This was already decided during the original trial. Two things will prevent Xinuos from succeeding:

1. SCO never had a license to the code they claim to own. They had a license to distribute it, but Novell owned the copyrights (such as they were).

2. The code SCO claimed was copied from Project Monterey wasn't in fact copied from there. It was original code IBM wrote and contributed to Monterey (while retaining the copyrights) and then subsequently contributed to Linux (which they had every right to do because the license granted to Monterey wasn't exclusive).

The only reason the lawsuit ended with a settlement was that SCO had lost on every argument and gone bankrupt, so there was no money to pay any judgement against them. I suspect some of the terms of that settlement are going to come back to bite Xinuos, because SCO had managed what everyone had considered impossible: they'd not only angered IBM enough they were out for blood, they'd managed to get IBM's law firm (Cravath, Swaine and Moore, who are a big name) personally angry at them too. I'm fairly sure there's terms in that settlement expressly to make sure that dead horse stays dead and buried. Given that Xinuos isn't bankrupt, and some of the figures behind SCO and the original lawsuit were involved with them last I heard, I expect IBM's attorneys to make great white sharks look cute and cuddly by comparison.

So let me get this straight. If I live in a hot or cold environment, and/or I regularly use the advertised range (or as much of it that the car will give me, realistically) to avoid having to sit and wait for fast charge to 80% for an hour on a road trip, I'm looking at (probably) no more than 80% capacity available after 5 years?

That torpedos the used market solidly. No wonder they're available so much cheaper.

And you Terminal is listed under "Developer Tools" in Privacy & Security? FWIW, mine is also listed under "Full Disk Access".

I'm on an Intel MBP. lldb never requires a password. I only debug command line apps - maybe that's it?

Iâ(TM)m wondering whoâ(TM)s typing passwords these days for elevation. Havenâ(TM)t all Mac laptops had Touch ID for years? I have an external keyboard, but itâ(TM)s still easier and faster to reach over to my MBP for one touch authentication.

I donâ(TM)t get prompted like this. Is this is an extra step in Apple Silicon machines or Iâ(TM)ve just granted more permissions to my terminal?

Asking for it in a situation where a user would expect to have to enter it, so they won't find the request unusual or suspicious.

Oh yes! I remember being at an air show on a small RAF base and a Vulcan did a low-level turning pass with the belly to towards the crowd. It was probably one of the loudest things I've ever heard. Military engines certainly have different priorities to civilian ones.

we no longer live in First World countries where you can rely on the power to stay on

Speak for your country, not the rest of the First World. I haven't experienced a power outage since I left N. America in 2008. Given the lag in grid investment here in the UK to reshape it with all the changes, that might change. But for now, it's been incredibly stable.

Maybe I wasn't clear: Concorde was loud, irrespective of whether the throttle was fully on and afterburners lit, or not.

I'm also glad we don't get any 747s anymore, which were quieter than Concorde. 777s are definitely the ones I've noticed to be loudest these days, especially when planes are coming over every three minutes from 04:30-05:00 in the morning. They're offensively loud compared to the 787s and A350s, and even A380s. But this is a different story.

I think you've downplayed the flight time on a conventional passenger jet for LHR-JFK by an hour at least and exaggerated the Concorde time by 30 mins.

Concorde's prices were determined by a number of factors such as fuel, but one of main ones was exclusivity/privilege.

I've heard this theory too, including from my own father. Maybe that's how it was portrayed in the British media at the time? I can't really find much evidence for it on the internet though. As far as the written history on the Internet goes, it's mostly about the noise. Maybe hysteria about the topic was whipped up for political reasons, but where's the evidence now?

There certainly were bans put in place for political reasons, such as India and Malaysia banning Concorde because they couldn't get the access they wanted in terms of landing slots:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

It wasn't just the sonic booms, this plane was just all around loud. It was a civilian plane afterburners! As somebody who lives about 500m directly under one of Heathrow's landing flight paths, I'm happy it's not coming over anymore.

I've always liked this video though. It starts off so quiet, suburban and banal, and then Corcorde roars over and shatters the scene, setting off a car alarm.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Of course, there are lots of videos like this one too, also setting off car alarms:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

It's not anywhere near one step away. Designing the peptides and getting one or more candidates is the easy part. The next steps are the hard ones, the ones that make pharmaceutical chemists and drug researchers cry:

• Phase I trials to see if it even works as claimed. Expect a 95+% failure rate here. Note that this is where you're going to see the best results for your drug candidate, things never improve from here. The best you can hope for is that they don't get any worse. So if you don't get strong results here you're probably wasting your money.
• Phase II trials to determine the best dosage and pharmacokinetics. Again expect a 95+% failure rate here, and results showing less effectiveness than shown in Phase I.
• Phase III trials to determine behavior in a large sample representative of the target population. Expect a failure rate upwards of 99% here, and a major drop-off in effectiveness. This is where toxicity and serious negative side effects show up, and those can kill your trial dead even if your candidate is working.

Getting through this process will take multiple tries and years of work, assuming you succeed at all. There's a reason they say that the clinic (clinical trials) is where drug candidates go to die.

I went to school in VA. There was rarely a day that the heat would get turned on. They're big monolithic heat islands full of children, calorie powered.

We also didn't have A/C back then, either. Windows would be open all day. I doubt they do that now.

I know this comes off trollish, but: why can't these power companies (which are usually public utilities) just build more power production instead of jacking prices? What's the deal? Why is this a "hate on AI that runs in datacenters" problem, and not a "just produce more power" problem?