History Main / WeWillUseManualLaborInTheFuture

28th Aug '16 12:01:16 PM Morgenthaler
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** The [[UsefulNotes/RedsWithRockets Soviet school of design]] was informed heavily by [[UsefulNotes/WorldWarTwo WWII]] experience: although the [[NazisWithGnarlyWeapons German Überpanzer like the Panther and the Tiger]] could [[CurbStompBattle snipe Soviet tanks at extreme ranges]], they were notoriously unreliable and [[EliteArmy few in number]], owing to [[AwesomeButImpractical their bloated size and mass]] - the "medium" Panther was larger (and heavier) than the Soviet IS-2 heavy tank - and so the bulk of Heer armour was made of [[MookMobile Panzer IV]] and [[TanksButNoTanks StuG III]], which were nothing to write home about. This meant that the Soviets would keep capitalizing on the advantages of the T-34-85 (a fast and cheap JackOfAllStats) and then apply the same logic to NATO armour, expecting to counter their super-duper machines with [[ZergRush quantity]], [[ConfusionFu surprise, speed]], [[DeathFromAbove combined arms]] and [[AllYourBaseAreBelongToUs deep operations]], denying them [[HollywoodTactics a head-on engagement]] in which NATO armour would exploit its advantages. Not that it had that many - a Soviet tank of the [[UsefulNotes/ColdWar Cold War]] was armed with a [[{{BFG}} bigger gun]] and equally thick armour compared to a NATO design of the same [[TechnologyLevels generation]], while being [[LightningBruiser lighter]] (modern Western [=MBTs=] are approaching 70 t; [=ComBlock=] designs are no heavier than 45 t) and hence more agile and economically and logistically affordable. The sole reason for this was because, as it became apparent in WWII, the Soviets ruthlessly cut down on interior volume - while Western tanks are cramped, they seem [[UnnecessarilyLargeInterior ludicrously roomy]] in comparison with Soviet-school vehicles that are near ClownCar levels, which means that the crew, naturally, sit on top of ammo and fuel, and have by regulation to be shorter than 185 cm (which means that someone around 170 cm is actually comfortable). An autoloader does not worsen the safety situation, but helps shrink mass and size further by eliminating another member of the crew, and it was the Soviet mantra that the best protection is not being hit at all; also, the human loader would eventually get tired, and was a lot less effective in the more confined interior, as the pre-autoloader but equally small T-55 and T-62 show. Furthermore, Soviet tanks were expected to actively maneuver rather than snipe targets from hull-down positions (as NATO tanks were likely to be doing), and had poorer suspension; it is considerably harder to load the gun manually when the vertical stabilizer keeps thrusting the breech up and down. Additionally, the later-pattern autoloader on the T-72 is significantly less vulnerable: the shells are arranged not in a cylinder under the turret ring, but in a circle of the floor, and hidden at the very bottom of the vehicle behind an extra layer of armor - hence [[NoKillLikeOverkill anything capable of triggering a magazine detonation likely destroys the tank anyway]]. As to the spare shell lockers, the [[UsefulNotes/RussiansWithRustingRockets new T-90 variants]] do move them into a bustle storage compartment - and Hatedom run afoul of the [[{{Hatedom}} bustle haters]], who believe that any large turret bustle is extremely likely to get hit in combat, whereas the baseline T-90 has a compact (short and broad) turret, and [[LuckilyMyShieldWillProtectMe it is impossible to hit anything but the heavily-protected front from a sector of 60°]]. Also, many Abrams loaders jam the doors open, [[WhatAnIdiot completely nullifying the protective qualities of the system]] - to [[DangerousForbiddenTechnique keep the rate of fire up]]. Finally, autoloaders are believed to be more usable in future tanks for two aspects: firstly, as the LensmanArmsRace is liable to continue, [[{{BFG}} tank guns]] will likely get [[UpToEleven even bigger]]: as of 1990, there were prototypes of prototypes a Leopard 2 variant with a 140 mm cannon and a T-80 variant with a 152 mm gun. Both of these exceeded the practical abilities of human loaders and were fitted with autoloaders - much like modern 152-155 mm artillery, which uses at least partially mechanized loading instead of ''two'' loaders per gun. The second element of prospective [[RussiansWithRustingRockets Russian]] tanks is removing the crew from the turret altogether, settling the issue completely by using [[NighInvulnerability a front-mounted capsule tough enough to survive the destruction of the rest of the vehicle]] - while even further reducing the size of the turret.

