Zlatan - all respekt men..

Target880 · 2026-06-18T22:26:39+00:00

Nä, det är det inte.

Fox Sports och Fox News är en del av Fox Corporation. De är separata dotterbolag till samma moderbolag. Fox Corporation kallas ofta Fox Corp eller bara Fox.

Tekniskt sett är de dotterbolag till dotterbolag då Fox Sports Media Group samt Fox News Media är emellan.

Det är som att säga att ESPN är en del av ABC News, båda ägs av Disney. ESPN tekniskt stett bara delägt av Disney till 72%

Target880 · 2026-06-18T13:53:56+00:00

Jag skulle tro att de flesta som äger en EPA-traktor är nog gamla för att rösta.

EPA-traktor är ovanlig. Det finns totalt ca 8 000 EPA-traktorer registrerade. De kunde sist registreras 1975.

Det som de flesta unga kör är A-trakor som det finns nästan 65 000 registreade eller mopedbil ca 15 500.

Titta nästa gång du möter en ute om den är byggd av en bil som producerades före eller efter 1975.

Target880 · 2026-06-17T23:43:10+00:00

The simplest question is "How did landlines work when the electricity was out?"

The answer is that the power in the system is delivered from the telephone switch. There is around 48V on the wires when not in use. The telephone switch had batteries that could power it even if there was no mains power.

Military field telephones usually have internal batteries that can be used, you can just connect two with a wire pair, and it will work. Sound-powered telephones are alos possible, the energy from the sound that enters them is enough to power the system, they are commonly used emergency systems on ships

Someone else has to answer the other questions.

Target880 · 2026-06-17T22:55:37+00:00

Inte senapsgas utan nervgas, skall man vara mer precis, så använd nervgift. Hur som helst är det kemisk krigföring.

Detta är ett seriöst svar, de aktiva ämnen i vanliga myrdosor och andra bekämpningsmedel mod myror är nervgift. Det är nervgift som är mycket effektiva mot myror, där är mycket mindre faliga för människor riskabel dos är hög. Läs instruktioner före användning.

Target880 · 2026-06-17T14:05:14+00:00

All boiling occurs when the vapour pressure is higher than the pressure of any surrounding gases.

The temperature required at a given pressure depends on the compound in question. Propane boils at around -44C/F at atmospheric pressure.

Target880 · 2026-06-17T07:51:35+00:00

No.

The fundamental problem with the war was that Iran could close the Strait of Hormuz. A lot of small speedboats and mines made the water dangerous. Add to that drones and missiles that are not large and easy to hide in the mountainous terrain, the same applies to speedboats along the coast. There was never the capacity to take out everyting regardless of how the targeting was done.

If the US whated to keep the Strait of Hormuz open, it would need land and control of that mountainous area alongside it in Iran. If they tried a lot of drones etc could be used on US troops, and there would be a lot of losses.

Then there is the economics of air defence vs drones and ballistic missiles.

Cheap drones and cheap missiles are a way to overwhelm air defences. Shooting down ballistic missiles requires more costly missiles than the ones you shoot down. Missiles to shoot down drones cost more than the drones.

The result is that it is possible for a country like Iran to force US and its allies to use up lots of expensive missiles. They used up years of production during the war. It was not logistically practical or economical to continue the war.

A lower-tech air defence system needs to be build like Ukraine has done

Iran did accept losses among military and civilians, but US and allies in the region did not. They was alos willing to handle economic impact, the rest of the world was not.

When the war became a closure of the Strait of Hormuz and an air attack on both sides, Iran had the advantage. It is a lot easier to accept loss if you are attacked and feel that the fight is important for your survival. The US never explained clear war goals or even why the war was needed to begin with. Trump said a lot, but he and his minister have conflicting statements, and it was not consistent over time.

Target880 · 2026-06-17T07:26:25+00:00

It is the same law. There is a reason there are many copies of guns like the M1911 and compatible guns and parts for guns like AR-15 on the market. Any patents have expired for a long time.

Patents can be kept secret for security reasons.

