If I was filthy rich, I'd buy a plot of land near a railway line (that is at least attached to the main lines), build my own siding, and buy one of DSB's IC3 MUs[0], maybe also an IR4 MU[1], so they can together ride on electrified and non-electrified tracks. Then refurbish their interior, install as many signal compatibility systems, and, for the IR4, have it support as many overhead voltage systems as possible. I have a soft spot for the MF/ER class trains.
That is exactly how the Halton County Railway Museum near Toronto came to be. A bunch of dudes bought an old streetcar (tram) to save it from the scrappers and built a track on some property to have fun driving it around. https://hcry.org/
Most people do this as part of a club. You join the club and combine everyone's money to buy the things needed, and then everyone in the club can enjoy it.
"Clubs" as a thing is such a great concept, and if you feel like there is some humanity missing because of all the things going on, they're real places with lots of humans and humanity in them. They work great for lots of things, from trains, computing, music to boats, puppets, gardening and whatever else. If there is no club where you live, you'll surely find at least one other member if you start it yourself :)
There is a tourist attraction here in New Zealand that started its life as a way for a potter, Barry Brickell, to get his clay and fuel for the kilns to his studio. It’s a beautiful spot, particularly if you manage to avoid a busy time.
Perhaps I am imagining it, but I immediately thought it was a pun on AltaVista in that "alt" in German means old. But there is nothing on the site that seems to suggest that that was how the name came about. (Though in that sense, you can argue the original AltaVista already meant "Old'aVista".) The only clue is this line from the FAQ:
> The name of the website itself is a wordplay on Altavista.
Though, the creator mentions on his own page, that he is a German citizen (due to his grandfather), even though he speaks no German and have never lived there[1]; which could mean that pun is intentional. Not that it is really all that important (like not at all), but I can't help but wonder now...
Unfortunately, I cannot edit my original post anymore, but it seems a few replies misunderstood my comment; in short: I wasn't questioning whether it is a wordplay (it clearly is), I was questioning which wordplay. Is it Old'aVista just because it kind of sounds like AltaVista, or is it Old'aVista because "alt" in German means old?
I'm glad you made the comment because at the very least I learned a new German word (native English speaker and conversational in Spanish).
It's ironic to search for "alt meaning" and find a tertiary definition of "Pitched in the first octave above the treble staff; high" which would suggest more of the Spanish "alta" root rather than the Germanic root.
Now I'm curious how much origins are shared between Spanish and German.
Perhaps we can all agree English is a goofy language!
The modern Germanic "alt" has some interesting leftovers in English from before English migrated its pronunciation/spelling towards "old". The word "auld" for instance (as in the holiday classic "Auld Lang Syne"). The beer term "ale" comes from "altbier" ("old beer") as in the "oldest known style of beer". (Lager yeasts were a later find. Also, if you are curious "lager" comes from "lagern" which mostly means "to cool/chill", with that being the benefit of lager yeasts that they are live and productive at colder temperatures.)
Both of which also suggest to me other ways to try to have made the wordplay in Old'aVista even cleaner if it was an intentional multilingual wordplay. "Ale-a-Vista" might have been silly or "AuldaVista" might have been funnier.
And here I thought it was going to be something to do with, at least in my experience, the much more memorable site: Astalavista. I will say, the linked site is nice for nostalgia and arguably more pleasant than being advertised donkey shows.
Sites like this remind me the internet used to be fun, and it was glorious. Really, makes me want to bust out Frontpage 2000 and Macromedia Fireworks to build a sweet landing page for an anime fan site and setup some phpBB forums.
Astalavista was named in jest after the original AltaVista, it just survived a bit longer after AltaVista lost the search wars to the newcomers like Infoseek and Ask Jeeves who in turn eventually lost to newcomers like Google. How much you remember AltaVista probably says a lot about when the first time you used the internet was and maybe if you were a Yahoo or AltaVista fan at the time. (In those days Yahoo had the better human curated hierarchical directory and AltaVista had the better search index with more boolean and exact search operators supported.)
Alt=old in German, but Alta=high in Spanish. And vista is pretty much a Spanish word. A high observation point is a pretty good metaphor for a search engine.
...given the line you quoted from the FAQ, I'm a bit confused about why you are still wondering. That seems about as straight forward of an answer to your question as one could expect.
The rhyming is good, making "Oldavista" a generic wordplay that is merely more obvious to find for German speakers, and the name is insignificant compared to the effort of reproducing the whole Altavista page.
I've been searching for a decent dumbphone for the better part of a decade. Unfortunately, I cannot really say I've succeeded. In that time I've tried the following phones: Nokia 225, Punkt. MP02, Mudita Pure, Doro 7030 and now a Nokia 2660.
