Company sued government for not adhering to contract.
The moral outrage should be at the people involved in the contract negotiations for the government and the fucker who ended up signing said contract. That group of persons and their entire genepool should be made to fill the vacant spots.
We had something a little similar here. Local government had a contract with an incineration company for trash. Then we started separating our trash more for recycling. And the local government is now BUYING trash from Italy and trucking it here to be incinerated because that is cheaper than the fines in the contract.
To be sure. The lawsuit is fine, if you build capacity for the state and they don’t use it, they still need to pay for the costs of having that capacity. Actually creating a situation where a business must increase incarceration to create a profit is actually the potential for a much darker path than a fucking lawsuit.
Yeah, the privatization is the issue. The state should be directly paying for maintenance of the facilities so there’s no incentive to have more prisoners. Profit shouldn’t be part of the equation at all.
Oh I’m all for radical change up to and including the redistribution of property and the abolishment of common law. I just don’t think that’s happening anytime soon.
The “spandrel hypothesis” is the front runner explanation. Essentially we didn’t evolve to have chins but rather evolved other things that are helpful, and the chin is a byproduct of that other evolution. Not harmful so it didn’t get selected away, but not helpful.
If you’re perpetually online, maybe? The only time you should give a shit about your chin is if you have an abnormally absent one. Like Andrew Tate for example.
I stumbled on it when figuring out just how the hell tall ships docked and undocked without tugs. Turns out they did use tugs in the form of rowboats but they also extensively used shoreside rigging and warping.
Edit: and I should add, they very rarely actually docked in the first place because it was such a pain in the ass, so they used tenders instead mostly
This also bugs me in movies whenever someone is kicked off the boat, but they’re given a small rowboat and some provisions. Like, that wasn’t an extra boat. It serves a purpose on the ship, and everything that takes up space on a boat is precious. A “spare” rowboat could be the difference between life and a horrible death. It could be months before they find a port where they can buy a replacement rowboat.
Yeah me too. I tried searching around but it’s hard to find something that’s not sci-fi related about this topic. It might also be called “kledging” from what I read, but not sure if that’s the exact same thing.
As a sailboat enthusiast kedging is most often used as in the case of poor Blackbeard when you get caught up on something and need to move a small bit in a direction that’s against the wind or water. So usually just trying to get unstuck when you’ve run afoul of hidden sand bars or the tide shift leaves you in an awkward spot. You also might do it to help set an extra anchor if you’re worried about drifting on the tides.
Even deep water boats only have a few hundred feet of anchor rode and line and it takes a while and is a hassle to kedge out with your dinghy.
I have never in all my years of boating seen anyone do it as a method of general propulsion outside of just handling lines at the dock. It’s just sometimes your best shot.
I had no idea this had a name! When I was a small child we lived by the coast and my dad had a small yacht, one day I remember the keel lodged on a sandbar and he used the anchor to pull it free. Unfortunately we moved inland when I was 5 and dad sold the yacht.
A trebuchet primarily transforms downward motion (of the counterweight) into forward motion, so it would actually work - the trebuchet doesn’t push the ship back as much as it pushes its load forward. This is particularly so if your trebuchet has wheels and you have room on your ship to accommodate it rocking back and forth when firing.
Edit: Thinking about it this technique would work even with something that does impart equal backwards force on the ship when firing a projectile, because there is considerably more force involved in winching the ship towards the anchor than what is involved in actually moving the anchor. You aren’t pulling against the inertia of a free floating anchor after all, you’re pulling against the ground the anchor has hooked into.
Not only that, you’re using the friction between the anchor and the seafloor, so even the recoil of a propulsive ballista will allow you to perform work.
I’ve got a really wild idea: what if you change the shape of the anchor so that it’s actually getting resistance against the water itself instead of having to hit the sea floor. You’ll have to pull it out if the water once you’re done moving it and then drop it in again. Maybe put it on the end of a big stick. I’m thinking about calling this type of anchor an “oar.”
Pipe lay (etc) anchor barges do this today.
There are usually six to 8 anchor winches on the vessel. A tug comes to the barge, picks up the anchor and moves it out to some point while the winch unreels. Repeat for other anchors. Winch in to move the vessel.
This is used for precision movement/placement of the barge.
Many vessels use azipods and Dynamic Positioning System (DPS) these days.
But before DPS much of offshore infrastructure was placed by anchor barges.
til
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.