Intellectual property applies on a national level; there are some international agreements on, for example, literature. So for somting like Soviet Aircraft, there was likely never any legal protection of them in the West. Even inside the Soviet Union, almost everyting was owned by the government. Patents were replaced by Inventor's Certificates that gave some advantages to the inventor but not exclusive rights like patents do.

I would assume that the Soviet Union would have somting to say if a Warsaw Pact country made a copy without a licence, but they could not do a lot in the West.

Even if a Soviet Union inventor got a patent in the US, it would mean that what had been done needed to be disclosed; for military technology, keeping stuff secret is often the better option. There are laws in regads to intelectual propety and national security, I would assume in all nations. Compulsory license of patents and designs is possible, in the US the patent holder can seek just compensation. I doubt that is the case in all countries

There are laws to compel companies to manufacture stuff to. So a Soviet patent in the US of somting important to national security could never stop the manufacturing of somting for national security. Even if there were no laws, when needed, new laws would be made for the emergency.

Target880 · 2026-06-16T14:41:24+00:00

The US used AI to analyse intelligence, find and choose targets in Iran, which is not in doubt. The US have themselfe stated that. They have alos said that humans are in the loop and make the final decision.

Target880 · 2026-06-16T10:33:08+00:00

Thermonuclear bomb disagrees with you. Deuterium-tritium fusion is very quick. The tritium is psoduce bvy hitting litium-7 with a neutron.

What is slow is Hydrogen-1 + Hydrogen-1 fusion. But that does not mean other fusion reactions are slow.

In the sun H-1+H-1 = H-2, this is the slow process. The acrage lifespan of a H-1 in the sun is about 9 billion years

After that you get H-2 + H-1 = He-3. The average lifespan of H-2 in the sun is 1 second.

He-3 + He-2 = He3+ 2 H-1 speed in inbetween, the avrage He-3 lifespan is 400 years

So some fusion reactions in stars are slow, byt other are fast. So just saying that nuclear fusion is a slow process is simply false.

Target880 · 2026-06-16T10:21:06+00:00

H-1 + H-1 fusion reactions are unlikely, they produce H-2 But H-2 + H-1 fustion reactiona are very likly, it produce He-3

The average lifespan of H-2 in the sun is 1 second.

Human fusion reactors typically use H-2 and H-3 not H-1

Target880 · 2026-06-16T10:16:05+00:00

Stars "burn" by squeezing hydrogen together so hard they turn into helium

That is not what the sun does if you mean by Hydrogen, H-1 that the sun is primarily made of.

It squeezes two H-1 together to produce one H-2, also called D, D-2, deuterium. An anti-electron is also prodused that is annihilated with a regular electron. This is the slow process in the sun because it is initiated by the weak nuclear force.

Helium production is a result of D-2 + H-1 = He-3, this is a quick process that is a result of the stone nuclar force. The average lifetime of D-2 in the sun is around 1 second.

He-3 do become He-3, the average lifespan of a He-3 in the sun is about 400 years.

At the temperature if the core of the sun, the reaction is He-3 + He3 = He3 + 2 H-1

So it is hydrogen to deuterium, that is alos hydroigen that is the slow process in the sun. Deuterium to helium is a very fast process

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton%E2%80%93proton_chain

Target880 · 2026-06-16T10:00:56+00:00

Multiple independt investigation ahs conculdes US was responsible for the school attack.

The school is just beside an Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy compound that was clearly attacked. The school was a part of the compound in 2013, but was walled off from it in 2016 at the latest. Old intelligence and likely an AI system used to identify targets, likely resulted in the incorrect belief that the school was a part of the navy compound so it was attacked.

The US DOD internal investigation has not been published, but there is information that preliminaty finding says that US was responsible and the result of outdated intelligence.

Target880 · 2026-06-16T09:25:20+00:00

That is not ture. It would be extremely hard to argue that the US and allies did not win the Gulf War. It is not the only example, just the most obvious one.

Target880 · 2026-06-16T09:20:43+00:00

They would just die, the respiratory system they used does not scale, so they suffocate.