to:

** The [[UsefulNotes/RedsWithRockets Soviet school of design]] was informed heavily by [[UsefulNotes/WorldWarTwo WWII]] experience: although the [[NazisWithGnarlyWeapons [[UsefulNotes/NazisWithGnarlyWeapons German Überpanzer like the Panther and the Tiger]] could [[CurbStompBattle snipe Soviet tanks at extreme ranges]], they were notoriously unreliable and [[EliteArmy few in number]], owing to [[AwesomeButImpractical their bloated size and mass]] - the "medium" Panther was larger (and heavier) than the Soviet IS-2 heavy tank - and so the bulk of Heer armour was made of [[MookMobile Panzer IV]] and [[TanksButNoTanks StuG III]], which were nothing to write home about. This meant that the Soviets would keep capitalizing on the advantages of the T-34-85 (a fast and cheap JackOfAllStats) and then apply the same logic to NATO armour, expecting to counter their super-duper machines with [[ZergRush quantity]], [[ConfusionFu surprise, speed]], [[DeathFromAbove combined arms]] and [[AllYourBaseAreBelongToUs deep operations]], denying them [[HollywoodTactics a head-on engagement]] in which NATO armour would exploit its advantages. Not that it had that many - a Soviet tank of the [[UsefulNotes/ColdWar Cold War]] was armed with a [[{{BFG}} bigger gun]] and equally thick armour compared to a NATO design of the same [[TechnologyLevels generation]], while being [[LightningBruiser lighter]] (modern Western [=MBTs=] are approaching 70 t; [=ComBlock=] designs are no heavier than 45 t) and hence more agile and economically and logistically affordable. The sole reason for this was because, as it became apparent in WWII, the Soviets ruthlessly cut down on interior volume - while Western tanks are cramped, they seem [[UnnecessarilyLargeInterior ludicrously roomy]] in comparison with Soviet-school vehicles that are near ClownCar levels, which means that the crew, naturally, sit on top of ammo and fuel, and have by regulation to be shorter than 185 cm (which means that someone around 170 cm is actually comfortable). An autoloader does not worsen the safety situation, but helps shrink mass and size further by eliminating another member of the crew, and it was the Soviet mantra that the best protection is not being hit at all; also, the human loader would eventually get tired, and was a lot less effective in the more confined interior, as the pre-autoloader but equally small T-55 and T-62 show. Furthermore, Soviet tanks were expected to actively maneuver rather than snipe targets from hull-down positions (as NATO tanks were likely to be doing), and had poorer suspension; it is considerably harder to load the gun manually when the vertical stabilizer keeps thrusting the breech up and down. Additionally, the later-pattern autoloader on the T-72 is significantly less vulnerable: the shells are arranged not in a cylinder under the turret ring, but in a circle of the floor, and hidden at the very bottom of the vehicle behind an extra layer of armor - hence [[NoKillLikeOverkill anything capable of triggering a magazine detonation likely destroys the tank anyway]]. As to the spare shell lockers, the [[UsefulNotes/RussiansWithRustingRockets new T-90 variants]] do move them into a bustle storage compartment - and Hatedom run afoul of the [[{{Hatedom}} bustle haters]], who believe that any large turret bustle is extremely likely to get hit in combat, whereas the baseline T-90 has a compact (short and broad) turret, and [[LuckilyMyShieldWillProtectMe it is impossible to hit anything but the heavily-protected front from a sector of 60°]]. Also, many Abrams loaders jam the doors open, [[WhatAnIdiot completely nullifying the protective qualities of the system]] - to [[DangerousForbiddenTechnique keep the rate of fire up]]. Finally, autoloaders are believed to be more usable in future tanks for two aspects: firstly, as the LensmanArmsRace is liable to continue, [[{{BFG}} tank guns]] will likely get [[UpToEleven even bigger]]: as of 1990, there were prototypes of prototypes a Leopard 2 variant with a 140 mm cannon and a T-80 variant with a 152 mm gun. Both of these exceeded the practical abilities of human loaders and were fitted with autoloaders - much like modern 152-155 mm artillery, which uses at least partially mechanized loading instead of ''two'' loaders per gun. The second element of prospective [[RussiansWithRustingRockets Russian]] tanks is removing the crew from the turret altogether, settling the issue completely by using [[NighInvulnerability a front-mounted capsule tough enough to survive the destruction of the rest of the vehicle]] - while even further reducing the size of the turret.
28th Aug '16 3:44:06 AM Morgenthaler
