The downvoters meant to demonstrate that they prefer the standard/expected behavior and would like OP to ignore your opinion on the matter.

Perhaps they need to start building more roundabouts on smaller intersections, and improve education in driving schools. Then give it time (decades).

The US has been building roundabouts for about 30 years.

It has a lot of intersections.

Reconfiguring intersections is expensive and disruptive. Stop signs and traffic lights take less space and are often the simplest thing that might work.

Those aren't usually time-sensitive.

Why not just sell them to some other country? Surely Canada would buy the in-place sensors and take them over.

You think this is done to save costs? NO! This is costing more money to actively dismantle them than it would be to just abandon them. The administration is intentionally and specifically trying to destroy scientific evidence of climate change. If they just abandoned them, the next administration could reactivate and repair them.

People in the libertarian SV techbro world actually fall for the randian crap and believe that’s what they are getting.

And that’s the charitable interpretation.

I work for an organization that uses equipment like this. We can't afford to buy or staff this scale of equipment, and the Canadian government (DFO in particular) might have the cash to purchase the equipment but nowhere near the staff. Sensor networks are a lot of work. The ocean likes to break stuff. You need to monitor nodes extensively. It requires a broad skill set, both physically and digitally, backed by a lot of knowledge and ideally experience. These people aren't very common, so building a team to support this network outside of the USA would not be trivial.

Maybe you could part it out to a number of orgs and governments, but I doubt the US government has much interest in putting in the labour to facilitate that. This entire project seems like it's designed to be offensive as it is to be anything else.

It's an enormous shame.

Beyond the regime's hatred of science, they also hate Canada, so that would never happen.

If we sell them to another country, then that other country will gather the data and publish it. The point of the Trump administration is that the data not be gathered.

They explicitly do not want them. They will pay companies to abandon renewable energy projects that have already planned / started.

LMAO, ok, how about “precisely landing the largest flying structure ever built such that it could be grabbed by two mechanical arms attached to the launch pad”?

That will make it clear it’s not actually a giant Mechazilla robot reaching out to grab the booster using literal chopsticks where ever it happens to come down.

Perfect!

> This is litterlly the logic that collapsed venezuela's oil industry after it was seized by the state.

Wasn't it sanctions? The state seizing ownership should not have meant the loss of:

> the people, the managers,engineers,etc

Ownership of companies change every day across the world without collapse.

The government will need to buy control of (or merely seize under eminent domain) the bots and the ai that runs them.

> Newsom has spent $14.8B over the past 18 years and it has zero operational miles of fast train.

Newsom was elected Governor in 2019. And no, it was never expected to be operational any time soon. Also, buying up hundreds of parcels of land (many presenting legal hurdles and eminent domain lawsuits, etc takes years. Then there's years to be spent building massive concrete aquaducts and bridges.

> foreign students

FTFY. Not exchange students.

Erp, well caught.

Why not just start making new B-52's again?

Is there a shortage of B-52 airframes?

They get upgraded regularly, the only reason to make more bombers is to try something different.

With eight engines mounted on external nacelles, it is the complete opposite of stealth. You need complete air superiority to use it without fear of being shot down.

The eight engines is a side effect of of how large the aircraft is vs how big the engines of the day were. they are basically business jet engines by modern standards.

During the recent engine replacement project using one full sized engine per boom instead of the twin small engine nacelle was seriously considered. So 4 engines instead of 8. I suspect the reason the twin nacelle was kept was that going to 4 engines required more engineering rework than they were happy with. It certainly would have improved the b-52's range and fuel efficiency.

Either way probably a net zero on the stealth consideration.

Fun fact: with the re-engine project the b-52 now has the same engines as the A-10.