Still, you got it wrong, because the curve around 100 is flat, and given that the IQ is rounded to a whole number, a significant part of the population has an IQ of 100 (or 99.5 to 100.5). Thatâs what the curve vs. triangle was aimed at. Add to the fact that individual results can vary a lot, depending on the exact Series and the current State of mind of the one tested, results between 95 and 105 are well within the IQ-100 group.

Thatâs not an independent thinker. Thatâ(TM)s someone who routinely doubts everything. But as Henri Poincaré already observed more than 100 years ago: To doubt everything and to believe everything are considered two equally convenient strategies, both of which relieve us of the necessity of thinking or reflection. (And I know, a witty saying proves nothing.)

Everytime I run the output through the Test test suite.

It's even more complicated. German law treats the grid as "copper plate", and ignores all regional differences. If a wind park in Northern Germany offers electricity for 8 ct/kWh, then a consumer in Southern Germany is allowed to buy that power and is entitled to get it delivered via the grid. And if the grid can't handle the load because of weak interconnectivity, then a gas turbine in Southern Germany will start and generate the power for 18 ct/kWh, but the consumer only pays 8 ct. The 10 ct/kWh difference is paid by all consumers with higher energy prices.

For Southern Germany, this is quite the deal, because they can now operate expensive gas turbines, and get them subsidized at least in part by electricity consumers in Northern Germany with higher energy prices, while the cheap energy generated in Northern Germany is switched off, as the energy on the books is sold already, but the electricity is generated somewhere else. But because Southern states profiteer from the situation right now, there is much resistance to changes in the law, which would make energy in the South more expensive, while Northern states would get a relief.

Dual ISA? The z processors (z13 right now) were multi-ISA from the very beginning. You can load them with different microcodes, and they will turn into different processors, CP, zIIP, zAAP, IFL...

IBM sold off their massively cheap commodity stuff long ago. The eServer series are now Lenovo, like the laptop business.

You're confusing the importance of avoiding Kessler syndrome in LEO with the difficulty of causing Kessler syndrome. GEO debris can potentially remain there for millions of years before interactions between the gravitational pull of the Sun, Earth, and Moon sufficiently perturb it. LEO debris remains for weeks to months. You have to have many orders of magnitude more debris in LEO to trigger Kessler Syndrome, where the rate of collisions exceeds the rate of debris loss.

The fact that a LEO Kessler Syndrome would also be short is something that exists on top of that.

It's also worth nothing that not only are modern satellites not only vastly better at properly disposing of themselves than they were in the 1970s when Kessler Syndrome was proposed, but they're also vastly better at avoiding debris strikes. All of these factors are multiplicative together.

Israel tried it with Hamas back in the early 2000s. They killed at least three successive Hamas leaders within a few month. What they did not achieve was to crush Hamas. So no. The U.S. will be long out of bombs before the supply of new ayatollahs will run dry.

Lol, I was thinking of this instead ;)

People forget that the primary concerns about Kessler Syndrome were about geosynchronous orbit, which used to be where all the most important satellites went (many of course still go there, but not the megaconstellations). It takes a long, long time for debris to leave GEO. But LEO is a very different beast.

They said it's internal rather than a collision, so probably a failed COPV would be my guess.

Yeah. In particular:

with fragments likely to fall to Earth over the next few weeks

LEO FTW. Kessler Syndrome is primarily a risk if you put too much stuff with too poor of an end-of-life disposal rate in GEO. End-of-life without proper disposal rates have declined exponentially since Kessler Syndrome was first proposed (manufacturers both understand the importance more, and do a better job, of decreasing the rate of failures before deorbit - in the past, sometimes there wasn't even attempts to dispose of a craft at end-of-life). And now we're increasingly putting stuff in LEO, where debris falls out of orbit relatively quickly. It's not impossible in LEO, esp. with higher LEO orbits - but it's much more difficult.

Or to put it another way: fragments can't build up to hit other things if they're gone after just a couple weeks.

And this trend is likely to continue - a lower percentage of premature failures, and decreasing altitudes / reentry times. Concerning ever-decreasing altitudes, we've already been doing this via use of ion engines to provide more reboost (with mission lifespans designed for only several years before running out of propellant, instead of decades like the giant GEO ones), but there's an increasing interest in "sky skimming" satellites that function in a way somewhat reminiscent of a ramjet - instead of krypton or xenon as the propellant for an ion engine, the sparse atmospheric air itself is the propellant, so the craft can in effect fly indefinitely until it fails, wherein it quite rapidly enters the denser atmosphere and burns up.

The problem with your argument is that while you rightly point out the strategic problem, you don't have a solution. The attempt at regime change has resulted in the very same regime emboldened now as they got the bragging right to have successfully repelled the largest military in the world together with the strongest army in the region in their unprovoked attack on the homeland. Additionally, you now have created at least one additional Shiite martyr, whose shrine will be a place of worship and pilgrimage for the centuries to come, and where oaths to defend Islam in his name will be renewed again and again.

Because the Buddhists for instance wreck havoc in Myanmar?

Why do you define people not adhering to your idea of a lifestyle "crazy"?

I for once neither like scuba diving, because I don't like the feeling of rubber on my skin, nor do I think skiing all year round is something important to do. I live in the Alps, I can go skiing whenever I feel like it anyway, but I barely do. And inhaling something from the boobs of some paid person was never a dream of mine. If that rocks your boat, why not find something who will do it because they like you, or they like the sensation of someone snorting something from their boobs? Ted Turner once said, Life was a game, and Money is how you keep score. Why in your opinion is chasing the next highscore in some computer game a worthwhile way to spend your time as a billionaire, while trying to increase your highscore in money is not?