fullsquare

joined 1 year ago
[–] fullsquare@awful.systems 2 points 9 months ago

I think that type A plug would be greatly improved in terms of safety and mechanically if it was put in a grounded metal shroud, in style of DIN connector https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DIN_connector it still would be compact, smaller than type F

[–] fullsquare@awful.systems 5 points 9 months ago (2 children)

UK uses type G. Type E/F plug has both contact for grounding pin like in type E and two sliding ground contacts on side like in type F. Sockets are either E or F, and i've mostly seen E

[–] fullsquare@awful.systems 21 points 9 months ago

no, because it'll just trip fuse, and stoves are wired directly anyway

[–] fullsquare@awful.systems 4 points 9 months ago

C/E/F also have shutters, probably more types do that too

[–] fullsquare@awful.systems 39 points 9 months ago (16 children)

Type E and F plugs are not really a thing anymore, today it's more common to find combined Type E/F plugs.

Fuses in british plugs are a mistake and only a requirement because of sketchy practices allowed in british electrical code immediately after WW2. Nobody else does that because nowhere else electric code is built in such a way that it is necessary. Switch seems to be mildly useful tho

[–] fullsquare@awful.systems 32 points 9 months ago (1 children)

llms allowed them to glide all the way to the point of failure without learning anything

[–] fullsquare@awful.systems 23 points 9 months ago

Live in the forest ig. Some defect to Ukrainians, there are flyers and websites and telegram channels for that, but hard to say how many choose so

[–] fullsquare@awful.systems 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

well, i see a large category of infrastructure problems (that will be 99% civilian use anyway - and not only transport, also telecomms, you can even put healthcare training in there) that is solvable by pouring money at them, and now it's politically convenient to let it rip even among pro-austerity neoliberals. if you want an example of what can this do, look at eastern eu countries and how they changed after funding went in

[–] fullsquare@awful.systems 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

which ones? germany has government spending at 48% of gdp https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_government_spending_as_percentage_of_GDP so 5% of gdp for defense will be closer to 1/10 of all government spending

going by 2024 numbers, russians putting third of government spending to defence would be closer to 13% gdp

[–] fullsquare@awful.systems 1 points 9 months ago (3 children)

It all depends on how it all will get managed, but there are already longer term infrastructure projects that now got some funding and now also it counts under 5% NATO target. I think that more resources will go towards rail infrastructure, bridges are just more illustrative, but still for a couple of these village 7 ton level bridge there will be one 30 ton bridge in town nearby that will get overhauled

[–] fullsquare@awful.systems 4 points 9 months ago (5 children)

in eastern nato countries there is logistical problem because army suddenly switched from 40 ton tanks to 70 ton tanks, for example, and old bridges or rail can't support them. this is just one of many small examples that add to that problem, and of course 99% of the time the stronger bridge will be used by civilians

[–] fullsquare@awful.systems 1 points 9 months ago

about #1, not only this makes number of potential leakers higher (intentional or not - by opsec failures) but also this narrows down number of loyal, reliable people who also won't fuck up the job real fast

view more: ‹ prev next ›