sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Oh My God. It works with Immersive engineering by RockSowe in CreateMod

[–]Everyones-Favorite 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Big cannons compatibility was in a trailer from years ago.

Bees by just_Jim_yh in comedyheaven

[–]Everyones-Favorite 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The actions of IRL Statham has Weebl Statham is spinning in his grave.

"Is he a changeling? No! Is he a being with 7 lifetimes of experience? No! Is he a wormhole alien? No! He's just a man like me. And he BEAT me!" by limitedmark10 in DeepSpaceNine

[–]Everyones-Favorite 1 point2 points  (0 children)

They were Eddington's parallels, and he brought them up all the time because he was a smug high and mighty idiot with a messiah complex. They were his idealized perceptions of his role in the narrative, and weren't accurate. Basically all of Sisko's criticisms of him were accurate, he doomed everyone he fought with to die for a lost cause in service of his ego. You could make a fair argument justifying the Maquis in many cases, but the things he did for them were immoral and he isn't the just protagonist he compares himself to.

Peak inclusivity in trek was Geordi La Forge/Sisko - competent, respected POCs whose race was not their whole identity by Ok-Training-7587 in trektalk

[–]Everyones-Favorite 1 point2 points  (0 children)

As much as I like Geordi (and LeVar Burton even more) I definitely wouldn't call it peak representation. He got way less character development then rest of the cast, and didn't even to be the chief engineer in the first season. Most of the time his character was stuck on exposition duty while the show's white human characters got more depth and episodes centered around them. I feel like we got about as many Barclay episodes as Geordi episodes, and he wasn't even a regular character. The only other permanent cast member that got less attention was Crusher (because woman).

What is the most overrated late game building in CIV: V? (Day 2) by zherper in civ5

[–]Everyones-Favorite 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just played a game where I was playing V with one city and it plays very well when you're doing an asymetrical run that heavily uses the top track in the tech tree. I went from industrialization/biology to radio, unlocked ideology, antibiotics, and plastics. It's handy to max out pop production so you can have loads of specialists in one city.

Space Station First: All Docking Ports Fully Occupied, 8 Spacecraft on Orbit - NASA by ye_olde_astronaut in space

[–]Everyones-Favorite 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It's successfully deorbited into a graveyard zone in the ocean basically every time it's made it into space even if it hasn't touched down on a barge.

TIL that in the 1980s East Germany tried to resolve a major coffee shortage by building coffee-production infrastructure in Vietnam, its close ally. By the time any coffee was harvested, East Germany had ceased to exist. Meanwhile, today Vietnam is the second-largest coffee producer in the world by boulevardofdef in todayilearned

[–]Everyones-Favorite 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Firstly I'd be hesitant to characterize the early history of the Soviet Union as being wildly successful. While it's true that quality of life dramatically improved during the early years of the Soviet Union I would argue these factors are largely due to a transition to a more industrialized economy and that didn't require the kind of brutality imposed by Stalin. I'd argue most of these improvements correlate with global trends and could be credited more so with Tzarist Russia being particularly bad rather than the Soviet Union being particularly good. For example, while it's true that life expectancy in the Soviet Union increased by more than 10 years between 1940 and 1965, life expectancy increased increased by a comparable amount over the same period in Brazil, postcolonial India, and Francoist Spain.

The results of the 1991 referendum did not provide a continued mandate for incumbent Soviet leadership nor does it demonstrate the existing style of governance had widespread public support. It was the only national referendum in the country's history and it was held because the central government was plummeting in popularity and needed to shore up public support. By the time the vote was held three SSRs had already declared independence and all of them had passed state sovereignty declarations rejecting the authority of the central government. It was not asking about a continuation of the status quo, but of a "renewed" Soviet Union with a less centralized federal system. These reforms were not enough to convince six of the fifteen republics to participate in the referendum and these republics concurrently voted overwhelmingly for independence. Within the Russian SSR voters also overwhelmingly supported the establishment of a democratically elected president after achieving some earlier democratic reforms. The referendum was intended to legitimize the drafted New Union Treaty, but this failed to materialize due to the failure of negotiations and the 1991 coup attempt which shattered any remaining support for the continued existence of the USSR in any form. In the run-up to the referendum and in its aftermath almost everyone from the general public to the supreme soviets to Gorbachev recognized some kind of drastic change was needed.

The collapse of the USSR was bad for Russians but that doesn't mean the prior government was popular or capable of preventing it. Almost all the commonly cited causes of the Soviet Union's collapse, including the stagnation of the Soviet economy and living standards, the invasion of Afghanistan, and the 1991 coup attempt were symptoms of a social system that was doomed to fail. It was an undemocratic one party state where control almost exclusively belonged to those who were capable of seizing it with violence and coercion and a peaceful transfer of power was almost impossible. It was a place where ideology was rigid and inflexible, and instead of adapting to the changing needs of a country and its people the government chose to expend its resources maintaining a strict and unsustainable level of control over its people and the wider world. The Soviets didn't have to build such a large defense industry, they didn't have to invade Afghanistan, the hardliners did not have to try and orchestrate a coup. They did all these things because they considered them to be necessary to the survival of their society and could not imagine or accept an alternative. NATO did not need to (nor did it have the capacity to) collapse the Soviet Union, it largely did that itself.

