Well after it’s heated the plastic that went in the first time around turns to jelly, and never really solidifies after that. So then the whole mix has an oily liquid spread throughout it.

We should build roads to last the first time.

Ok, so while I agree with the sentiment, what would you build them out of?

First off, I want to point out that cement is probably worse environmentally than asphalt. I also want to point out that you do need to tear up roads somewhat regularly having nothing to do with the road itself, but because underground pipes or cables need to be laid down or repaired. So any solution would have to also be manageable to dig up.

Finally, I want to add that roads get a staggering amount of wear. Truly, I don’t think any machine humans have ever used has to put up with as much abuse as a road. I live in New England and when I look outside I see a road covered in a thin layer of corrosive and abrasive salt dust. Last week this road withstood snowplows driving through a few times a day, their steel plows visibly sparkling where they contact the road, chipping off the paint of dividing lines. Thermal cycles, cold, then hot, then cold again, also consistently wear out just about every material you can imagine, and roads lay there exposed to the weather and in direct sunlight.

So with all that in mind, what better materials do we have?

Well, there are many kinds of plastic, technically, this could be something new. But some places have been adding plastic to asphalt for a while now, it certainly is cheaper in the short/medium term. And who knows, maybe this has different properties from all the existing systems, but I doubt it. I think this is just reporting research findings on the existing systems.

Currently, where I’ve seen this done, when the road finally does need repair, you have a whole lot of heavy waste to deal with. I don’t have exact numbers on hand for what the financial or environmental cost comparisons are, but I think anyone could infer that reusing 100% of the existing material, and adding an extra 20% in order to repave a road is probably going to be a more optimal option when compared to replacing it all and then dealing with a huge amount of waste.

I asked someone else, but I hope you don’t mind me asking you as well… With the FP6, 5g works as well? Any issues with MMS or RCS messages? Visual voicemail works fine?

I am trying to find a new phone, and while there are a few different companies making repairable phones, (Fair phone, HMD, shift) most of them are aimed at EU markets, so I want to make sure that a majority of the features also work in the US. My goal it’s to find something that will work for me, my wife and my in laws that won’t be a hassle. (Because, I do the tech support for all of them, and ideally I’d love to support just 1 device)

Asphalt is recyclable, you can tear it up, drop it in a mixer and after it heats up you can pour it back out.

ADDING PLASTIC BREAKS THIS PROPERTY. DO NOT ADD PLASTIC TO ASPHALT.

Awesome! And just to clarify, 5g works as well? Any issues with MMS or RCS messages? Visual voicemail works?

I ask because I am actively looking for a replacement for my 4a, it really is at its end of life at this point.

I was also considering some Nokia/HMD phones,as they made good scores on the ifixit repairability scale. Apparently HMD (who actually make Nokia phones) has a whole line of phones where their goal was modularity/repairability. It’s just been unclear which of these phones actually work on US networks.

There’s also shift phones out of Germany, but same deal, will they work on US networks?

I’m guessing the EU has some incentive programs to help these phones exist, but as a result, they’re mostly aimed at EU markets and networks.

Yikes, it doesn’t matter how spinlaunch sends you there. 200+ Gs are not friendly to the human body…

More and more mounting evidence! Exciting times!

Nobody likes the idea of panspermia, the idea that life on earth originated elsewhere in the solar system (or galaxy). It’s unpalatable because it just kicks the can down the road, “if not here, then where did life originate?” “Why not here?” “That doesn’t even answer the question of how life started” and I totally sympathize with all those sentiments.

But we’re finding increasing evidence that life existed on Mars before it existed on Earth. And if that’s true, then it becomes impossible to deny panspermia, because we already know some other key bits of information. First, we know chunks of Marian rock have crashed down onto earth after being ejected into space by asteroid strikes. Secondly, we know that some forms of carbon based life, bacteria and fungal spores can survive both vacuum of spac , extended periods without moisture, and the heat of reentry into atmosphere if they’re embedded into porous rock.

