What I meant was I thought I’d read that because the design originally had those elements in place, the QE class carriers had left the design characteristics in place to support the launch systems, in particular the structural load bearing aspects.
Not that they’d need a ground up refit.
Certainly the navy is looking a the possibility of doing this.
https://www.twz.com/royal-navy-wants-to-refit-its-carriers-with-catapults-arresting-wires
That it has shitty shower thoughts.
NATO is a military organisation. Trade is civilian.
You don’t see the US joint chiefs weighing in on the tariff discussion, nor the head of the UK armed forces weighing in on Brexit.
Why does the NATO chief feel he’s free to talk about trade relations?
I believe they can still be retrofitted, right?
Obviously that would mean extensive time in dock.
They stream data from it while you play, so if you don’t have an SSD you’ll get pauses in game play.
Fair enough.
My personal experience is that we’re often unaware of the contradictions until something external happens. It might be someone pointing it out or just a passing comment in an overheard conversation. Something needs to jostle the noggin.
That’s why I said what I did. You can’t fix what you’re oblivious too. However once you are aware, you have the power to choose to do something about it. Sounds like you exercised that power. Good for you.
To say I haven’t fallen victim to cognitive dissonance would be a lie. However, I learned how to avoid it and resolve conflicts in my own beliefs over time.
I like the self-awareness of the first half, but I think the second half is likely bullshit. Unless you’ve become a being of total rational thought and zero emotion, I don’t think it is possible.
First thing to realise is that people only repair dissonance alone and in private. As you say, debates and arguments don’t help.
I just try to engage on the positive topics and not engage on the negative ones. I’m honest about why I think what I think, but I don’t try to convince anyone. I say when I don’t know something. I don’t make shit up that I can be proved wrong about, even if that means letting something go unchallenged.
You won’t convince people that something they see as a problem isn’t a problem, but what you might be able to do is get people to look at alternative solutions. People don’t want to be brutal and uncaring, but they that can get there when it’s their last option.
Then occasionally you get a “something you said stuck with me” several days later, or maybe you don’t but something did stick with them. They incorporate the idea Into their thinking and start slowly shifting.
…except there’s no hardware to run it on. They’ve chosen an ISA profile that’s not been decided on for long enough.
You know that over-the-air update facility you all loved?
Errr … there’s a downside.
But I haven’t seen anyone expressing that Superman should not represent kindness.
Isn’t the take more like “You think it’s super-human to be kind?!?”
How did this manifest before? You only need to look at the advertising of the time. Take the 1950s America - McCarthyism and the red scare in full force. Most US marketing relied heavily on how buying American made you a good patriotic citizen, living the American dream… even if the product wasn’t 100% American.
I think people who dislike flatpaks or similar aren’t having “problems”. They work, but they’re using using a sledgehammer to drive a nail.
…and it’s turned them into the state with the highest standard of living in the US…right?
If ethical boundaries get thrown out in times of trouble, we don’t have ethical boundaries. It’s easy to not step over the line in times of peace.
A better way to say that (more accurate) is that abusers often learnt “how” through personal experience.
The key point is not to look at someone who has been abused and think that they are likely going to become an abuser.
They just assumed a constant draw I think.
The avalanche has started. It is too late for the pebbles to vote.