Cost of an attack (say, a missile) is much lower than the cost of the defense against it (counter-missiles and related detection/tracking systems).

One of war strategies is simply overwhelming defense capabilities by attacking first, launching multiple cheap attacks and exhausting first the deployed then the stored defense missiles. Their production would simply not keep up.

Cyberweapons likely make the attack costs even lower.

Theory vs practice.

In theory all these mechanisms help.

From experience a car with "emergency braking" would slam the breaks, jolting everone, while approaching a boom barrier - because the programmer did not think of such scenario. It would also detect benign metal surfaces (such as road signs, barriers along the road) and "help" with braking at higher speeds, creating risk o the road - because the sensors are still very limited and programmers trust them too much.

Yes, these get fixed, eventually. Even Tesla has a hard time figuring it out, other car logic might be even more behind.

The spiral comes from the fact that mechanisms to support faulty drivers breed even more faults in drivers. Lack of sensor warning becomes "everything is ok".
People get conditioned to "I stop car in a garage when my parking sensor starts beeping" so much that they just crash into the wall when there is no beep - the sensor failed, is disabled, or they drive a different car without sensors.

"GPS told me to drive into this river".

"1. The latest wifi security protocol - and the ability to upgrade effortlessly, as new protocols are ratified"

New security protocols typically require new encryption mechanisms that have to be implemented in hardware by the wifi chip to work with a reasonable throughput. Some of it can be patched, but changing to a new security mechanism (like WEP -> WPA) means new hardware.

In case of dishwasher you pay for processing/disposal of 3l of dirty water. Handwashing costs 40.100l of water disposal, plus unnecessary wasted clean water. Does the cost of composting some of the food offset wasting so much clean water? These are hard questions...

Ecologically it is good to compost, however it may change little in paid costs - highly depending on country/region/city regulations.

Power usage estimation (daily use):
365 days * 0.35 kWh * 0.20EUR ~= 25 EUR per year.

Water savings estimation (10min washing @ 4l/min):
365 days * (40 - 3) l / 1000 * 2 EUR ~ = 27 EUR per year.

This seems to balance out, however with water you typically pay more than listed clean cold water delivery price - there is also water heating and waste water disposal. Some countries base your general waste payment on water usage.

Time savings estimation:
365 days * 10min = 60 hours per year = priceless private time

Overall a dishwasher is still a saving.

From water consumption PoV a dishwasher is MUCH more efficient. They do not use much electric energy either.
Dishwasher production cost (in energy, water and resources) would need to be known and amortized for a more meaningful comparison though.

This is already happening in corporations. Securing corporate computers, especially for remote work, is an uphill battle. Corporations see server-side rendering of the browser as a security feature. In that aspect makes sense, as there is already no privacy on a company-owned computer.

GIMP supports 8/16/32 bit colour depth setting. "GIMP all internal processing is done at 32-bit floating point precision".

It is usually a matter of formulating the question to obtain an answer they want:
"Do you want to see random or relevant ads?"

Additional point - these people prefer to pay with their time (watching ads) rather then money.

They commented that the same pressure drop during flight would not have caused problem (still within specification), as the threshold in the test was set "too low" just in case.
APU was likely tested, but this could have been interaction of the whole stack/system (hydrogen fuel gas tank with APU and engine) and a combined effect happened.

It's not as simple as "hydraulics".

Short version: Space Shuttle used hydrazine for auxiliary power units that (I suppose) provide hydraulic pressure.
SLS reesigned these APUs to run off hydrogen instead. This modification didn't behave as expected - pressure dropped below a threshold they set for this test.

Agreed on "real" profile, this was a test with different goals and constraints.

Rocket burns more and more fuel, rocket gets lighter, => less thrust is needed, engines are shut down.

Twitch already muted portions of the recordings and displayed message "Audio for portions of this video has been muted as it appears to contain copyrighted material owned or controlled by a third pary".

It seems as if they are trying to tackle the live streams now, too.