Forget about whether or not this is or isn't spying. Even if you take their claims at face value, this balloon would represent airspace incursion by an out-of-control unmanned aircraft. And airspace incursions are something the US military should handle, efficiently and promptly, as a matter of routine. This shouldn't be a giant diplomatic incident or require some great policy analysis to decide to take it down. The message should be plain and simple such as:
In the interest of the safety and security of people of the USA, we have ended the flight of your out-of-control balloon which had entered US airspace without clearance or authorization. We reserve the right to inspect the wreckage as part of our investigation of this incident. After that investigation is complete, you may make arrangements for the return of the aircraft remains, at your expense, via any US embassy. Sincerely, North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD)
NORAD almost certainly knew about this balloon heading towards our airspace probably 5 days ago (late Monday or early Tuesday) when it was still many hundreds of miles away from the west coast, which means that authorization to shoot it down would have been requested at virtually the same time. There should have been plenty of time (hours) to take care of this safely and efficiently before it actually entered US territory, but my guess is that the authorization to shoot it down didn't come until much too late... possibly as late as Wednesday, after it had already crossed into inhabited US territory. Hence the reluctance to shoot it down, and hence the uproar.
One of the best parts about the FCC Broadband Map in my opinion was the idea that it was essentially "crowd-sourced" in that users could file challenges to the data and fix mistakes. But I was surprised to discover recently that there are huge limitations on the challenge process.
A month ago, I was interested in purchasing a property and one of my criteria was having fiber service available. The FCC Broadband Map showed fiber being available there, but before placing an offer, I called the broadband provider to confirm. The representative on the phone apologized and said that no service was available at that address, nor did the system show it becoming available soon. I mentioned that the info at the FCC Broadband Map was incorrect for this address and needed to be corrected, but she did not know what to do about that, but she would "make a note about it" and pass it along. I happened to check the map again about 30 days later, but it was still listed incorrectly. I decided to be helpful and file a challenge myself directly via the FCC website.
Unfortunately, before clicking on "submit" you are required to certify that you are either a current resident at the address or are the legal owner/manager of the property. No one else is permitted to file a challenge, based on the current website language. That's a significant hindrance in this case, because the current owner of the property obviously has no incentive to update the map to make the property look worse to prospective buyers, and obviously the provider here can't be bothered to fix it either. If interested 3rd parties are not allowed to file challenges on behalf of others when they have evidence, then the entire challenge process is sadly flawed and strongly designed to favor the status quo.
In fact, based on the OP, it sounds like this challenge which came from a competing ISP was actually against the FCC's own challenge policy, and I'm pleasantly surprised it went anywhere without simply being tossed/ignored.
I'd love if my switch could do 4k, I've got a Sony 4k projector and a large acoustically transparent screen. Our Xbox One X looks amazing, the PS3 still looks great, but the Switch feels quite dated. Targeting 4k for the easier output means we should be able to get a true/sustained 1080p output, a massive improvement. E.g. Breath of the Wild was only pushing 900p when plugged in and would chug in certain points, I'd love to revisit it at 1080p and a sustained 30FPS (if 60FPS isn't possible).
From the source's source:
> One metric ton of remdesivir is sufficient API to manufacture 900,000 courses of treatment, without allowance for any losses during formulation.
They don't account for losses, and estimates are around 12% of inputs make it to outputs: https://www.acsh.org/news/2020...
What about partial/full pre-processing of web sites or parts thereof to optimize client-side access for different platforms or scenarios?
Under the intense field the protons are going to oscillate back and forth under the optical electric field - note, the electrons will do this even more, as they are ~ 1/2000 as massive. With a beam, you only interact once, here the protons may interact for the lifetime of the pulse - which is very short. The question is the fusion yield vs the energy needed to drive the field. Muon catalyzed fusion worked very well - but the cost to create the muons was too high.
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
> for nicotine, there is no "good" range, and it is far more addictive.
Are you sure about that? From what I've read, there's a potentiating effect of the nicotine caused by MAOIs in tobacco. Further, I have a very hard time finding studies about the health effects of nicotine that isn't from tobacco (smoked, chewed, or otherwise ingested). The health effects of nicotine sans tobacco seem akin to those of caffeine.
I have been expecting this for a while. The real question I have had is how they would implement the feedback weights. You can do it with switches and a bank or resistors, but a memristor as a feedback element would be much more efficient - and should be far denser.
"It's my cookie file and if I come up with something that's lame and I like it, it goes in." -- karl (Karl Lehenbauer)
