Making money is more valued than making strangers happy.

IAI hasn't build a fighter since the Dagger/Nesher that Israel sold to Argentina after the IAF was done with them. They tried to build an F-16 competitor, the Lavi, but stopped when the US refused to allow any funding to be used towards its development.

Israel likely has the technical capability to build a modern fighter. Whether it has the money to do so on its own is an entirely other matter.

But car batteries are quite large. Even my shitty Honda Prologue that was less than $35k new has an 85kwh battery. Yeah, you might not want to give up 50% of your battery. But giving up 20% of your capacity? That's as a Tesla home battery, which is a decently substantial amount. And you'd still get hundreds of miles of range.

USA average house consumes 30kWh/day. That and solar power and a little care not to run the AC or clothes dryer and you could probably run off the grid indefinitely.

You're right, claiming that "a product made by Apple is the cause of all this is silly." But that's not what the article did, did you read the summary? They argue 33-52%.

That is a feeling you have. You aren't supporting it with any evidence, just feels. There's obvious counter-examples - why are birth rates down even higher in places where there's socialized medicine, no student debt, heavily subsidized childcare, etc.? If you're going by evidence, rather than feel, that clearly suggests there's more going on.

Furthermore, you seem to have read the article, but you dismiss it with "it is still not magic." What a meaningless statement! Scientific method requires some kind of counter-argument, not just hand waving away the parts you don't want to be true.

Probably not but there are two existing datacenters downtown along with Seattle Internet Exchange. Not a lot of room to expand though I imagine in the building.

I mean...isn't that what people use computers for? browsing the web, simple games, and maybe a word processor? What else would they do with one?

I am reminded of some source code for a company-specific program that I saw in the late 1990s. I don't remember why I was perusing it, as I was in IT and absolutely not a developer. But I remember being tickled at one of the comments before a block of code. It was something like, "I have no idea why or how the following code works. But every time someone tries to change it, everything breaks, so please don't touch it."

For int'l flights: Amazon Leo is launching next year. Delta is waiting.

And LEO is even easier than GEO since it doesn't have any moving parts. GEO had to rotate to keep alignment. LEO are all using phased arrays.

For existing code in the QA he said leave it be and it's better to fix.

For new code, he's recommending Rust and the advantage he talks about is that it makes the code more maintainable by people. And one thing that every AI coding talk I've seen agrees on is that what makes code more maintainable by people also helps AI and vice versa.

People and AI both have limited attention and memory. The less context necessary the easier it is to evaluate safety.

Another thing not in the summary he touches on is hardware safety. Not just software bugs but also compromised hardware which if your driver is memory safe can also prevent a buggy or adversarial piece of hardware since the hardware is effectively user input.

To balance out OP's selective quoting to avoid people strawman-ing his argument as a fanatic who can't balance risk:

That's not the reason that both bombs were dropped. They were dropped because the military saw them as just another tool in the toolbox, just like the bombs dropped on all the other cities that continued to be dropped on other cities until the surrender. Truman ended the military's control of atomic bombs after Nagasaki, when the USAAF was preparing to use a third bomb, establishing civilian control of atomic weapons. Firebombing continued, though, right up to Kumagaya, Akita, and Osaka getting hit in the 24 hours prior to Hirohito taking to the airwaves.

The agreement expired in 2030. It did not authorize Iran to pursue nuclear weapons at that time. There's a difference.

The agreement was the best available at the time. Diplomacy sometimes requires taking a temporary win, and it usually means that neither side gets everything they want. The hope was that Iran would find that they would not want or need to develop nuclear weapons. If they did go down that path, there were penalties for doing so. Future negotiations were planned to modify or extend the agreement as it got closer to the expiration date.

That's how such agreements work. Every arms treaty signed between the US and USSR had an expiration date. The expiration date was not an agreement that at the end, both sides would immediately rearm. They were meant to establish a new normal and a baseline for future negotiations, and that's what happened. Over time, the arsenals were negotiated down from tens of thousands per side to a few thousand per side, with only a fraction of them deployed or even deployable. The last one expired a few months ago, but neither side is racing to add to their deployed warhead count.

There is no way to outright prevent Iran from developing a nuclear warhead without occupying the country and removing its entire current government. That is hundreds of billions of dollars, tens of thousands of lives, and an even worse look for the US than it has right now. Negotiating a deal like the JCPOA is the best option available. But every time Trump starts to talk about a deal and details start to leak out, they look a lot worse than the JCPOA. Trump is incompetent, he started a war that even Republicans are turning against, and he's arguably left Iran in a better place than it was before. Iran now knows that they can cut off the Strait of Hormuz, and no one can or will do anything about it. Worse, Trump has stated that he would be OK with Iran charging transit fees. If that starts, everyone else who controls a waterway that is otherwise internationally accessible is going to charge them, too. Indonesia and Malaysia would be the top two who could affect global trade, and while both have said that they would not, it's hard to say what future governments would do if they came under budget stress and had a precedent to point to.

Latest top performance is expensive, and electronics in general are more expensive, if you haven't noticed. There are still plenty of Wi-Fi 5 devices, and a lot of networks don't go faster than 1 Gbps anyway. If you need faster, the USB-C port is capable of 5 Gbps Ethernet via USB-CDC NCM, so there's probably enough there to connect a 2.5 Gbps USB NIC.

The whole design is supposed to be open, so maybe you can gather a few friends and figure out how to install faster components that meet your expectations.