Ooh .. so clever. You posed a question then made up an answer. You could instead do some research into why the fish ladder approach that was investigated 20 years ago proved infeasible if you really were interested. Post the results when you do the work.

If we suppose that there is an underlying error rate in classifying pox-like rashes as chicken pox then when true chicken pox cases become very rare reported cases that are misclassifications will naturally dominate. Then too, with true cases very rare any given physician is going to have little experience in observing and correctly identifying it, so the error rate should be expected to go up.

They are supposed to be honest not fraudulent.

And we aren't living in one yet. SpaceX with its actually reusable boosters has gotten launch costs down to new lows, $1500/kg is the lowest price now available. Cheap for space launch, but not really cheap yet.

Notice that Starship is no where close to being recoverable at this point. So far it is a one use booster, same as the bad old days of space flight. The current estimate for the cost of the three launch program thus far is around $3 billion, or a billion dollars per launch. It is likely that the incremental cost for the fourth launch is will be in the hundreds of millions, but until SpaceX can demonstrate a Starship returning from orbit in reusable condition this is not going to bring launch costs down at all.

It remains to be seen whether what was achieved with Falcon and Falcon Heavy which are only retrieved from sub-orbital launch trajectories with a powered descent will be achievable with Starship using an entirely different recovery strategy.

Calling this video "security footage" as if this was a 7-11 is likely a serious error leading to trivializing what happened here. These cameras were filming safety related work in progress, not a building perimeter, or customers walking into a store. They were documenting important safety related work and since Amazon Deep Glacier storage costs $1/month/TB compressed video could have been stored for years at trivial cost to Boeing. And they could store it themselves even more cheaply -- its a very big company and can afford its own archival structure.

The predecessor to Paramount+ for Star Trek, CBS All Access, was even worse. My spouse actively hated it, and we stopped watching the new Star Trek series live and just wait for the DVDs to drop.

Welcome our radioactive mutant cancer-immune wolf overlords.

This AC theory aligns with my own suspicion that "Satoshi Nakamoto" is really a small group of Wall Street quants looking for a way to create another bubble that they could exploit to semi-legally steal more billions.

Excellent points all. My theory is that it was not the work of one person and that "Satoshi" is a fictional entity. Not to have any evidence of the work that went into developing it? Never spoke to anyone about the project during its gestation? Even if he destroyed every thing he touched while developing it, he would be able to provide from a memory a detailed credible account of how he developed the ideas, how the project proceeded, show code written before the Satoshi drop that looks like it was done by the same person, etc.

Although people are naturally focusing on cryptographic proofs - the Genesis Block and the early mined coins that have never surfaced, having Satoshi's private signing key - all of which are different proofs that would be all but incontrovertible there should be more ways the real entity ("Satoshi" may not be a single person) could demonstrate it -- for example records of the development of the algorithms, records of activities that can be synced up with Natoshi's postings. etc.

Put yourself in "Satoshi's" shoes and suppose you had done what he did. Initially you chose to be completely anonymous and so released what you had developed completely anonymously. Unless you physically destroyed all of your storage for all of your computing systems you should be able to produce credible records of your activities that could be validated by forensic analysis. Even if you had destroyed it all, Mr. Robot style, you should be able to provide from memory a detailed account of how you developed it, and a believable story of why you destroyed the digital evidence, but now want to be recognized. People who wish to confess to acts they actually did can usually provide credible accounts, including secret knowledge that can be verified that established they really did it.

If a guy looks like a hoaxer, and has been caught trying to fabricate evidence that he tries to pass off as proof, then can be assumed to be what he appears to be - a hoaxer.

My theory is that "Satoshi" is not one person but either a spook of some kind (agencies really can keep secrets very well), or possibly something like a small group of Wall Street quants deliberately trying to create the sort of bubble that they intended to exploit.

Just saying.

Less than five years really, from the end of the EHT observing campaign at the end of April 2018. The paper was submitted for publication in early September 2023, and the data processing was finished long before that to draft a 66 page paper with about 200 authors from all over the world. I expect simply writing the paper in its various drafts could have taken a full year or even more.

The first EHT image took two years to prepare, and was a bit like a dry run, shaking down the whole very complex system, and collection and analysis processes. This second run collected a lot more data that needed processing. This is nothing like snapping a photograph. A great deal of meticulous analysis went in to extracting all the information they could from the collected data and cross-checking everything.

A concern I have is that there should be a mandate that all solar farms in remote areas be dark - as in no night time lighting at all. There is a compulsion by all facility builders that the facility, even if unmanned, must be brightly lit at night. There is no reason why a solar farm needs any lights at night, none. Keep people out? Build a fence with motion detectors. Install infrared cameras if you like, they are cheap. If you need to send someone around the place at night bring the light with them, or have (shielded) lights turn on automatically when they are in sector. But don't light the whole place up, wasting electricity for no valid reason.

Since the sun shines everywhere this is a claim that we can grow crops anywhere. This is clearly not true, only some fraction of the U.S. landmass has all the requirements for successful farming. Currently 17% of the U.S. is devoted to growing crops so that leaves 83% where the sun shines and will not interfere with crops. It would only require 0.5% of the land area of the U.S. built out as solar farms to produce all of the electricity that the U.S. currently produces in a year.

Yeah, the aren't so hard up for land that we can't use any for solar farms.

This "But think of the plants!" faux environmentalism by opponents of renewable energy is both comical and predictable. Like the "But think of the birds! " opposition to wind turbines - no one espousing this talking points is genuinely concerned about the feigned issue, and can't build an argument on actual facts.

Engineers should be able to understand that eliminating the use of fossil fuels is essential to minimize a global climatic catastrophe that cannot be entirely avoided at this late date. Ignoring the externalities of you system is bad engineering, though a common enough practice since other people can be forced to pay for them. Advocating bad engineering does not justify your self-conceit of being a good engineer.