No, if you did deeper, you'll find the horrors that Jon Pertwee's Doctor was trying to save us from, by stopping the crust penetrating drill.
You want to stick a candle that burns at both ends into the sun.
Aim at another sun.
Someone want to link the Schlock Mercenary strip where a bunch of idiot AI's steered a gas giant into another gas giant by doing this?
Same here! I can only reply to existing messages, and cannot otherwise comment on my own videos.
And that is *AFTER* upgrading to stupid forced-social share-your-details stupidity -- before that I could not do anything without making a brand-new account just for replying to youtube.
Where was this treaty visible to the public during negotiations?
This treaty may be horrible. But just like more well-known free-trade treaties, it seems like we are just now finding out about it, after it is too late to do anything to change it.
*THAT* is what has to change.
As someone who ran a Tor exit node for years (and has the bright green t-shirt to prove it), I don't think the protocol has anything to do with the speeds of Tor. Not inherently, anyway. Tor is slow because the vast majority of its nodes run on asymmetric consumer links.
The Tor protocol *is* the problem.
Tor says "I will use one encrypted channel, and send your data out that one channel, regardless of its speed".
Not "I will borrow from IP. I will open many encrypted channels, and send packets of data out each channel. The end node will re-assemble data from those channels. We will use the IP protocol to retransmit lost packets over each channel.".
IP, even though it is physically 1 channel, pretends to be 8 channels that each can transmit one packet. Something very similar to this could be used, and then if you have a slow link, that one slow channel only sends a small number of packets.
Tor *relies* on high volume to mask individual traffic. The only way to get high traffic is to make it "fast enough". With the default behavior, that any node can be an intermediary, any channel may wind up with a slow node in the middle, and then suddenly speed is lost. When speed is lost, people stop using Tor.
That is problem number one with Tor.
Problem 2 with Tor is less obvious. It claims to know what kind of anonymity you want. If all I want is to hide who I am talking to / what I am saying from my direct eavesdropper (my ISP, the local wireless hotspot), then all I need is to talk to one intermediary. Tor forces 2. There's good reasons to require 2 if I want full privacy, but maybe I don't.
If I want to split my communication into many streams, and have it re-assembled, then there must be lots of one-intermediary-hop streams.
That's good enough to stop my ISP from spying on me.
The normal encryption is good enough to stop the wireless hotspot people from watching me.
For 80%+ of usage (probably closer to 95%), that's sufficient.
Requiring more means slower.
Design a protocol so that none of the node can tell if you are using a 2-hop or a 3-hop system.
The entry nodes cannot tell if they are talking to the originator or to another node. (I think Tor fails this -- the first hop uses a different protocol than the rest, as I understand it).
The intermediates cannot tell if they are talking to first and last hops, or another intermediate.
Many years ago, I tried explaining this on the Tor discussion lists, and did a bad job of explaining it.
The last time I checked, the Tor people wanted a security analysis of all proposals.
And the one thing I know for certain is that I am incapable/incompetent at that.
I was taught that very high speeds came with very short wires, and getting chips faster than about 5 GHz meant that you could not even have external support chips, never mind the constant wait for memory to respond and sitting around idle at the inevitable cache failures if you went faster.
Hence, the push from Intel, etc., to massive numbers of cores rather than faster cores as transistors shrank farther.
If they were smart, they'd have the character just blowing ten or fifteen creatures away before they had a chance to draw.
"Han. You're still alive!"
"I shot first."
Leia: "Han, stop shooting first! We need to interrogate someone".
(I think that's the quote from Darths and Droids)
God, I really hope they follow the Han Solo Trilogy, 1: because I must have read them 10 times each as a teenager
It's some nice memories of your childhood you have there. It would be unfortunate if someone came along and ruined them for you.
"That'ssss a very nice memory you have there, it would be a shame if ssssomething happened to it"
Great, so we end up with Darth Binks.
_General_ Binks is the most capable person the pro-republic forces have. Darths and Droids for citation.
The question is not, who did the electoral college vote for.
The question is, who did the states send to the electoral college.
"Rachel from Cardholder Services" would disagree with that assessment.
I thought the FCC *did* file a suit against Cardholder Services for that junk. What happened?
The entire RTS section of the gaming world is missing.
May I suggest Warcraft 1, or the predecessor Dune 2, or even the grandaddy of them all, Populous?
Populous was actually real time _strategy_. The rest were real time _tactics_ and micromanagement.
You can't say that for any other MMO.
Granted, I run Minecraft with a ginormous amount of mods, but is there any reason I have to give 5GB to a game that should have ridiculously low resource requirements based on what it is actually doing?
Because you use "a ginormous amount of mods".
Any one of which could be programmed poorly.
The base game can run in less than 1 GB -- no joke, 1 GB is huge for vanilla.
What happened to the dinosaurs? Some of them grew wings, developed feathers, and are still around. Just ask the chicken what it's ancestor was like.