Red_Dragon wrote:

Whoever sketched this up on some AI fantasy notepad has obviously never been to Magdalena Bay. The idea of that place as a defense base is laughable. Good place to see whales, and get a fish taco, but it's easier to reliably get a supply truck to Guantanamo Bay.

 ScottFromWyoming wrote:

Trump isn't a techno anything; just an idiot. But whoever put it in his head that we should own Greenland, Cuba, Venezuela, etc. certainly has some idea about this stuff.

 Red_Dragon wrote:

I mean, it never sounded totally crazy but by definition, the billionaires aren't leading it. Tim Berners-Lee for President! Or something. If we were a technocracy, UBI would be a thing, right? And Trump and Musk and all the wealth extractors would be sidelined? I guess it's time to do some more reading of stuff I don't understand so I can not understand better.

Abstract

• Objective To determine if using a parachute prevents death or major traumatic injury when jumping from an aircraft.
• Design Randomized controlled trial.
• Setting Private or commercial aircraft between September 2017 and August 2018.
• Participants 92 aircraft passengers aged 18 and over were screened for participation. 23 agreed to be enrolled and were randomized.
• Intervention Jumping from an aircraft (airplane or helicopter) with a parachute versus an empty backpack (unblinded).

...Should our results be reproduced in future studies, the end of routine parachute use during jumps from aircraft could save the global economy billions of dollars spent annually to prevent injuries related to gravitational challenge.
A minor caveat to our findings is that the rate of the primary outcome was substantially lower in this study than was anticipated at the time of its conception and design, which potentially underpowered our ability to detect clinically meaningful differences, as well as important interactions. Although randomized participants had similar characteristics compared with those who were screened but did not enroll, they could have been at lower risk of death or major trauma because they jumped from an average altitude of 0.6 m (SD 0.1) on aircraft moving at an average of 0 km/h (SD 0). Clinicians will need to consider this information when extrapolating to their own settings of parachute use...

 rgio wrote: Way too much violence for me. 

Go figure.   

 Proclivities wrote:

trippy

 KurtfromLaQuinta wrote:

This clears things up:

The periodic table has several items missing from the pie chart

• SUICIDE (STAB)
• SUICIDE (POISON)
• DIED OF ILLNESS
• EXECUTED
• DIED FROM EATING HOT COALS
• DIED OF A SWEAT
• HANDS AND TONGUE CUT OFF, THEN STABBED
• BURNED
• DIED OF JUMPING FROM A WALL
• STABBED, THEN DROWNED IN A BARREL OF WINE
• DIED OF AGE
• CUT TO PIECES

While the pie chart has a few not on the table.

• Pursued by bear
• Throws oneself away
• Shame

 rgio wrote: Death by teal duck.

 Red_Dragon wrote:


Maybe Portia eating hot coals?

 rgio wrote:

Unknown, perhaps? Just a random, unmarked body?

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:
So what's the teal slice between "Stabbed and poisoned" and "Poisoned"?  I gotta know.

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:

Are we certain that the bear pursuit ended in death?