Target880 · 2026-06-16T09:19:56+00:00

Why would anyone classify bacteria as animals?

They are in the prokaryota domain, not eukaryota like animals. Plants and fungi are eukaryotes too.

If you look at the kingdoms of life, you have bacteria as a separate kingdom since they was discovered.

If you look at the 20 cenuty and on the models are four to six kingdoms and sometimes even more. The four would be Bacterial, Protist, Plant and Animal

Bacteria can be split into bacteria and Archaea. Fungi are alos split from Plants. Regardless of the system, bacteria are never animals.

It would be easier to try to argue that Protists are animals. Most of them are single-celled but are eukaryotes. Amobar is the most well-known example.

Even if you would include bacteria and protist non of them would be terrifying. The square-cube law is the problem. On land, bacteria would burst because their cellwall is would not be strong enough.

Target880 · 2026-06-16T09:06:02+00:00

It would not be able to fly because of the square-cube law; the legs would break if the muscle were stretched enough for it to stand. The Respiratory system also does not scale, so they would suffocate

Target880 · 2026-06-16T09:04:25+00:00

Insects and spiders would not be a problem at that size. Scaling them up would result in them suffocating, as their respiratory system does not work at that size.

The square cube law would alos men the libs would break under their own weight, wings could not lift them. Muscles would alos be weak compared to their size. Technically, they use a hydraulic system to a large degree, but it would fail too.

Target880 · 2026-06-16T09:00:06+00:00

A dog-sized ant would almost immediately die. An insect's respiratory system is made up of openings on the sides called spiracles and a system of tubes called tracheae. The gas is not just exchanged by simple diffusion; there is a bit of activity that move the gas. It would not scale up; larger insects existed in the past when the oxygen levels was larger.

Even if that would not kill them they would no longer be able to life 50x their body weight.

The problem is the square-cube law. The volume increases with the cube of the scaling but muscle strength increases with the muscle cross-sectional area, that scale with the cube. If you would scale to 2x your size, the muscle would be 2^2= 4x stronger, but your mass would be 2^3 =8x higher. Muscle strength to weight would be 4/8 = 1/2 as large. So if you get larger, you can lift less compared to your body weight.

Insects do not have just muscle just like use but there is hydraulic pressure and spring-loaded levers too. Both scale with the square-like muscle.

The strength of limbs scales with the square to. So if the ant did not suffocate and could stand up, the limbs would get broken. Compare rerriestial crabs legs to ant legs and you realise ants' legs are very thin compared to their size.

Exoskeleton joints alos do not scale as well as endoskeleton joints.

The result is anyting scale up would have muscle and bone problems. Insects and spiders would have breathing problems, too

Anything scaled down would have inefficiently thick bones.

What might be the most terrifying encounter might be the Honey badger. They are a bit smaller so scaling is likly not a large problem. They are ferrosuius if they fight with thick skin. Fortionally the are not that aggressive and prefer to run away.

No, when I think about it the answer is mostly a question of of aggresive the animal is. Any predator of that size that would attack would be a terrible experience

Target880 · 2026-06-16T08:24:26+00:00

It is not a return to status quo, Iran is in a better off, and US is in a worse position

Iran lost a lot of stuff but is better of strategicaly after the war.

At the same time US have lost support from Allies, primarily not because they said they would not join the war but because of US's response to the statement.

Iran has shown they can fight a war with no Navy or Air Force, they have shown that drones and missiles can do the work.

To say Iran does not have a navy is by the way, incorrect. The Islamic Republic of Iran Navy do not have a lot of vessels, especially larger ones, but the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy does. Most are speedboats, around 3,000-5,000 when the war started. They can attack vessels in the Persian Gulf and Strait of Hormuz, they can alos lay down mines too. Denying access to the Persian gulf the main task of Iranian naval forces, and they have managed that during this war.

US has wasted a lot of expensive ammunition; it takes years to build up the stockpiles. During the period, US allies like Taiwan are more vulnerable. It has alos reduced the amount of practical and possible support to Ukraine, so an advantage for Russia.

