There isn't a solution to that. You have to talk to other points, and you have to do so from a connection you are on. That information, on ANY network in the world, is inevitable.
Hmm. Depending on the kind of traffic, and provided that public key encryption were used in a way similar to PGP, wouldn't a multi-hop transfer offer a solution? Provided that the level of traffic would be sufficient to scramble the time correlation of messages exchanged...
Yes, I get it, space is like Heaven for atheists.
Ever since Muslims were banned from going to Mars by a fatwa? I guess it is!
SpaceX has achieved pretty much fuck all in its first decade compared to what Boeing was working on when it received its first (far smaller) government contracts.
Really? I thought Boeing was forced to build furniture after WW I.
1. There's no mention of either Earth's magnetic field or DNA in the Nature article, demonstrating that you can bullshit people twice for the price of one. Neat!
2. The fact that Earth's magnetic field has a documented history of significant changes, reversals, and even almost-disappearances for time periods way beyond the lifetime of any single multicellular organism demonstrates at least that the function of DNA isn't significantly disrupted by absence or presence of weak magnetic fields.
More importantly, each train had its own "personality" and handled differently, and all of them would take between one and two seconds to respond after an input was commanded except for E-stops, which instantly opened the relay contactors and applied air to the friction brakes.
Don't we have machine learning and adaptive control for that? These things should still be easier for a computer than for a human. Even momentary weight estimates could work based on the most recent history of acceleration and engine power. You shouldn't even need full automatic control; If you absolutely need humans in control, you could still give them semi-auto modes. Apollo LEMs had those in 1969 already. Why does it have to be full-auto or full-manual?
Nothing's ever on the level in D.C.
Now imagine the terrain in A.C.!
even if the populous voted
The populous what?
It's "the intentional creation of the apprehension of imminent harmful or offensive contact"
Your interpretation of that seems overly broad. All actions are intentional, and some of them create the apprehension of imminent harmful or offensive contact, but does that imply that all intentional actions (which are all of them) creating the apprehension of imminent harmful or offensive contact intend to create the apprehension of imminent harmful or offensive contact? If I ask someone at night what's the time, 1) it's intentional, and 2) that person might mistakenly get the apprehension of imminent harmful or offensive contact, but 3) is it my intention to create the apprehension of imminent harmful or offensive contact? It's not the same thing as throwing a stone at someone and missing, where a misunderstanding is much less likely.