Of course. Close enough counts with horseshoes, hand grenades, and nuclear ordnance.
If only they had this system in the 25th century...
Temba, his arms wide.
with raid 5 you lose a percentage of the disks you use (like ~25% if you use 4 disks).
You're right about the amount for 4 disks, but the general answer to how much you lose in RAID5 is "one disk". The percentages change with the number of disks involved in the array. So in a 3 drive array (the minimum for RAID5), you lose one disk; 1/3 = 33%. For a 10 drive array, you still lose 1 disk, but 1/10 is only 10%, so the efficiency is better the more drives you use.
I've had this conversation more than a few times with people over the years and I believe that your idea of what atheist means is wrong.
I believe an atheist is someone who believes that there is no god, while an agnostic is someone who believes that it is impossible to say definitively one way or the other whether there is a god and therefore doesn't believe in a god (or the non-existence of god).
Your point about
To believe something exists, you need proof it exists. To believe something doesn't exists, you need proof it doesn't exist. To not believe something exists, you just need to not have proof it exists.
is way off the mark. You absolutely do not need proof to believe, you only need faith. Belief plus evidence equals knowing, which is different again.
I think that in your elephant example, your non-belief makes you an elephant-bathtub-agnostic. You don't know of the elephants existence or non-existence, but you choose not to believe with the expectation that you may be proven wrong by further evidence.
To sum up, atheism is the belief in non-existence of god, just as theism is the belief in the existence of god. Agnosticism is the lack of belief in god. And you sir are an agnostic in my estimation.
It seems that if this platform is coupled with a laser weapon there would be effectively no limit to the amount of destruction that could be rained down on one's enemies while this drone is airborne.
Imagine a high-flying drone that circles over an area for months at a time, sniping strategic targets with a laser at will.
Now imagine a whole fleet of them.
>>>It's about constant exposure to low frequencies
Low electrical frequencies would have far less harm than the high electrical frequencies coming out of your TV and computer and LCD and CFL bulb and car's alternator and nearby FM radio tower and Wifi modem and.....
Why do you think that? Do you have any kind of proof that points to higher frequency background EM radiation being more harmful than low frequency? Or is that just an assumption on your part?
I'll be the first to say I don't know and I admit I'm curious. My initial thinking would lead me to believe that certain resonant frequencies would be the most harmful and that those frequencies could be found up and down the spectrum.
I know several high IQ people with DUIs on their record. Base attributes are supposed to be what the attribute is BEFORE modifiers are taken into account. Any decision or actions made when affected by a modifying state (19 vodka redbulls) would not affect your base attribute after the effect wears off (sleep off the hangover).
High WIS means not getting drunk in the first place.