debunked in the 70s
... and still taught to to me in grade school the mid 80s
6 different wifi network segments, all with different routers and CCSID
It sure is a shame when a company blatantly alienates
If you can get an appeal. If the evidence against you wasn't fabricated or "overstated".
I can confidently say that there are crimes so horrible that the death penalty is appropriate for. The problem is you can't undo the punishment if the criminal justice system is found to have made a mistake. How do you objectively measure the level of perceived doubt of guilt between McVeigh and the innocent individuals who have likely been executed? Until we can prosecute with 100% certainty, I can't support executing a convicted criminal.
I think the problem with that part of history was the state involvement in the surveillance. Which is different than something like dashcams in Russia that provide evidence to defend yourself in court against widespread insurance fraud and police corruption. Or security camera footage that is used to publicly shame someone for being a horrible person-- in contrast to imprisonment and execution from information gained by threats of the same for being complicit if you are found not to report the information to the state.
The biggest difference between these types of surveillance is that, in the case of the state, it is a third party to the actions talking place. The most a person recording the footage is removed from the actions in a "surveillance society" is a role of eye witness.
For mobile applications, our prototypical controller uses a small driver IC (Model Durel D356B, sine wave, 220 Vpp, 230Hz to 390Hz). This driver IC generates the high-voltage AC signal from a 1.0-7.0V DC power source. If a higher luminance is required, a stronger 0-12.0V driver IC with a slightly bigger footprint can be used (Model Sparkfun DC12V10M, sine wave, 220Vpp, 800Hz to 3.5KHz). A microcontroller (ATmega2560) triggers optocouplers (MOC3063) for multiplexing the high-voltage signal between display pins.