Not much. Plutonium isn't like uranium, it's effectively safe for human contact outside its fissioned form. This has been pretty well documented.

This is a step forward which is a long time overdue. It should've happened 30 years ago, and we'd have averted having to depend on China for our electricity production (wind + solar) without the net-zero production problems those two 'sources' introduce.

It's a concept called defense in depth, and perhaps also defensive programming. It's good practice. You do not want to hold things off at the gate exclusively, because that relies entirely on your gate defense. This shouldn't be a difficult concept to understand.

Yes, it's potentially more difficult to exploit, but if it's known, a clever exploit can still be fashioned to expose it. This is being seen increasingly with AI driven exploits. You don't need a kernel RCE to gain full system access - you need 3 or 4 small privilege escalation bugs (theoretical problems) in different packages that are commonly used.

You're viewing the waves for the ocean.

There's also been recent research that shows that plasma actuators or electrohydrodynamic (EHD) flow control effectively eliminate drag. I'm not sure why this specific TFA gained publication but the ionic charge did not.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40430-026-06357-y

"the people who have to review code"

That doesn't exist as a meaningful or useful discipline anymore, except in niche development roles.

Sorry, no. Your code review isn't useful. It's probably not even thorough.

We're well into the "code review should be done by agents" phase of things.

Yes, FreeBSD has most of the headaches of Linux in 1996 (mainly around package management, compatibility, and hardware support). Other than all the important things to an OS, it's great.

If you use debian based distros, the answer is 'yes'. The size of the package repository is excessive, and it's markedly cleaner to install sidecars on Linux than it is using the ports tree (or rather, adding packages which are not in the ports tree, because that happens a lot too).

Frankly, in 2026, this is inexcusable. You can easily and trivially build high quality documentation using AI (assuming the underlying project is of high quality).

FreeBSD is a non-starter for anything beyond hobbyist or large fleets of generic boxes due to its shortcomings in package management. It hasn't meaningfully changed in 30+ years.

You've got pkg and you've got ports - and neither provides an adequate means of keeping systems up to date en masse, by itself or in aggregate.

pkg (and related tools/repo) is severely limited - it doesn't really do security updates. It's not meaningful beyond the quarterly updates; it's a base working set.

The ports tree is another problem entirely. It's workable for one system as a hobbyist where uptime and consistency isn't important, but instantly requires secondary independent management to keep things up to date. It's just one big rolling release with no apparent controls for quality.

Perhaps it's just me, but the only way I found to maintain 2+ FreeBSD systems consistent is to keep an independent ports tree on ZFS (for snapshots you keep indefinitely) and a dedicated build box (instance). The resulting packages then get distributed to all the machines. The alternative is to have updates fail fairly regularly due to ports not being thoroughly vetted - unbuildable versions of the packages or security issues that weren't properly addressed from upstream. Then, you've also got to hunt down the upstream releases on occasion when the ports maintainers... haven't. You end up needing to run a full package vetting environment for your production systems and the QA burden is much higher than running your own eg. apt or yum mirrors + testing environments. I did this for years and it was horrible busywork.

In short, there's nothing on freebsd that's comparable to apt/yum/slpkg and package management is stuck in the 1990s. It's the only ecosystem I'm aware of which hasn't modernized to use cohesive and coherent package management.

Unless you're doing an extremely minimalist system, or building appliances, I see too many significant downsides to using FreeBSD. Better to use DragonFly, or Gentoo.

Star Wars is increasingly targeting children with its stories and characters. The plot and moral theme (what little of it there ever was) suffers as a result. Grogu is a massive hit with children, so they're monopolizing on that.

I have no idea what your point is at all. Seriously, are you OK? Just to make it clear - I am against governments, I am against governments using any technology to make it easier for government to oppress people and this is one instrument of oppression.

So how can this be allowed if there is so much graft around this technology that is flowing through thousands of hands in the government offices?

Here is an example: https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/news...

This here: https://simpler.grants.gov/opp...

Funding Opportunity Number: FM-MHP-26-002
Assistance Listing: 20.245
Funding Details: $52.7 million expected total amount to award

Executive Summary:
The objective of the HP-ITD program is to advance the
technological capability and promote the deployment of
intelligent transportation system applications for CMV
operations, including CMV, commercial driver, and carrier-
specific information systems and networks, and to
support/maintain CMV information systems and networks to
(i) link Federal motor carrier safety information systems with
State CMV systems; (ii) improve safety and productivity of
CMVs and commercial drivers; (iii) and reduce costs
associated with CMV operations and regulatory
requirements.

Eligible Applicants
1.1 General
The HP-ITD awards are available to States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin
Islands. FMCSA may award HP-ITD funds to eligible applicants that have an approved program plan as
outlined in the Fixing Americaâ(TM)s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act. Individuals and businesses are
not eligible to apply for HP-ITD funding.

This entire thing is premised on the idea that there will be *more* information available to the federal government to work with, not less. They are fully committed to using these ALPR cameras that are everywhere now to track everything all the time and to put every truck driver out of service for any inconsistency in their visual data and thus hand out more fines, more court time, more oppression.

This is just one single program, one example, there are so much more, there is so much money at stake, never mind the actual flock graft itself.

They're clearly trying to hide the fact that the pilot was of a specific ethnic classification, one which is already well known for causing a very large percentage of road accidents with tractor trailers.

In other words, it's like saying someone violated copyright by making a MIDI version of a popular song.

No, they did not release audio.

A spectograph is not audio, it's an image of the timing, signal, frequency of a signal.

The fact that it could be reverse engineered into coherent audio is not consequential.

That's like saying that someone released public source code to a program when all they did was release the binary. Or, more accurately, released a use video of the software, which someone then reverse engineered.