laughing_man

Even if phones are the root issue a ban during school hours can't be expected to do much if the kids spend all their hours outside of class on the phone.

That's what happened in Iridium's case. They created a new company, which bought all the assets for $25 million and the original entity defaulted on $1.5 billion in debt. The new company now does business with the original name.

It's the same thing that happened with the GM's 2009 bankruptcy. Technically the original company was liquidated, but you'd never know as a customer.

A family member made a big short bet on Iridium after he decided they couldn't survive and made a lot of money.

That's not dispositive, though, since it may be that people spend more on rent because they can, i.e. other things have become relatively less expensive.

I don't think it's much more complicated than that. If you own a "rent-stabilized" apartment there's going to be a very low limit to the amount of money you're willing to spend to keep it habitable. If it needs a lot of money to make it legal to rent out, you're just going to leave it vacant. You don't really have a choice.

"This game brought to you by the studio that fired all the developers that made the games you love."

One problem with live service games is management will be tempted to release it as a minimum viable product and add all the features that would make it competitive in later updates. That's all well and good if players are hooked enough to stay, but if they don't there will never be enough money to finish the game.

Bullets, rockets, and anti-tank rounds aren't that big of a threat to a vehicle going from the front lines to the rear area. The threats are mines, artillery, and drones.

But you're right. Airborne things behind opposing lines are harder to destroy. Still doable, though, with missiles and drones. I guess the hope here is it's fast enough to evade drones and also that the Russians aren't going to want to risk expensive aircraft and pilots to kill a guy that might die anyway or be too disabled to return to the fight.

The text I was responding to was "Helicopters are extremely vulnerable for drone interceptors."

Well, okay, but your point wasn't related to the discussion. What I was asked was for evidence helicopters were shot down by drones.

Not only is that not true, you might be surprised to discover another term for flying drone is "UAV".

But that's because of IAD, not drones.

The Russians target the ground vehicles with drones and artillery. From what I understand, in some areas they've been completely unable to evacuate casualties. Guys are dying from infections and wounds that could easily have been treated by people with the right expertise and equipment.

Yes, it's a UGV. It's also a drone.

Did you respond to the right comment?

Did the helicopter go down?