I had the opposite happen to me. The password length was enforced on the frontend by JavaScript, which the password manager bypassed. The backend recieved the whole string though, so I could only log in by pasting in the password, which got truncated by the client side JavaScript. Drove me nuts until I figured it out.
Ever is a long time! In 50 years when travel via rocket between cities on Earth is common, why wouldn't airports build rocket pads for it? When you can fly New York to Singapore in less than an hour, JFK isn't going to just give up that market, they're going to want to capture some of that money.
Probably because the blast radius during lift off is close to the entire JFK property size? Of course, let's not forget the blast radius of a Starship undergoing unscheduled rapid disassembly.
I don't know about the meme, but the spider webs done by drugged spiders dates back to 1948, by Swiss pharmacologist Peter N. Witt and later repeated elsewhere. If there's questions as to it's veracity, it's not mentioned in the Wikipedia article.
ESP32's neat and all, but it's severely underpowered and very limited in what it can do. A Banana Pi (while we're waiting for Raspberries) is going to be a much shorter route to success.
The ESP32 should be able to handle 9hz 160x120 video. There are some projects put there using it for this. I just can't get it to work and there are no step by step guides for it.
Using one principle (nukes are expensive) isn't the same thing as deducing something from first principles. In particular, it's not enough, especially given hypersonic missile technology, to just take an ICBM, reprogram it, and voila you have an ABM. Because the cost of even a single warhead off an MIRV ICBM getting through is so devastating, the cost of a ABM system includes a huge number of missiles to increase the chance of catching the incoming attack. And then, once the ABM missile reaches the incoming ICBM. How does it neutralize the threat? What technology do we have that causes a lot of destruction? Oh that's right, nukes. If the ABM system uses nukes to neutralize the incoming threat, then it's very much not clear that the singular principle (nukes are expensive) doesn't also apply to the ABM system.
Some subjects, like computer science, which is still a very young area of study are very open to learnings from first principles. Others, like the geopolitics of nuclear deterrence, are deeper than any one person can even begin to understand.
Current interceptors do not use nuclear warheads. This makes it both cheaper and more expensive. It requires a more complicated hit to kill system than merely getting the nuclear warhead close enough. However, the system as a whole ends up cheaper. You don't need to get National Command Authority to authorize a launch anymore, because you're not using nukes. You can get that delegated down to whichever officer is in charge of the system that day.
The objective of National Missile Defense isn't to stop all the warheads, it's to make the attacker's job harder. There's a bunch of ways it does that. One is that the defender gets to choose what it stops. So they can stop all the warheads going to one target. But the attacker doesn't know ahead of time, so they need to launch enough warheads at each target to destroy it regardless of whether it's actually defended or not. So 1550 warheads no longer hit 750 targets, but rather they hit 75 targets. It really sucks to be one of those 75 targets, because most of them get absolutely destroyed, but the other 90% of potential targets are much better off, because they didn't get hit at all.
Another way is that ballistic missile accuracy depends on how far away from the target it gets separated from the missile bus that has the guidance system. If they separate too late, the interceptor will hit the bus before separation. Which kills all the warheads. So they have to move it back, which makes it less accurate, which means it's more likely the warhead will miss the target.
A third way is that they may decide they need to carry penetration aids. But there's a bunch of really fancy tricks radars and IR sensors can do to see which is a real thing, and which isn't, which amount to: the penetration aid which is best at mimicking a warhead ends up being the same size and shape as a real warhead. So they might as well just use a real warhead.
Ten or twenty buildings on the continental US being hit by Russian hypersonic missiles may seem like basically nothing, but on 9/11 we lost two buildings, plus minor damage to the Pentagon, and the US collectively lost it's shit. It's still looking for it, more than a decade later. It's not the destruction from the Russian missiles I'm worried about, it's the US's totally unhinged response that I'm afraid of.
> How does the 'economy' work for your Milk and Cereal producers? Just fine.
By "Just Fine" you mean there's currently a hullabaloo about what can legally be called Milk? In a story of naming rights and lawsuits, various non-dairy milks have come to market, and the traditional dairy farmers, unable to hack it, have taken to the courtroom instead of actually competing. Sound familiar?
What word would you like to use for a gathering of a dozen or so adults, meeting for one or two nights (colloquially known as Friday and Saturday, because adults have jobs) where there is zero damage to the property? Because most people I know would call that a party.
Most people I know also don't own ridiculous mansions, so have been using AirBNB to rent locations for these events (again, causing no property damage). They are fine switching to VRBO/whatever but these are expensive locations so it seems strange that Airbnb wouldn't want the revenue.
AirBNB was originally designed around renting a room in the place you live. More akin to couchsurfing then a hotel. So while it's pivoted, there are side effects they wern't really setup to think about.
I wouldn't even say damage is the main problem, so much as neighborhoods being descended upon by random people who don't care about the neighbors or their sleep.
Beyond just the summer, a lot of housing is being reallocated from long term, traditional tenants to airbnb, driving up rent prices.
This was always a farce though. At the size they were trying to push themselves to be, there were never enough couch surfers to support that business. Just like how Uber's "just share rides" was always nonsense.
