I believe the FCC ban doesn't apply to used gear but seems like eBay is taking a harder stance.

"Call Fred."

"You'll need to unlock your phone for that."

"Call Fred."

"You'll need to unlock your phone for that."

"Call Fred."

"OK, calling Fred."

Phone is locked in my pocket the entire time. Like, make your damn mind up. Every time I try to call from the car now I have to ask it at least twice, usually three times.

And a completely baffling one recently, not even anonymizing names, also in car:

"Call George."

"OK adding L.S.D. by Hallucinogen to your Liked Songs playlist."

WTAF.

Indeed not. Being in service provided one of the most desirable careers you could hope for as a working class Victorian. When your options look like pit, mill, or factory, cleaning floors in a nice warm house is a good alternative. And that was just the foot in the door: there was progression available. Those jobs were hard to get, prestigious, came with their own status hierarchy, and could keep you set for life.

> The switch could be connecting ground trace to the casing

This seems most likely - that there's actually a conductive path on one side of the switch from the switch body to the metal frame it's bolted to, so flipping it does take the frame in and out of circuit (doing something like changing capacitance or introducing RF noise on the ground plane which something in the PDP is sensitive to.)

Decades ago I wrote a paper, lost to time now, on the effect of his military purges on the fighting effectiveness of the Red Army during the back half of WW2. He purged not just senior commanders but mid ranks and up, think like down as far as their equivalent of majors. A vast amount of battle-relevant experience was swept away, much more damaging in the day-to-day grind than simply disappearing a few field marshals.

My point is, hope is not lost for the US military. Yes lots of irreplaceable senior experience is being tossed aside for unforgivably stupid and pointless reasons, but there's a lot of recent, hard-won, actual shooting war experience in the officer corps which, if they don't all bugger off in disgust, will serve us well in future. Today's captains and majors are well aware of how drones in Ukraine have changed battle[1], to give one example, and the career-minded among them will be in doctrine-influencing and development positions before too long.

I'm aware this is to some degree wishful thinking.

[1]I chose this example because it's going to be one of that drunken fool's more consequential errors: re-tasking the Army unit charged with developing drone capabilities for the US.

The point of my note was less about SR-71 and more about developing the capability to resurrect old technology in general, a skill we do not often practice at institutional scale. The SR-71 is a visible and cool way for NASA and contractors to teach themselves how to do something we'll probably have to do again in future. Making a documentary series out of it would be a smart move too, if we are attempting to inspire the future of American engineering by fetishizing the past as seems to be this administration's intent.

Then:

> We simply don't need that capability anymore. Recon of this sort is now done by satellites (at much higher resolution) and it's unclear if designated enemy states don't have or couldn't have an effective defensive system.

Isn't really true. The A12/SR-71's predecessor, the U2, is still flown operationally today because satellites are only a 90% solution. They can't be tasked to overfly a particular site on demand or on an arbitrary schedule, can't have their sensors switched out on demand, and can't loiter. The air defense evasion aspects of the Blackbird aren't as important now which is why the U2, being much cheaper to operate, is still flown and the SR-71 isn't. Of course that is not an argument to spend billions returning Blackbird to flight, since we already have the U2. But high altitude reconnaissance aircraft are still useful.

Having a manned, very high altitude, very fast research plane is undoubtedly useful for all sorts of development purposes.

But more than that, we are as a civilization doing a bad job of preserving cutting edge expertise from the past. We keep letting entire areas of engineering and technology die out without really trying to preserve them even though we know at some point they will come in useful. The skills, processes, even institutional confidence developed in just trying to get an SR-71 flying again will teach us a lot about resurrecting other such dead ends. Aerospace in particular is full of them. That will, for sure, get us out of trouble or speed up something we need at some unknown point in the future. I'd think of it more as developing a general capability than the world's most expensive vintage aircraft hobby.

EDIT Agh now Range Rover v Mini? What do you want from me!?

"Goodbye, USA friend, I am emigrating to Tonga so I won't see you again."

"Hello my new Tongan neighbor! I am an immigrant to your beautiful country."

"Hey, buddies at my high school reunion, I'm doing great thanks! I am an expat living in Tonga these days."

"Emigrant" exists but almost unused (perhaps other than in specialist policy writing.) "Expat" is the common agent noun for "Emigrate."

That said your seatback map is better than anything on any airliner I've ever been on.