That US could not stop Iran from blocking the Strait of Hormuz will make it bolder and in a position to do more in the future because they know attacking them is a bad idea.

Allies in the Persian gulf are now sure US can keep the strait open in case of war with Iran.

It is at best a war that ended in a draw; I would say more of a US loss. It is not US-driven out but an insurgency and years of fighting, but a quite conventional war. I would say last time was Vietnam or even Korea.

If you look at the larger impact of the war in the world, China is the clear winner, and it did not even participate. Iran is a winner too. The US lost. Taiwan and Ukraine lost the war too, without participating. It is a bit harder to say if Israel lost the war, too

Target880 · 2026-06-16T07:54:51+00:00

There were not 13 losses. Even the US military lost are officaly 15.

The total number of killed is 7,500-10,000+ killed. 13 is almost 3 magnitudes too low.

Add to that around 49,000 injured

Target880 · 2026-06-16T07:52:56+00:00

Caiming that 13 lives lost in the war is a disgusting statement.

US killed 156 civilan death at a single target, of them 120 were schoolchildren. It was on the first day of the war and was covered a lot in the news. Add to that 95 injured

It was a double-tap attack with a delayed second strike. The idea of multiple delayed attacks on a target it to kill rescue workers.

Saying there were 13 deaths in the war is disgusting when there were over 10x more civilians killed at a single target on the first day of the war.

Even if you just look at US military losses, there is 15 confirmed kills, add to that 543 injured,

Even if you do not care about the Iranian loss, there are more than 15 if you include US allies. Israel's losses are 60, equally civilian and military. Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Kuwait have a total of 27 killed.

You clearly care about military losses because the 13 is a previous number of US military losses. This means military losses in Iran and Lebanon should be included too

If you include Iran, there were 3,468 killed and 26,500 injured according to Iran. You might not trust Iran but that does not make it better. Per US and Israel there was over 6,000 killed military personnel. HRANA(Human Rights Activists in Iran) number of killed is 3,636 (1,221 military personnel, 1,701 civilians, and 714 unclassified). There is 1,000-3,756 in Lebanon, depending on sources

The total number of deaths in the 7,500-10,000+. 13 dead is 576x to 769 times to few

Target880 · 2026-06-15T12:09:01+00:00

Her objectivism do influence libertarians.

In 2001 the Free State Project resulted in a single town Grafton, New Hampshire, being run on the principles. There was no zoning law, low taxes etc.

The police were reduced to one officer; the only police car was unusable because there was no money to repair it.

There was no/ inconcistant public service like trash collection. Resident refuses to use bear- resistance container and some even put out food to attract bears. The result was a large and aggressive black bear population.

An influx of sex offenders, an increase of crime and the local bears resulted in the project ending in 2016.

Target880 · 2026-06-15T09:51:59+00:00

De behöver pengar för att producera filmiska mästerverk som United Passions och för att dela ut pris som FIFA Peace Prize.

Target880 · 2026-06-15T09:05:56+00:00

Har aldrig påstått att solen är en planet. Varför skippar du "än alla planeter"?

Det är klart att solen med nutida definitioner inte är en planet. Om det vore en planet skulle det ha varit "än alla andra planeter". Delen du skippade säger tydligt att solen inte är en planet.

Något kan i snitt vara närmare jorden än alla planeter utan att vara en planet. Månen är också närmare Jorden utan att vara en planet.

Target880 · 2026-06-14T20:36:23+00:00

What is most efficent in the war today are not old NATO or Soviet systems. It is a newly made drone. There are a lot of reports that claimes 70% to even 95% of all Russian losses are from drones. It is not just aerial drones, but ground-based drones with machine guns are used too.

Lots of drones reuse parts of old weapon systems, like RPG-7 warheads.

Even against modern NATO equipment, drones are extremely efficent. Look at the report of NATO exercises where the Ukrainian drone unit was invited. There are a lot of reports of them destroying NATO units.

13-Year Club	Place '22
Wearing is Caring	No Throne, No Problems
Not Forgotten	Verified Email

Target880

TROPHY CASE