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** The [[UsefulNotes/RedsWithRockets Soviet school of design]] was informed heavily by [[UsefulNotes/WorldWarTwo WWII]] experience: although the [[NazisWithGnarlyWeapons German Überpanzer like the Panther and the Tiger]] could [[CurbStompBattle snipe Soviet tanks at extreme ranges]], they were notoriously unreliable and [[EliteArmy few in number]], owing to [[AwesomeButImpractical their bloated size and mass]] - the "medium" Panther was larger (and heavier) than the Soviet IS-2 heavy tank - and so the bulk of Heer armour was made of [[MookMobile Panzer IV]] and [[TanksButNoTanks StuG III]], which were nothing to write home about. This meant that the Soviets would keep capitalizing on the advantages of the T-34-85 (a fast and cheap JackOfAllStats) and then apply the same logic to NATO armour, expecting to counter their super-duper machines with [[ZergRush quantity]], [[ConfusionFu surprise, speed]], [[DeathFromAbove combined arms]] and [[AllYourBaseAreBelongToUs deep operations]], denying them [[HollywoodTactics a head-on engagement]] in which NATO armour would exploit its advantages. Not that it had that many - a Soviet tank of the [[UsefulNotes/ColdWar Cold War]] was armed with a [[{{BFG}} bigger gun]] and equally thick armour compared to a NATO design of the same [[TechnologyLevels generation]], while being [[LightningBruiser lighter]] (modern Western [=MBTs=] are approaching 70 t; [=ComBlock=] designs are no heavier than 45 t) and hence more agile and economically and logistically affordable. The sole reason for this was because, as it became apparent in WWII, the Soviets ruthlessly cut down on interior volume - while Western tanks are cramped, they seem [[UnnecessarilyLargeInterior ludicrously roomy]] in comparison with Soviet-school vehicles that are near ClownCar levels, which means that the crew, naturally, sit on top of ammo and fuel, and have by regulation to be shorter than 185 cm (which means that someone around 170 cm is actually comfortable). An autoloader does not worsen the safety situation, but helps shrink mass and size further by eliminating another member of the crew, and it was the Soviet mantra that the best protection is not being hit at all; also, the human loader would eventually get tired, and was a lot less effective in the more confined interior, as the pre-autoloader but equally small T-55 and T-62 show. Furthermore, Soviet tanks were expected to actively maneuver rather than snipe targets from hull-down positions (as NATO tanks were likely to be doing), and had poorer suspension; it is considerably harder to load the gun manually when the vertical stabilizer keeps thrusting the breech up and down. Additionally, the later-pattern autoloader on the T-72 is significantly less vulnerable: the shells are arranged not in a cylinder under the turret ring, but in a circle of the floor, and hidden at the very bottom of the vehicle behind an extra layer of armor - hence [[NoKillLikeOverkill anything capable of triggering a magazine detonation likely destroys the tank anyway]]. As to the spare shell lockers, the [[RussiansWithRustingRockets new T-90 variants]] do move them into a bustle storage compartment - and Hatedom run afoul of the [[{{Hatedom}} bustle haters]], who believe that any large turret bustle is extremely likely to get hit in combat, whereas the baseline T-90 has a compact (short and broad) turret, and [[LuckilyMyShieldWillProtectMe it is impossible to hit anything but the heavily-protected front from a sector of 60°]]. Also, many Abrams loaders jam the doors open, [[WhatAnIdiot completely nullifying the protective qualities of the system]] - to [[DangerousForbiddenTechnique keep the rate of fire up]]. Finally, autoloaders are believed to be more usable in future tanks for two aspects: firstly, as the LensmanArmsRace is liable to continue, [[{{BFG}} tank guns]] will likely get [[UpToEleven even bigger]]: as of 1990, there were prototypes of prototypes a Leopard 2 variant with a 140 mm cannon and a T-80 variant with a 152 mm gun. Both of these exceeded the practical abilities of human loaders and were fitted with autoloaders - much like modern 152-155 mm artillery, which uses at least partially mechanized loading instead of ''two'' loaders per gun. The second element of prospective [[RussiansWithRustingRockets Russian]] tanks is removing the crew from the turret altogether, settling the issue completely by using [[NighInvulnerability a front-mounted capsule tough enough to survive the destruction of the rest of the vehicle]] - while even further reducing the size of the turret.
** And then there are [[GaulsWithGrenades the French]], who TakeAThirdOption out of their love for GlassCannon tanks: the Leclerc stores its ammo in the bustle, AND mounts an autoloader inside of it, and, as a bonus, it's even faster-firing than the Soviet equivalents.

