That is high-watt transmission power may not be required. And further, it was suggested it's not done in isolation by HAARP but cooperatively with various transmitters also transmitting the same frequency at the same target - using standing waves.

It makes sense conceptually as an idea but I'm not sure there if there's any evidence of it?

Ie, maybe able to generate the level of specificity required.

EDIT: Also there aren't that many places on earth at high risk of earthquake that also have poor construction, etc. Meaning any advance warning, that a significant quake may hit somewhere, can trigger "battening down the hatches".

> Proprietary code hack.

(6w/45c -> 3w/22c: >50%)

> Hackers exploit flawed proprietary code.

(6w/45c -> 5w/40c)

EDIT - Answered here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36332352

Eg, are there C to Zig ports that have had a demonstrable performance or memory-safety gain or something like that?

(Specifically, I mean over a C-lib wrapper compiled using Zig, as matching this case.)

And if that provided any immunity, what's to stop someone from claiming it happened to avoid issue?

That the past 100 years of cows farting would suddenly have infinitely greater impact strikes me as absurd, and meshes well with the decades of failed predictions I've observed its purveyors making.

That they will casually disregard, as entirely irrelevant, large-scale human deployments specifically targeted at changing the climate - that have succeeded in doing so - only supports this assessment.

Finally, asserting a "consensus" only by ignoring or mocking any and all dissenting views is utterly pathetic and not indicative of science. It's more indicative of field capture by industry, politics and profits.

Even the most cursory analysis of investment flows, or the personal investments of people promoting it and what they stand to personally gain from it (while taking private actions contradicting public claims) confirms this also.

That everything the field claims about the future is based on "modelling" (which is another word for "imagining"), really just cements the level of "science" we're dealing with here. No wonder their "models" always fail.

I'm not saying the climate isn't changing, and I'm not even saying we couldn't be causing it. I'm saying the current investigation into it is off-track, compromised, and historically incapable of coming up with any accuracy.

Ie, if China can successfully, and continually, modify the climate across their entire continent using a large-scale tech deployment, how is it reasonable to exclude it from theories on anthropogenic climate? It makes no sense.

(And if you aren't aware of China's weather modification programs, look them up. It's not "conspiracy theory", even CNN has reported on it.)

You can hardly be blamed for that, they've been saying it was one way or another since at least the 1970's.

Literally none of their doomsday scenarios have occurred as stated yet.

My bet is, rather than bovine farts and air for plant-life, the major climate driver will turn out to be what it always has been... 1 million earths-worth chaotic searing nuclear eruption, boiling atop hidden internal processes 4b+ years.

And if there is a human aspect to it, I'd first investigate the large-scale weather-modifying experiments creating and directing precipitation in arbitrary and unaccountable ways over large landmasses for decades. Eg, look at China's.

(Cue the brigade claiming sensible observations are madness because there's a "consensus"... among only scientists that agree...)

The number of users impacted by the (very popular) subs that have gone dark looks in the region of almost... everyone.

What will reddit look like without r/pics? Without r/funny? Without r/Music, t/aww, r/todayilearned, r/explainlikeimfive, r/DIY? Etc.

Less than 1% of all subs are going down, but it's substantially comprised of subs that matter the most, appeal to the largest number of users and literally have characterised the site as a whole for over a decade.

Doesn't this describe all armed forces, everywhere, ever?

This is not something to casually dismiss.

And that the reason it doesn't is because everyone involved has to constantly leak and brag all their confidential secrets out in the open so they will be considered hireable by other agencies tasked with secret-keeping?

Have I read that right?

There's advantage in appearing incompetent and creating traps to distract from actual active capabilities that are working.

Your move, NSA.