Does not matter what the pilots seeing them knew about the projects.

With full speed they are hardly 2x as fast as a passenger plane. The F-117 was not even that fast. And: they look like air planes. They do not look like "strange objects".

And fighter jets already existed. So they only would look "strange", when you can visualy identfy strange details. No one would throw a second glance at a fighter jet too far away to identify with naked eyes, but that behaves like an ordinary fighter jet: flying fast in one direction.

You charge all of the cells in a battery in ()parallel(?), so unless your input power is limited by something,
The correct word would be simultaneously. As plenty of them are chained in serials, and do not charge parallel.

charge time is dominated by how long it takes a single cell to go from empty to full. if one wants to nitpick, that is correct.

However the battery is full when the amount of nominal charge came from the plug into the battery. Ooops.

So a smaller battery charges much faster, as the amount of energy to put into it, is much smaller.

Hence: the trend to smaller lighter batteries, that in turn support slightly lighter engines/brakes and an over all frame, and in the end lead to just minimal range loss, but charge in half the time than the previous battery generation. With similar driving performance as in speed, reliability etc.

You morons are not even utterly uneducated how stuff works, hence your stupid idea about "all cells charge in parallel" - you are also completely out of the loop how stuff works on the other side of the planet.

You charge all of the cells in a battery in parallel, so unless your input power is limited by something,
The correct word would be simultaneously. As plenty of them are chained in serials, and do not charge parallel.

charge time is dominated by how long it takes a single cell to go from empty to full. if one wants to nitpick, that is correct.

However the battery is full when the amount of nominal charge came from the plug into the battery. Ooops.

So a smaller battery charges much faster, as the amount of energy to put into it, is much smaller.

Hence: the trend to smaller lighter batteries, that in turn support slightly lighter engines/brakes and an over all frame, and in the end lead to just minimal range loss, but charge in half the time than the previous battery generation. With similar driving performance as in speed, reliability etc.

You morons are not even utterly uneducated how stuff works, hence your stupid idea about "all cells charge in parallel" - you are also completely out of the loop how stuff works on the other side of the planet.

Ebikes are most certainly not more effective.
Low efficent battery.
Low efficient engine.
No aerodynamics what so ever.

And: the few which can actually do regenerating braking are perhaps a hand full.

To know that, you do not even need to look at specific numbers.
You are indeed an idiot.

Most countries a company can do nothing about unionizing ... unions already exist, people just join them and from 30 employees on people have the right to install a "Betriebsrat" a mini union, and there is nothing any manager can do about that, except: managing the company in a way that people are not urged to install such a mini union.

Bonus point, you could put 20 or 30 mini golf curses under the solar cells!

Which clearly are airplanes and any pilot would identify them as such.

And: they can not do any fancy maneuvers people are talking about or which we can see in the clips.

So it seems we agree :D

All your points are stupid.
As the public has nothing to do with "(taxes, time of the courts / judges that could be spent on other cases, etc.),"
The parties going to court pay for that.

No, it proves that the idea already existed and therefore the public gains nothing from the grant of the patent.
That is not the goal of the patent system. The goal is that the inventor can exploit his idea alone for a limited time.
Of course once the higher goal was: he would license it for a reasonable fee, and hence would help competitors into the ever growing market of commodities they can sell together to the mundane. And?
That never happened and never worked. And unless patents are officially auctioned or granted automatically to "infringers" and can not be denied to be used by the holder of the patent: nothing will ever promote the idea of "public gains".

Hint: unless the government rips the patent out of the hands of the holder, NO ONE CAN USE the invention, unless the holder grants a license. WHICH BASICALLY NEVER HAPPENS!!!

Same result.

There is some extra force, where do not know about where it comes from.

If it was gravity itself, then it would be pretty odd, as would kind of randomly be different at different places.

Are you silly or just stupid?

If they would get a bonus in cash: it would all be taxed right away.

If they get it in shares, it is taxed when the shares are sold, or not at all, if the shares are hold long enough.

No idea what your definition of a bonus is, though.

You are "covered by the union" if you are member of the union.

whole point of a union is to operate adversarially against the executives.
Nope, against the owners of the company. And usually it is not about against but about sharing or work conditions.

If the AI can code the stuff you prompt it for: it creates the same code a human had, based on the code the AI is trained with. So: the maintenance is the same.

And: you do not maintain AI created code manually. You tell it what is wrong and let the AI fix it.

Are you stupid or what?

No one who has any clue is going to let an AI produce 30kLOC code, and then fixes the problems by hand. That would be utterly idiotic.

A) you do not know which apps are made by or with AI
B) you are not even looking ...

If you are not even looking, how the funk do you think to know which apps are made with AI or by AI?

The law punished the action.
Not the value that changed possession during that action.