to:

** The [[UsefulNotes/RedsWithRockets Soviet school of design]] was informed heavily by [[UsefulNotes/WorldWarTwo WWII]] experience: although the [[NazisWithGnarlyWeapons German Überpanzer like the Panther and the Tiger]] could [[CurbStompBattle snipe Soviet tanks at extreme ranges]], they were notoriously unreliable and [[EliteArmy few in number]], owing to [[AwesomeButImpractical their bloated size and mass]] - the "medium" Panther was larger (and heavier) than the Soviet IS-2 heavy tank - and so the bulk of Heer armour was made of [[MookMobile Panzer IV]] and [[TanksButNoTanks StuG III]], which were nothing to write home about. This meant that the Soviets would keep capitalizing on the advantages of the T-34-85 (a fast and cheap JackOfAllStats) and then apply the same logic to NATO armour, expecting to counter their super-duper machines with [[ZergRush quantity]], [[ConfusionFu surprise, speed]], [[DeathFromAbove combined arms]] and [[AllYourBaseAreBelongToUs deep operations]], denying them [[HollywoodTactics a head-on engagement]] in which NATO armour would exploit its advantages. Not that it had that many - a Soviet tank of the [[UsefulNotes/ColdWar Cold War]] was armed with a [[{{BFG}} bigger gun]] and equally thick armour compared to a NATO design of the same [[TechnologyLevels generation]], while being [[LightningBruiser lighter]] (modern Western [=MBTs=] are approaching 70 t; [=ComBlock=] designs are no heavier than 45 t) and hence more agile and economically and logistically affordable. The sole reason for this was because, as it became apparent in WWII, the Soviets ruthlessly cut down on interior volume - while Western tanks are cramped, they seem [[UnnecessarilyLargeInterior ludicrously roomy]] in comparison with Soviet-school vehicles that are near ClownCar levels, which means that the crew, naturally, sit on top of ammo and fuel, and have by regulation to be shorter than 185 cm (which means that someone around 170 cm is actually comfortable). An autoloader does not worsen the safety situation, but helps shrink mass and size further by eliminating another member of the crew, and it was the Soviet mantra that the best protection is not being hit at all; also, the human loader would eventually get tired, and was a lot less effective in the more confined interior, as the pre-autoloader but equally small T-55 and T-62 show. Furthermore, Soviet tanks were expected to actively maneuver rather than snipe targets from hull-down positions (as NATO tanks were likely to be doing), and had poorer suspension; it is considerably harder to load the gun manually when the vertical stabilizer keeps thrusting the breech up and down. Additionally, the later-pattern autoloader on the T-72 is significantly less vulnerable: the shells are arranged not in a cylinder under the turret ring, but in a circle of the floor, and hidden at the very bottom of the vehicle behind an extra layer of armor - hence [[NoKillLikeOverkill anything capable of triggering a magazine detonation likely destroys the tank anyway]]. As to the spare shell lockers, the [[RussiansWithRustingRockets [[UsefulNotes/RussiansWithRustingRockets new T-90 variants]] do move them into a bustle storage compartment - and Hatedom run afoul of the [[{{Hatedom}} bustle haters]], who believe that any large turret bustle is extremely likely to get hit in combat, whereas the baseline T-90 has a compact (short and broad) turret, and [[LuckilyMyShieldWillProtectMe it is impossible to hit anything but the heavily-protected front from a sector of 60°]]. Also, many Abrams loaders jam the doors open, [[WhatAnIdiot completely nullifying the protective qualities of the system]] - to [[DangerousForbiddenTechnique keep the rate of fire up]]. Finally, autoloaders are believed to be more usable in future tanks for two aspects: firstly, as the LensmanArmsRace is liable to continue, [[{{BFG}} tank guns]] will likely get [[UpToEleven even bigger]]: as of 1990, there were prototypes of prototypes a Leopard 2 variant with a 140 mm cannon and a T-80 variant with a 152 mm gun. Both of these exceeded the practical abilities of human loaders and were fitted with autoloaders - much like modern 152-155 mm artillery, which uses at least partially mechanized loading instead of ''two'' loaders per gun. The second element of prospective [[RussiansWithRustingRockets Russian]] tanks is removing the crew from the turret altogether, settling the issue completely by using [[NighInvulnerability a front-mounted capsule tough enough to survive the destruction of the rest of the vehicle]] - while even further reducing the size of the turret.
** And then there are [[GaulsWithGrenades [[UsefulNotes/GaulsWithGrenades the French]], who TakeAThirdOption out of their love for GlassCannon tanks: the Leclerc stores its ammo in the bustle, AND mounts an autoloader inside of it, and, as a bonus, it's even faster-firing than the Soviet equivalents.
20th Aug '16 4:50:58 AM isolato
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** The Federation does it to the EMH-Mark-Is (upon which ''Series/StarTrekVoyager'''s Doctor is based). This, when they have devices capable of disassembling matter to the subatomic level and ships that bend the laws of reality at command, not to mention a race of friendly living ore processors (the Horta). But no, they consign outdated humanoid ''holograms'' with glorified shovels and picks to mining. This implies that the Federation either does this on a wide scale, or that they specifically modified this mine with holo-emitters to do such a thing.[[note]]Voyager's Doctor has a mobile holo-emitter, but this is [[BlackBox one of a kind device from 29th century which can't be replicated by 24th century technology]] and it's on board of Voyager in the Delta quadrant anyway.[[/note]] No amount of FridgeLogic can save ''this'' one.

to:

