I thought I was clear where I was looking - here, you may check for yourself: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HESA_Shahed_136.

This is too complacent for my liking. Every rusty trawler is a viable launch platform for Shahed type drones (operational range ~2500 km per Wikipedia). Nearly every US oil refinery and LNG terminal are on the coast. And then there are floating oil platforms (e.g.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perdido_(oil_platform))

The article then says:

>One can never know how well prepared an enemy is for something.

And:

>And if I can reason this out, Iran – which has been planning for this exact thing for forty years certainly can.

I'll leave it here for y'all to ponder.

"At Anthropic, we build AI to serve humanity’s long-term well-being."

Why does Anthropic even deal with the Department of @#$%ing WAR?

And what does Amodei mean by "defeat" in his first paragraph?

In France and Japan, HSR has had zero fatalities in the entire period of operation.

In China, HSR had AFAIR one fatal crash, with 40 fatalities. Per passenger-mile, Chinese HSR is twice as safe as US air travel.

What then?

You may find this marvelous piece enlightening:

https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/30/meditations-on-moloch/

I am puzzled that the alleged ship-launched drone swarms were allegedly able to penetrate this far undetected.

How about now?

Incidentally, US nukes in Turkey in 1960s was the starting point of the Cuban missile crisis.

https://www.icanw.org/nuclear_arsenals

Only if you compare Prusa printing at 50 mm/s with Bambu at 500 mm/s.

>and better overhang performance

What? No. Proof: https://youtu.be/HcSOz-Lsxgg?feature=shared&t=293

>Prusa drives the slicer development ecosystem (Bambu Studio is a fork)

Prusa slicer is also a fork ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

...you can watch Borat, which is far less about Kazakhstan than it is about the US.

Also, kerosene for lanterns became a thing in 1846, not 1865 as claimed in the article, and by 1856 was already widespread. Wikipedia has this to say about its impact:

As kerosene production increased, whaling declined. The American whaling fleet, which had been steadily growing for 50 years, reached its all-time peak of 199 ships in 1858. By 1860, just two years later, the fleet had dropped to 167 ships. The Civil War cut into American whaling temporarily, but only 105 whaling ships returned to sea in 1866, the first full year of peace, and that number dwindled until only 39 American ships set out to hunt whales in 1876.[36] Kerosene, made first from coal and oil shale, then from petroleum, had largely taken over whaling's lucrative market in lamp oil.

Sometimes this is just sloppy methodology. Other times it is intentional.

Let's go back to your opening comment which was something like "I thought methane was 80% hydrogen on a molar basis". Methane does not contain H2 molecules, it contains 4 atoms of hydrogen. Plus one atom of carbon, which would indeed make it 80% hydrogen on a molar basis.

If that does not convince you: note also that atomic carbon is also a very unstable, and will auto polymerize into one of its allotropes (eg. C60 - buckyballs). And yet we count carbon by the atom.

The defense of Azovstal steelworks and Gaza tunnels seems to show otherwise.

On average and excluding the minority of routes with dedicated lanes (which may be best run on diesel), the Boston metro buses are in use for 6.6 hours per day, covering on average 53 miles.

A full size electric bus uses electricity at a rate of approx 2 kWhr/mile.

So, on average the bus would have around 17 hours to charge up with 106 kWhrs of juice, and this averages out to about 6.2 kW. On average.

However, the smart thing to do would be to charge the buses when the power costs the least, say between 10 pm and 8 am, so you'd need ~10 kW/bus, maybe ~1MW for the 100 bus fleet. Not difficult.