My list of requirements isn't long: 1) should make/receive phone calls, 2) should make/receive text messages, 3) have physical buttons and 4) preferably use 4G and be able to create hotspots (the last requirement, I have deviated on occasionally, like with my current phone). A requirement 0, if you will, is that it needs to do these things at high quality. But in one way or another, they suffer wildly in either hardware or software, or both. Often to the point, where I wonder if the creators themselves use them.
The two Nokias unfortunately have quite a few ad programs (like Facebook of all things), that just clutter up its menu (but which I can thankfully just ignore), its T9 dictionary is weak (though this will be a recurring theme, they are all bad at doing T9 dictionary typing), and its text message storage is severely limited. The Punkt. MP02 had high quality hardware, but again its T9 typing was frustrating, and eventually mine just bricked. The Mudita Pure was probably the worst one, though: it only supported characters A-Z, despite being developed in Poland, which is frustrating when living in a country, that regularly uses characters beyond that. The Doro 7030 had bad buttons, that often wouldn't properly click, leading to missed characters while typing, and it had an annoying behaviour, where sometimes it would just miss calls, and its T9 typing was abysmal.
I still have all the phones (except the Mudita Pure, which I sold to someone in Greece, even though I explicitly warned them it would not work at all with Greek letters, which they later confirmed, as it was just showing squares), and I am generally sad, that it feels like a bit of an electronic waste.
And why not a dumbed down smartphone, then? My requirement 3 isn't debatable, I loath touch screens; they are - for me at least - the bane of modern existence. I cannot avoid them entirely, but I can lower my own exposure. For example, when I bought an induction stove top, I made sure to get one with knobs.
Maybe when I feel ready again, I will try my hand at another[0]...
My dumb phone solution: an Apple Watch with a cellular connection.
You can’t browse the web or install addictive apps. But you can get your mail, texts, and phone calls and you can listen to music, check the weather, and navigate with a map. It also has a physical dial you use for scrolling.
There’s enough friction with the device that you aren’t glued to it, but it’s functional enough that you won’t miss leaving your phone or wallet at home. It mostly becomes a watch first and foremost but also has the perfect feature set as a phone replacement.
Once you get over the hump of "I don't need to be notified of everything" and start pairing down the notifications, I find that most of the time I can put my phone down and just get the right notifications on my watch.
When I need to respond to something, that's when I grab my phone (or laptop).
Perhaps its not quite 'dumb' enough for you, and they have yet to ship so no one can really speak to the quality but this product https://clicksphone.com/communicator might fit your needs. I'm thinking to get one myself but not yet decided. Will probably wait for a review or two.
I now recall why I did not buy the 6300 4G, because I remember it looked very promising: it is out of stock everywhere. I'm going to assume HMD aren't making more of those, and they don't seem to have any KaiOS feature-phones in the works.
I found mine on Amazon shipped from France. The reviews were all over the place with some people complaining that they had ordered a dual-sim version but only received a single-sim one, I took the chance and got the dual-sim one that I wanted, maybe some inventory co-mingling had been happening.
It is a shame that it isn't widely available, someone could maybe write a Signal app for KaiOS.
I have a nokia 110 4g and it works perfectly. Yes, it is clunky to type, but that is a feature, not a bug. If long messages are called for, I call or email.
Wifi hotspot is sadly what's frequently missing, I'd like that.
As far as I know, the mp02 or one of nokias Kaios phones are the only ones that provide that, but kaios is frequently called the retarded little brother of Android, so due to all the bugs I avoid those phones like the plague.
My emergency solution is to buy a separate 4g modem if I need hotspot functionality, but to be honest, wifi is so common these days, that I hardly ever need it.
"Europe" may be a bit broad there. In Denmark, I can get by without a smartphone; I have to carry what they call a "MitID code display" to gain access to online public services (though the device is entirely free of charge), but I also carry keys, so it's not a big hassle.
That is a bit of revisionist history: conspiracy theories gripped the revolution, and a lot of them thought Marie-Antoinette was already organising an Austrian invasion of France (since she is Austrian), so rather than wait for the supposed inevitable to happen, France attacked first. And that's what made the coalitions form. Not that they liked the idea of a Republican France, but before France attacked, they were unlikely to do anything about it.
I am pretty confident that aircraft manufacturers themselves cannot require these things, only regulators can. The FAA in particular used to lean heavily on budget constraints for airlines (who would also push back against expensive upgrades); but I am sure the same applies to EASA and other regulators as well.
Separating "regulators" and "manufacturers" in such distinct categories is overly simplistic, I'm afraid. As we saw with the whole Boeing debacle, the manufacturers are the experts on what they build, and we expect them to give clear, levelheaded, and honest guidance to operators and regulators. That also means they must have some responsibility for the outcomes of that guidance.
Having a separate regulator, which does no building themselves, somehow maintain a separate team of independent experts is a fools errand. We should of course have independent evaluators, but the people building the thing are the experts on the thing.
