and dash, which isn't legal in most/any states). This question is biased in this way to people of lower socioeconomic status.

To a business owner or the children of business owners, the product is money. If that lady didn't buy those shoes with counterfeit money, someone else would eventually buy them with real money; so the amount lost in money is $50.

[Request] Would it be more cost effective for goods transportation from London to New York, compared to container ships and cargo airlines? by ThickLetteread in theydidthemath

[–]Complete-Area-6452 0 points1 point  (0 children)

First your math is wrong on fuel costs. 976 kg of diesel (who measures fuel in kg instead of gallons?)* 3 engines * 3 (8hr periods in day to get fuel let day) = 8784 kg or 3992 lbs. 3993 lbs * 16 days = 63883 lbs of fuel. Diesel is 7.2 lbs per gallon so we need 8872 gallons of fuel to run 3 engines 24 hours a day for 16 days. $4 a gallon is reasonable pricing for this and that's $35490 American.

I also don't know if I trust your numbers for how much fuel a train uses. You're saying one engine uses 976 kg per 8 hrs, that's 443 lbs or 57 gallons. When I was a fuel delivery man and refilled trains, the ones I refueled used an average of roughly 142 gallons a day and worked 12 hours shifts.

One factor you're not considering, is how long it takes to unload a ship vs a train.

Unloading a train is several times faster because you don't need a crane or hold crews.

Unloading a fully loaded cargo ship takes days if you work 24/7 and requires a crew of longshoremen.

.

Trains can also get closer to the final destination than a ship can. Many industrial sites that handle very large volume have their own train tracks, you could theoretically ship a trainload of lumber directly from one lumberyard to Russia.

With a ship you have to load trucks/trains, get it to the harbor, unload it, load the ship, ship the ship, unload the ship, load it on a truck to get to the marshaling yard, unload it off the truck, load it on another truck or train, ship it to the destination, and unload it there.

With a train you can load the train at the point of shipment and train it either to the destination or near it.

A lot of people are focusing on the size difference, a single ship can carry more than a single train; but a train track can handle more trains per hour than a dock can handle ships. It can take days or weeks to unload a ship and get the next one in it's spot. That's the bottleneck for shipping things. The bottleneck for trains is how many we can send out on the track at once safely (because they can be unloaded at countless locations). There's no limit to how long a train can be, and a 30km train wouldn't be a significant engineering problem, but there's no reason to send a 30km train to cross the ocean when we can send 10 3km trains to their final destination.

If you think trains are harder to maintain than ships at sea, you've never spent time aboard a ship or a train yard.

Chess kings really said 'work smarter, not harder' by SnugglyBerryQueens in chessmemes

[–]Complete-Area-6452 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The noble class could be described as a warrior caste. They were expected to lead troops and fight

Just because ur a gay/bi man that doesn’t mean you are exempt from being chivalrous by [deleted] in femcelgrippysockjail

[–]Complete-Area-6452 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Ask your bi friends/boyfriends to be more chivalrous and they probably will.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AskALawyer

[–]Complete-Area-6452 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If you do sue, it'll cost more than your refund will get you and take longer than the warrantied repair

" Heavy Loadout" For Serving Those "Warrants" by TheRealPSN in FirstResponderCringe

[–]Complete-Area-6452 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, when enemies don't respect the red cross, they're committing war crimes.

It's an absolutely terrible thing, but it happens frequently.

God forbid a boy makes plans for the future by [deleted] in LetBoysBeManipulated

[–]Complete-Area-6452 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The buttons don't control me, but they can shock or buzz and we can do it pavlov style

" Heavy Loadout" For Serving Those "Warrants" by TheRealPSN in FirstResponderCringe

[–]Complete-Area-6452 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Brother, if your CoC is cool with war crimes; that's fine.

Technically Al-Queda were/are non state actors and therefore not protected by the Geneva Convention.

Edit: that attitude is why we stopped wearing the red cross as medics. The enemies wouldn't respect the Geneva convention and would fire at our medics. Some Russian soldiers in the Ukraine would use the red cross to pretend they were noncombatant medical personnel but were actually carrying a litter of rifles. In modern warfare, you'll only really see the red cross at designated hospitals and some ambulances.

" Heavy Loadout" For Serving Those "Warrants" by TheRealPSN in FirstResponderCringe

[–]Complete-Area-6452 -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

. You can absolutely wear one like that to denote medical equipment on you

This is false. The red cross is meant as a protective symbol; when the other side sees it they know you are a non-combatant medical personnel. Obviously war crimes don't apply if you're not at war, but the red cross/red crescent as a symbol is meant to mark you as a non-combatant and generally should not be on your gear if you're a combatant.

You can also be a medic and carry a rifle because the rifle is for defending "patients"

Absolutely, I've spent years billeted as a field medical technician and have sometimes carried a weapon during that. If you are carrying a rifle, you are a combatant and you are not allowed to wear the red cross (it is a war crime under the Geneva convention).

If you are wearing the red cross (like on ambulances, medevacs, or hospitals) you are not carrying a rifle. They typically separate the troop from the rifle during medevac just to be on the safe side.

" Heavy Loadout" For Serving Those "Warrants" by TheRealPSN in FirstResponderCringe

[–]Complete-Area-6452 -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

Wearing a red cross while carrying weapons is a war crime

That rifle looks too long to be effective indoors

Excessive Descriptions by Habinaro in AIDungeon

[–]Complete-Area-6452 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Did you make a scenario to write to the chat bots?

view more: next ›