** The Federation does it to the EMH-Mark-Is (upon which ''Series/StarTrekVoyager'''s Doctor is based). This, when they have devices capable of disassembling matter to the subatomic level and ships that bend the laws of reality at command, not to mention a race of friendly living ore processors (the Horta). But no, they consign outdated humanoid ''holograms'' with glorified shovels and picks to mining. This implies that the Federation either does this on a wide scale, or that they specifically modified this mine with holo-emitters to do such a thing.[[note]]Voyager's Doctor has a mobile holo-emitter, but this is [[BlackBox one of a kind device from 29th century which can't be replicated by 24th century technology]] and it's on board of Voyager in the Delta quadrant Quadrant anyway.[[/note]] No amount of FridgeLogic can save ''this'' one.
20th Aug '16 4:40:49 AM isolato
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** The Federation does it to the EMH-Mark-Is (upon which ''Series/StarTrekVoyager'''s Doctor is based). This, when they have devices capable of disassembling matter to the subatomic level and ships that bend the laws of reality at command, not to mention a race of friendly living ore processors (the Horta). But no, they consign outdated humanoid ''holograms'' with glorified shovels and picks to mining. This implies that the Federation either does this on a wide scale, or that they specifically modified this mine to do such a thing. No amount of FridgeLogic can save ''this'' one.

to:

** The Federation does it to the EMH-Mark-Is (upon which ''Series/StarTrekVoyager'''s Doctor is based). This, when they have devices capable of disassembling matter to the subatomic level and ships that bend the laws of reality at command, not to mention a race of friendly living ore processors (the Horta). But no, they consign outdated humanoid ''holograms'' with glorified shovels and picks to mining. This implies that the Federation either does this on a wide scale, or that they specifically modified this mine with holo-emitters to do such a thing. thing.[[note]]Voyager's Doctor has a mobile holo-emitter, but this is [[BlackBox one of a kind device from 29th century which can't be replicated by 24th century technology]] and it's on board of Voyager in the Delta quadrant anyway.[[/note]] No amount of FridgeLogic can save ''this'' one.
17th Aug '16 5:19:41 AM Morgenthaler
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* In VorkosiganSaga Jacksonians, being a Mafia-ruled planet often engage in slavery, though their most valuable slaves are less for mundane purposes and more for exotic things like replacing the brains of clones with those of rich men who wish for a rather vampiric immortality. On Barrayar slavery is illegal, but it's status as an unevenly developed civilization means that in many parts they will depend on manual labor, sometimes in nasty conditions.

to:

* In VorkosiganSaga Literature/VorkosiganSaga Jacksonians, being a Mafia-ruled planet often engage in slavery, though their most valuable slaves are less for mundane purposes and more for exotic things like replacing the brains of clones with those of rich men who wish for a rather vampiric immortality. On Barrayar slavery is illegal, but it's status as an unevenly developed civilization means that in many parts they will depend on manual labor, sometimes in nasty conditions.
8th Aug '16 6:55:15 PM zarpaulus
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** Played with in the novel ''Prisoner Of The Daleks'', a SpaceMarine points out that Daleks do have tunnelling equipment that could do the job of clearing rubble in minutes. But Daleks [[ForTheEvulz enjoy subjugating other races]].

to:

** Played with in "Destiny of the novel ''Prisoner Of The Daleks'', a SpaceMarine Daleks", one of the Daleks' human slaves points out that Daleks do have tunnelling equipment that could do the job of clearing rubble their mining work in minutes. But Daleks [[ForTheEvulz enjoy subjugating other races]].
31st Jul '16 4:32:11 AM Malady
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* Those that did think the steam engine was great tended to not be taken seriously. One guy was pretty sure that Hero's Engine could be used to predict the weather. Given that the boiling point of water varies depending on air pressure, and that quite a bit of the weather is dependent on moving high/low pressure fronts, he was probably actually on to something. Ancient Greece also had several factors working against it that are considered a requirement for industrialization. First, their technology base was actually very low, to the point that they had little access to high grade iron for a good steel industry. Second, they had no real centralized polity to ram the reforms down their throats. Third, they would not have been able to afford it even if they did have a fully centralized authority. They actually saw the potential, but wrote it off as a case of AwesomeButImpractical. Even the Romans, who could have possibly done it to a limited degree, would not have been able to fully pull it off for the first and third reasons respectively. The nations of Europe in the late 18th century which kicked the industrial revolution off actually had more concentrated wealth ''individually'' than the entire Roman Empire at its' height.
* Consider also the medieval Chinese, who invented so many amazing feats of chemistry, engineering and metallurgy yet somehow were eclipsed by the western European nations and remained a bit of an industrial backwater for hundreds of years. Though much of this was cultural, as Confucianism taught rigorous adherence to the status quo. The Chinese were never able to separate philosophy from religion and they were never able to invent the scientific ''method''. They did have all the ingredients for the scientific and technological revolution, but they never made the final breakthrough. Once that was introduced from outside, however, China has rapidly risen to the spearhead of technology.