It's a challenging problem. Going back to when I was in aerospace even just with the FAA we had FAA west and FAA east, and they were treated as different entities within our company because they had such different approaches/understanding and then the EASA which was from our experience a protectionist entity that would look for gotchas on American competitors and not a neutral safety focused party and refused to recognized treaty obligated acceptance of FAA certification (and it was a big issue that the US refused to step in on our behalf and require the treaty be followed because the US authorities put safety first even though the US had agreed we were safe and had demonstrated it).
> Having a separate regulator, which does no building themselves, somehow maintain a separate team of independent experts is a fools errand. We should of course have independent evaluators, but the people building the thing are the experts on the thing.
Well they have to. Boeing showed what happens if they are not experts and they leave everything to the manufacturer. They'll just lie and scheme and even get away with it.
The FAA and its international counterparts were created because airliners were constantly cutting corners or putting pressure on their pilot to do unsafe things.
This is a real problem with the current FAA setup. The limited amount of legal liability seems like a major problem, even switching from 200k euros to 2 million or 10 million euros as the max penalty per soul would add a minor amount of heft to lawsuits against the airlines and manufacturers.
Well yes of course they have to be checked by a regulator, but you should still have the thought of, we must do this, no matter the cost as safety matters above everything else in this industry.
> you should still have the thought of, we must do this, no matter the cost as safety matters above everything else in this industry.
This premise implies that if you could prevent one plane crash for $10 trillion dollars then you should do it, but then ordinary people wouldn't be able to afford air travel. In reality they do have to consider the cost and then do the things that are justified based on the cost and the risk. Which means that high regulatory costs compromise safety because the more it costs to make a change that improves safety, the fewer of those changes can be implemented for an amount of money that can be justified by the risk.
That's right, Airbus is responsible for the faulty equipment onboard, not pilot training. Air France is responsible for its pilots' operational training and recurrent training.
It's not that black and white. Airbus will be responsible for educating Air France too and giving appropriate training. These planes are not purchased by Air France without significant documentation and access to support.
The Dark Ages are dark, because they lack surviving written record; ironically due to advancements in writing technology, where people would begin writing on hides instead of papyrus or chisel stone; this made writing a lot faster, but also had a far shorter life span, particularly because people could wipe the hide clean (after the text was of no use), and then rewrite on it.
Conversely, a lot of the writings of the Antiquity are preserved, in large part due to Middle Eastern scholars. The Dark Ages aren't a myth, but rather what is meant by "dark" is misunderstood.
No, the whole thing is some sort of revisonist history gambit. The Dark Ages were "dark" because they represented a massive and lasting decline in social organization, trade, and yes, literacy. These are all extremely well documented. You can see it in basically any field you want -
Except that source article doesn't make that claim, only number of gun deaths. The best source[1] I could find on heatwave related deaths on short notice has the following summary:
> Asia observed the highest heatwave-related mortality, accounting for 47.97% (85,611 deaths) of the global excess death, followed by Europe (37.23%, 66,443 deaths), the Americas (13.15%, 23,467deaths), Africa (1.61%, 2,881 deaths), and Oceania (0.05%, 83 deaths).
That of course muddles the picture by combining both American continents, though further down it quotes 9,666 for "Northern America" in table 1; though the Europe number also includes all of Russia. Those numbers are from 2023. Additionally, Europe has more than twice the population of North America. Without doing the maths, the gap claim sound about right; however, that doesn't necessarily mean it's due to a lack of air conditioning in Europe.
Frankly, the last true Citroën (and I know this is going to sound a bit snooty) was the Xantia Activa. The C6 was supposed to truly harken back to the Citroën of old, but it fell short on so many levels: only hydro-pneumatic suspension (brakes and steering were conventional), too little leg room in the back, no frontier engineering, etc.
While the Xantia itself wasn't any particular standout in Citroën's history, its Activa variant felt like the Citroën engineers had finally broken through the Peugeot penny-pinchers. At least one last time. Citroën used to be about pushing unconventional engineering (like front-wheel drive (Traction-Avant), unibody (ditto), hydro-pneumatic suspension (DS), self-adjusting headlights (SM), active self-adjusting steering (CX), anti-roll (Activa)); the Metropolis - by contrast - just seems like a styling exercise with some conventional (though uncommon at the time) engineering.
Citroën used to push the frontiers of car manufacturing, but haven't done that since the 1990s.
Disclaimer: I own two classic Citroëns, so I'm likely a bit biased.
Yeah it's gotten really bad at Citroën, they split of their brand with the DS brand, which was supposed to be the cutting edge design brand, but it's rather generic design with a logo nobody recognizes.
Speaking of logos, the new Citroën logo itself is very ugly.
It's bad when a budget brand, Dacia, is going more inventive stuff, like designing a slide in bed system and attachable tent for their station wagon.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DSB_Class_MF [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DSB_Class_MF#IR4_%22InterRegio...