This is the AWS hosted service (formerly "AWS ElasticSearch Service") based on OpenDistro for ElasticSearch adding OpenSearch and being renamed.

Slightly new, but certainly not unexpected after OpenDistro was renamed to OpenSearch (They basically changed the name and added OpenSearch 1.0 as an option)

Possession of stolen property is a crime. If you see a too-good-to-be-true deal and don't demand proof-of-purchase you take the risk....

What this shows, is confirmation that such a response is possible, which means that it might be possible to develop a vaccine that stops all of those viruses and potential future similar ones.

Interestingly, these concerns are about a CDC lab, not the Wuhan Institute of Virology... (I know "Wuhan CDC" is close to the market, not sure if that is the same place as "the Wuhan branch of the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention")

(WIV is significantly further away (~14 km / 9 miles) and is what most of the theories focussed on)

If they survived the first infection without issues...

There is data (another study) that a single vaccine dose in the previously infected significantly boosts the immune response. (An infection seems similar to one dose of the two-dose vaccines)

And by hosting content for free (often demonetised for business reasons), they actually subsidise the content - bandwidth is not free....

I know Tesla claims "<2 kWh/mile" (That, with the range and the Model 3's battery specs calculates to about a 6 ton battery) (that would be " 1.25 kWh / km" when converted to units used in the vast majority of places)

The industrial loads does not often vary as quickly as the world's truck fleets being connected and disconnected though?

(I do see uses for battery-electric trucks for local deliveries though, long distance just seems better suited for hydrogen (or possibly electrified roads) though. (but the report below seems like it might not be completely impractical, with assumptions about future gains and different weight limits for electric trucks)

This report seems interesting as well. They claim around a 4 ton battery by 2030 and energy consumption between 1.1 kWh / km (2030) and 1.4 kWh/km (now) for battery-electric trucks (which seems similar to the Tesla claims) (It would be interesting to see if battery energy density can make those gains) (They work on a battery with the capacity to do the maximum legal driving time in the EU for a day, with overnight charging, which might be more practical than fast charging)

The power needed to charge a large truck in a reasonable time would likely put huge loads on the grid (storage at the charging station can help though). Some fast car chargers are around a neighbourhood worth of load being added and removed quickly, while a trucks would be closer to a town worth of load... That happening thousands of times a day might need a significant redesign and modification to the power grid for the huge rapid load changes.

The overhead lines spreads the demand out over a much longer duration (And allows for much less of the cargo capacity being sacrificed for batteries - the max mass of trucks are regulated, so batteries means less payload)

ENUM allows you to look up phone numbers by DNS.... (My previous employer used an internal ENUM setup for number portability)

True, the design deserves criticism, but the articles almost make it seem as if it is something new that was discovered (that control of the booster was lost), instead it was something that was known before the launch, since the other launch of the same rocket did the same... (But the article as it stands is easier to write and has a more clickbaity title a decent critique would have...)

They could probably add a relatively small solid fuel rocket just for deorbiting... (But they'll still need A and C) (It just needs to be able to dip the orbit a bit deeper into the atmosphere in the approximate area of an ocean) (It is certainly a bad design, but not a malfunction (I have a problem that the article doesn't make that clear - it presents it as if it is was just discovered, instead of as a criticism of the design))

Yep, it is not a great design. (Adding a tiny amount of extra fuel or a small rocket (If it is low enough for the orbit to decay quickly enough, not much delta-V should needed to put a higher drag part of the orbit in a predictable place) to deorbit it in a predictable area would have been better). The summary / article leaves the impression that it is some kind of failure though.

The chance of it doing significant damage seems quite low though...

Another rockets did a similar re-entry in 2020. It is not a failure, but by design... (which does not feel clear from the article or summary) Another rockets also did it in 2016.

This might make it a lot harder to spot scammers using pictures from porn sites on dating sites....