UNCLOS article 98. They are the monkeys of the insurance clubs long before they are monkeys of the owner. Owner can stop them from being employed on the boat.

Insurance clubs will stop Master from getting employment in shipping industry. And do, all the time.

Incorrect. Master is legally required to disregard any such orders from the owner.

This is one of the things that can actually get you in trouble internationally, as one international law that tends to actually be applied fairly evenly is the UNCLOS parts about ships in distress.

Articles 39 and 98 are utterly unambiguous here.

This is because it's enforced by insurance clubs. You want the boat to be able to enter ports? Better be in good standing with insurance ports, or your boat a useless boondongle that can't find a berth anywhere. These are the people who can tell national governments and Saudi rulers "no". Run of a mill Western billionaire? You're a bug to these people.

The weirdest part is that even if all the worst things about this were true, it still had nothing to do with Zuck.

This would fall on ship's Master. (Captain for laypeople).

Man discovers that bureaucracy is for the aristocracy with proper connections who cut the red tape, not the plebs who cannot.

News at 11.

Article from 1996 about a 10 year University of Arizona project https://ers.usda.gov/sites/def...
I also found a 2015 patent application from Kimberly-Clark that ceased in 2017 that mentions hesperaloe for making paper (the wfaa article is geo blocked so I don't know what patent that article refers to).

I'm highly sceptical of old ideas that didn't pan out being suddenly sold as new ideas. Tell me why the old idea didn't work out and what has changed and I'll listen.

Another thought came to mind. Let's assume we have intentionally fired and targeted rockets, and choice is between the Moon and the Sun.

I would choose the Moon, for the reason of recycling. We can likely recover materials from those rockets later. Many of them highly valuable once remnants of meteors that hit our planet's surface run out and before we start asteroid mining/if we discover some significant obstacles to mining asteroids in the future.

Shoot it at the Sun, and it's gone for us. We cannot use it again.

IMHO it makes sense to do keep them at least hypothetically recoverable in the future at no cost to us. Moon is worthless. It's an old, dead rock in space with no atmosphere and no magnetosphere. It eats massive asteroid collisions regardless. Even six to seven digit rocket shots at it would change nothing relevant from our perspective. If anything, I'd try to concentrate the rockets falling on the Moon in hopes of making it more concentrated batch of resources to more easily recycle in the long term future.

Story implies they didn't aim at all, it just took itself out?

Am I reading it wrong, or is story lying? I will admit I didn't verify.

Honestly, a bit confused here. The problem with space debris is that they stay up there, requiring a lot of tracking resources so that new launches don't get hit by it.

If this one went into Moons gravity well and crashed there, that means it's not a problem any more. Trash has been taken out. That's a good thing, isn't it?

Most of "Steam's Linux users" are almost certainly Steam Deck users at this point. Steam Machines running SteamOS aren't relevant yet due to RAM costs hitting those, and if you're a gamer on desktop, you boot into your windows partition even if you're a mainline linux user pretty much every time.

Microsoft knew exactly what it was doing when it allowed you to run windows even without a license in 10 and 11.

There are almost no exceptions to this outside the neckbeard crowd. Hence the main fluctuations in Linux users so far have been from Steam Deck adoption rate.

Unfortunately, "year of Linux on desktop" remains a meme in 2026.

Afaik the US has very short training period to become a police compared to other countries. If length of training correlates with cost (which I believe is a reasonable assumption) then I don't see how this makes sense?

What sets the US police apart in my mind is the _lack_ of training in combination with the concept of "qualified immunity".

It's an issue of battery capacity and charging/output speed. When battery was small, charging speed low and engine power low, you could do with cheaper air cooling.

As charging speeds and power go up, air eventually becomes insufficient.

Leafs from last 7-10 years are mostly ok. They had low power, low charge speeds, and so battery doesn't heat all that much in normal use patterns. Old Leaf's main problem was BMS. It was primitive and did a very poor job at maintaining the battery.

Margin of error is probably in the realm of 1-2%. This is no meaningful change in user base month to month. You're seeing fluctuations that are within the error margin.

Don't take the clickbait.

Leaf batteries are air cooled, and their early BMS was very, very unfinished. Hence the rapid drop of range with time.

Modern EVs are pretty much all liquid cooled, and have complex battery (and) thermal management systems. Their degradation is much better than early leafs.

Reality is quite a bit more complex. Batteries do go bad when usage is bad. Rapidly. Fast charge to 100% every day, and see how it holds up. Hint: it won't.

What changed is that now we have mechanics with experience in battery management who will take a look a deep look into the battery data that they will pull from a modern BMS (which have improved massively in last 10 years), compare it to how it should have aged and will be able to give a detailed reports on how this car's battery holds up.

This means that people who do retarded shit to their EVs now struggle to sell the cars, while responsible owners who keep batteries in good condition can now charge a bit of a premium on used market in most developed nations (and increasingly, quite a few developing ones).

So in summary, this is about evolution of BMS coupled with emergence of experienced cadre of specialist mechanics who specialized in automotive batteries, their service and repair. You still shouldn't trust old batteries. But now, you have ways to verify.

The weird part is that main value of youtube premium is ad free everywhere with no real hassle.

And instead of just offering people "cheap ad free tier", they instead bundle more and more crap with it and keep increasing the price, while waging long term war on ad blockers.