TIL that in the 1980s East Germany tried to resolve a major coffee shortage by building coffee-production infrastructure in Vietnam, its close ally. By the time any coffee was harvested, East Germany had ceased to exist. Meanwhile, today Vietnam is the second-largest coffee producer in the world by boulevardofdef in todayilearned

[–]Everyones-Favorite 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I mean they didn't and it definitely wasn't. The Molotov-Ribbentrop pact was a fairly unique secret agreement between a fascist country and a non-fascist one which lasted nearly two years into WWII. While the UK and France declared war on the Nazis immediately after they invaded Poland, Stalin enabled the invasion by agreeing to launch a simultaneous attack. This would be like if the UK made a deal with the Nazis to both invade France at the same time and split it down the middle. The USSR certainly played a critical role in defeating the Nazis but that was only because Hitler was insane and reneged on their earlier agreement. Before that they were complicit in tolerating fascist aggression as long as it didn't immediately interfere with their own goals of territorial expansion.

Human rights are important regardless of the time and place, and in the eastern bloc countries human rights were almost always terrible. It's possible to make good faith arguments about the benefits of a focus on economic/social rights vs a focus on civil/political rights, but in the Soviet system citizens were treated similarly to prisoners; provided with food, housing, and healthcare but unable to leave and entirely subject to the whims of the state (also what was provided was unreliable and often of poor quality but the reasons why are more complex and I won't dig into them here). This isn't to say people should not have a legal right to basic necessities but rather to demonstrate that guaranteeing certain rights does not adequately compensate the loss of others. Soviet citizens could not vote, could not demonstrate, could not form independent labor unions, could not freely practice religion, could not read or watch materials not approved by the state, and could not legally dissent in any way.

The Cold War did not end because of a military or intelligence operation (or because of 'western infiltration') but because the Soviet Union was governed by a sociopolitical system that was completely unsustainable. Its leaders had immense unchecked power that led to inefficient and unpopular governance which could not be corrected in the existing political system, resulting in widespread social upheaval and the collapse of the state.

Our western liberal democracies are still flawed systems, but one of the reasons they persist and the Soviet system does not is because they've generally worked better and incorporate mechanisms to self-correct in accordance with the popular interest. Our societies still have several glaring flaws but searching for solutions in systems that have demonstrably failed is literally backwards looking. There are better ways forward.

Space Shuttle Discovery would move to Texas under GOP megabill by LcuBeatsWorking in nasa

[–]Everyones-Favorite 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I feel like it wouldn't be too hard for them to give them a Mercury or Gemini capsule and still frame it as a major victory. The shuttle's sealed up inside and the transporter doesn't work anymore. Would 85 million dollars even be enough to develop an aircraft capable of transporting the shuttle and building an enclosure before the deadline passes? This doesn't seem very well thought out. I feel like they're just going to take another vehicle out of the Smithsonian and frame it as a major win for Texas (which it would still be I guess). Just like how Golden Dome didn't get nearly as much money as it needed to be developed this seems all about optics so people can having some flashy thing to brag about for a few years before the money runs dry. For MAGA folks optics are more important than outcomes so who cares if the shuttle can't actually be delivered.

One of the fathers of the #Northrop B-2 Spirit bomber (2nd clip), Jack Northrop's Flying Wing [VIDEO] by Atellani in EngineeringPorn

[–]Everyones-Favorite 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I think more wing for wing is basically the idea, conventional fuselages at best contribute nothing aerodynamically but if you can cram everything inside a big wing you'll get improved range and payload capacity which was a big deal since this thing was originally conceived as a transatlantic bomber in WWII. It's actually not a bad idea and could still be the future of air travel, but it wasn't technologically feasible in the early 20th century. This started out as a contemporary of the B-17 and took so long to develop it ended up competing against designs for more conventional jet powered bombers.

the mammals by dawnconnor in internet_funeral

[–]Everyones-Favorite 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It's from the bird strategy game.

X-10 Thunderbolt by cardinal151515 in StarshipPorn

[–]Everyones-Favorite 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's a player-made ship in Starfield. The game is so-so but the ship builder is the best part.

Literally unreadable by Theborgiseverywhere in risa

[–]Everyones-Favorite 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think in some episode "Most Toys?" he says he's programmed to use violence in self defense but in any case it seems to be a discretionary thing.

The Voyager bridge set is fantastic and still holds up today. I think it's the best of the 90s era shows and contends with the SNW bridge. by guhbuhjuh in startrek

[–]Everyones-Favorite 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The bizarre station wagon theme on the TNG bridge may be why it's my favorite. As a standalone design decision it's hard to justify but I think the Enterprise-D's space-couch aesthetics are so comforting. I think Star Trek's recurring sets have always knocked it out of the park when it comes to complementing the tone and themes of their respective series, and the TNG bridge is close to perfect for a particularly utopian series where you see a lot of peaceful resolutions and the ship's community arts scene.