to:

* ** Those that did think the steam engine was great tended to not be taken seriously. One guy was pretty sure that Hero's Engine could be used to predict the weather. Given that the boiling point of water varies depending on air pressure, and that quite a bit of the weather is dependent on moving high/low pressure fronts, he was probably actually on to something. Ancient Greece also had several factors working against it that are considered a requirement for industrialization. First, their technology base was actually very low, to the point that they had little access to high grade iron for a good steel industry. Second, they had no real centralized polity to ram the reforms down their throats. Third, they would not have been able to afford it even if they did have a fully centralized authority. They actually saw the potential, but wrote it off as a case of AwesomeButImpractical. Even the Romans, who could have possibly done it to a limited degree, would not have been able to fully pull it off for the first and third reasons respectively. The nations of Europe in the late 18th century which kicked the industrial revolution off actually had more concentrated wealth ''individually'' than the entire Roman Empire at its' height.
* ** Consider also the medieval Chinese, who invented so many amazing feats of chemistry, engineering and metallurgy yet somehow were eclipsed by the western European nations and remained a bit of an industrial backwater for hundreds of years. Though much of this was cultural, as Confucianism taught rigorous adherence to the status quo. The Chinese were never able to separate philosophy from religion and they were never able to invent the scientific ''method''. They did have all the ingredients for the scientific and technological revolution, but they never made the final breakthrough. Once that was introduced from outside, however, China has rapidly risen to the spearhead of technology.
29th Jul '16 12:57:46 PM DanaO
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

** It's possible they were a useful workforce earlier during the "setting things up" phase and some combination of bad contracts, unanticipated level of reproduction, and passenger transport turning out less profitable than projected meant when they finally should have been paid off, left and retired, they (and their descendants) ended up stuck instead.
17th Jul '16 6:21:21 PM nombretomado
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* In Jerry Pournelle's ''Falkenberg's Legion'' series and [[CoDominium its spinoffs]], the colonized planets generally have little or no industry or infrastructure, and the CoDominium keeps shipping convicts and dissidents to them whether they like it or not. In particular, Haven, Tanith, Frystaat, Thurstone, Arrarat, Hadley, and Sparta all have a permanent underclass, with degrees of unfreedom ranging from "can't vote" to "outright property".

to:

* In Jerry Pournelle's ''Falkenberg's Legion'' series and [[CoDominium its spinoffs]], spinoffs, the colonized planets generally have little or no industry or infrastructure, and the CoDominium Literature/CoDominium keeps shipping convicts and dissidents to them whether they like it or not. In particular, Haven, Tanith, Frystaat, Thurstone, Arrarat, Hadley, and Sparta all have a permanent underclass, with degrees of unfreedom ranging from "can't vote" to "outright property".
18th May '16 9:17:14 PM zarpaulus
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

* In ''VideoGame/{{Stellaris}}'' Collectivist and/or Xenophobic empires can legalize slavery. Enslaved population units have a bonus to farming and mining but a penalty to research.
This list shows the last 10 events of 118. Show all.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Main.WeWillUseManualLaborInTheFuture