So 1, bits of Mars make it to earth with some regularity. 2, some life will survive a journey to earth. And now 3, there was life on Mars long before it was on Earth.

This unfortunately leaves many questions in its wake… Where did life actually first arise? If it didn’t even start here, then how rare is life? Will we see the same kind of life everywhere we look? (Because apparently everything in the solar system is probably cross pollinated)

Exciting times.

Yeah… You, an Internet rando sound immensely more presidential than our actual president. This is why he had mixed feelings, the situation is legitimately embarrassing and shameful.

Haha, your username is ironic, you’re not even honest to yourself!

No… You need a phone you can fix if you don’t break your phones all the time. That’s how you use the same phone for 6 years, like my pixel 4a. I haven’t upgraded to another pixel because the newer ones all have some deal breaker, no SD card slot, or a non removable battery, or no 3.5 mm headphone port.

But if you keep a phone for 6 years, they need maintenance. A speaker stops working, the battery life drops to nothing, the touch screen digitizer fails, etc. And then you need to be able to open it up.

Do they work on US networks?

That’s not what I said, before or after my edit.

Did you read my comment? My entire point was essentially that I don’t care. I’m not weighing in on that.

Edit: Though, I take that back now, just because you made such a big assertion, I’ll play devil’s advocate.

Let’s say you were using a drone for surveillance, what kind of range can you get in a drone? Looking around online, it appears that 200 km is considered extreme range for commercial drones, it’s hard to find anything greater than that. That said, military drones tend to have much greater range upwards of 1500 km.

On the other hand, I see no maximum range for a pigeon, at all. There’s a maximum distance it can travel per day and a maximum distance between landings that will keep it from crossing oceans. But that’s it.

Secondly, a drone can be shot down. If spotted it will be targeted. So they’re vulnerable. The pigeon on the other hand, if spotted, it will be ignored - because it’s a pigeon. It’s essentially a perfect stealth platform.

So there are two potential advantages if someone got this to work. There would of course also be drawbacks, and ultimately, who knows if it would turn out to be a viable system. But saying there’s “no benefit” is silly.

Sure, fine. At no point was I making any argument for or against this technology. Maybe it works, maybe it doesn’t, maybe it’s a waste of time, maybe it’s the future of aerial surveillance, maybe it’s just propaganda.

The only argument I’m making here is that there’s nothing far fetched about a pigeon flying thousands of kilometers, that’s totally normal. I’m pretty confident in this because I have first hand evidence that birds are actually really good at flying, and sometimes they fly very long distances.

Cruise missiles often use pre-programmed guidance systems, or total automation with just set of GPS waypoints to reach. That’s a pretty sensible appropriate because the nature of the device is as a long range weapon that often ventures far into enemy territory. If you needed to stay in constant communication, radio jamming would become a serious liability. I’d imagine this is very similar in its design goals, so they’d likely use a similar approach.

At any rate, I don’t expect the guidance to be the hard part, GPS navigation is not that hard to implement. (or GLONASS, in this particular case)

Also… If the US were doing this, they actually could use star link. Star link direct to cell phone connectivity is actually in beta right now and it works. If the pigeon could carry a striped down iPhone (it doesn’t need a screen, speaker, microphone, etc), then it could actually carry a communications device that could be in constant contact. I wouldn’t recommend Russia try that on starlink though, given that it’s an American company.

I have no idea, controlling an animal’s brain is obviously the hard part too believe. But I don’t see how that affects their range. It’s a bird, birds naturally migrate thousands of miles.

Well… The electronics are solar powered, so it’s not like batteries would run out. I’m not sure there are really limits on the flight range of a pigeon. I have to assume they’d be allowed to eat.

I don’t think they could cross an ocean.

deleted by creator

Thanks Mamdani…

This is great! Obama is finally off the hook.