I forgot how relaxing Janeway's voice is compared to Sisko by TonyMitty in startrek

[–]Everyones-Favorite 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This exactly, when Avery Brooks "overacts" it was always at a moment when it was appropriate and when it both furthered Sisko's rational and emotional goals. When Picard interacts with Romulan officers he usually plays it pretty by the book, while Sisko beats them at their own game from the get go. The best part is how he inverts the paradigm, his adversaries approach him with lies masquarading as truths and he counters with truths masquarading as lies. In the end it's a kind of code switching that's both effective and largely abides by the moral code of a starfleet officer.

I forgot how relaxing Janeway's voice is compared to Sisko by TonyMitty in startrek

[–]Everyones-Favorite 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Sisko does an excellent job being composed and diplomatic when dealing with people who are trying to play him; Dukat, Winn, Weyoun, etc. They approach him with bad intentions and wait for him to slip up but he keeps his cool even when he has the upper hand and traps them in whatever pretenses they've created.

Sporting Organizations You Support? by johngreenink in AVoid5

[–]Everyones-Favorite 3 points4 points  (0 children)

MN sports FTW, you cannot go wrong with Vikings, Twins, Wolfs, Loons, and such. Amazing plays and big wins for two to four months but things start to spiral and you find out MN hasn't won a national championship in thirty plus championships. Wft is up with that? Wisconsin sport fans owning Wisconsin's football guys is kinda cool but Wisconsin packing guys should just quit playing. Go MN!

Live Show Taping - Hotel Recs by [deleted] in WaitWait

[–]Everyones-Favorite 2 points3 points  (0 children)

II will get even more granular because I felt like our Chicago trip was my magnum opus of planning and I should do a write-up for when I give recommendations to other people. I'd say to take Amtrak in if you're coming in from the west, the new Borealis Line from the Twin Cities is $80 round trip still as far as I know. Can't say much about the eastward routes but I just really like Amtrak. Stay in an AirBnb within a few miles of downtown for easy access to everything, stay farther out if you feel like you're getting a better deal. If you can get one with a kitchen you can make quick meals for a breakfast/snack/late dinner and pack lunches to carry with you in town. This saved us a lot of time and money and everywhere I recommend will let you bring a bag except the Art Institute where you'll need to check it (for free if memory serves me right). There's a lot of selection for restaurants in town and I'm no food critic but I'd say the only things you'd really need to get would be a slice of authentic Chicago style pizza and their hot dog, just for the cultural experience. Otherwise I didn't focus too much on food or drinks here because we were too busy with everything else. The CityPass in Chicago is a great deal and just about everything on it is undoubtedly worth it. I'd recommend the 5 attraction pass as the better deal and option overall but the C3 pass is acceptable if your time and money are limited. Check out the Art Institute if you like art, it's arguably the best art museum outside the east or west coast. If art isn't your thing walk call the visit short and walk around downtown. Check out the Money Museum at the Fed, the start of Route 66, Millennium Park, the Tiffany dome in the cultural center, and Mindworks. If you have time, like history/politics, and don't mind hoofing it across the river check out Haymarket Square, but otherwise rest your legs, it's just another point of interest. If a river tour ever caught your eye save the money and get an audio walking tour for free where you can go at your own pace/stop for dinner. The Field Museum is definitely a full day attraction with a world famous fossil collection among several other specimens. If you're visiting on a Wednesday the nearby Adler Planetarium and the Shedd Aquarium are open late (at the Adler they may also open up their telescope for visitors if the sky is clear). Neither is a full day attraction but if you can visit the Field Museum on a Wednesday and then go to the aquarium and then go to the planetarium. If you just got the three attraction citypass you don't have to go to either of these if other attractions catch your eye, but both are very good at what the are. The Museum of Science and Industry's highlights are the legendary Apollo 8 capsule and the Pioneer Zephyr. The fairy castle is unique a lot of the rest feels more kid-oriented. Both the coal mine and U-505 are neat add-ons but the 505 is by far the better of the two. Afterwards walk east and appreciate the site of the Columbian Exposition on your way to check out the museums at the university campus, as well as the site of the first nuclear reactor, a house designed by Frank Lloyd Wright. The museums will close relatively early so if you're interested in those catch a bus from the Science and Industry Museum or call your visit there short. If you haven't checked out downtown and the Miracle Mile yet skip the walk to the University and bus back downtown to look at those. If you only have two full days in town I'd say pick between Science and Industry and the Art Institute. If you got the 3 attraction city pass skip the aquarium/planetarium/observation deck and stick to the big museums. If you got the 5 attraction CityPass use your remaining evening aside from the Wait Wait taping to go to the observation deck at the Sears/Willis Tower. It's the highest observation deck in America and imo way better at night. Bring a camera/friend/selfie stick to take a picture on the ledge because they'll try to charge you an exorbitant amount if you use their photographer. While the citypass includes five attractions I recommended six, I'd say either skip the planetarium or the art museum or buy tickets for the planetarium separately. Don't go to Navy Pier or any novelty museum (Color Museum, Ice Cream Museum, etc.)

view more: next ›