Plus the extra weight of the radio and the antenna. Tiny, perhaps, but not inconsequential.

Clemency? That can't happen, because it would legitimise his leaks. Right now, not only is he considered unreliabl by many on simple grounds of being "a traitor", but he's in exile in Russia -- Russia! -- so anyone with a slight hint of right-wingedness will be disregarding everything he leaks.

Why be partisan when in all major democracies, the two major parties are practically separated-at-birth twins?

Ah, but that's what they want you to think...!

Also, as the drone has to compensate for wind, the drone can tell you what the wind strength is, so you don't have to estimate it from sighting a tree.

Apart from every quadcopter pilot whose flight time would be drastically reduced thanks to the second radio constantly drawing current, even when out in the middle of a desert.

You can't "perfectly legally" fly an unmanned aircraft in an unmanned aircraft no-fly zone.

The job of TFS is to tell me whether or not I am interested in TFA. If I have to read TFA to understand TFS, then TFS is NFU. [No F***ing Use.]

Be careful, those toasters will drive you mad.

The main car would need a cable for the full length of the building. The problem with cables (if I understand the article correctly) is not the infeasibility of the length, it's the weight that comes with it. The point of counterweights is to have roughly similar weights either side of the fulcrum (ie the winch), but when there's a lot of cable, the long end is going to be heavier than the short end. My point isn't to reduce the cable length of the main car, but just to compensate for the change of weight as the cable moves from one side of the winch to the other.

Only if you do a one-for-one mapping of instructions. The x86 can take advantage of more sophisticated opcodes (eg MULT) to cut down on the number of instructions and its general purpose registers to reduce Load and Store calls (with the associated address bytes). I'd expect x86 to be shorter, if programmed correctly....

Which is exactly his point. Even 16-bit x86 processors have more general-purpose register space than z80, so there should be fewer memory calls required. x86 has a more sophisticated instruction set (z80 has no multiplication instruction), so program the exact same algorithm in the two assemblers and you will get a smaller program in x86 than in z80.

No we're not. We're talking long-distance elevators. Or do you think someone will ever get to the top floor of a 1km high building if the car stops at every floor. Every time you're almost there, you'll have to stop for a pee break then wait for the car to come back.

Various skyscrapers have extremely high capacity lifts -- the Petronas Towers have double-decker lifts with a capacity of 52 passengers.

Yeah, but the lag on the satellite broadband suddenly drops away...

Actually, if you're building a tower that high anyway, you'd be just as well using it as a pseudo-satellite broadband provider -- the horizon is over 100 km away when you're a kilometre up. You can serve wireless internet to a small country from up there....

...or in the case of a building over the height of 1.6 km, the "Mile High Club".