I feel like her reply is just as likely to be to call him a race traitor or whatever. It's hard to reason with people who gatekeep that hard
I googled Pyhäsalmi Mine gravitricity "2 MW"
and EVERY article covering this has also cited 2 MW.
Now, under Occam's Razor, what's more likely:
- Absolutely none of the article writers have any clue what the difference between a MW and a MWh is because none of them remember any physics
- Some of them could suspect that it's wrong, but an authoritative source of the claim wrote/said 2 MW capacity when they meant "2 MW peak generation" or "2 MWh storage" (I'd presume Gravitricity, but I'm struggling to find such a source, myself)
- One writer miswrote/misquoted as per 2, and everyone is mindlessly recycling that original article's contents with no attribution or care.
I don't know which one it is. But I'd generally lean against 1.
The FDA regulation on Net Weight is found in 21 CFR 101.105. In this regulation FDA makes allowance for reasonable variations caused by loss or gain of moisture during the course of good distribution practice or by unavoidable deviations in good manufacturing practice. FDA states that variations from the stated quantity of contents should not be unreasonably large.
While FDA does not provide a specific allowable tolerance for Net Weight, this matter could come under FTC jurisdiction. FTC has proposed regulations that would unify USDA and FDA Net Contents labeling and incorporate information found in the National Institute of Standards & Technology (NIST) Handbook 133.
NIST Handbook 133 specifies that the average net quantity of contents in a lot must at least equal the net quantity declared on the label. Plus or minus deviation is permitted when caused by unavoidable variation in weighing and measuring that occur in good manufacturing practice. The maximum allowable variance for a package with a net weight declaration of 5 oz is 5/16 oz. Packages under-filled by more than this amount are considered non-compliant.
All but confirms
So not confirmed
An API token is more secure than a password by virtue of it not needing to be typed in by a human. Phishing, writing down passwords, and the fact that API tokens can have restricted scopes all make them more secure.
Expiration on its own doesn't make it more secure, but it can if it's in the context of loading the token onto a system that you might lose track of/not have access to in the future.
Individual API tokens can also be revoked without revoking all of them, unlike a password where changing it means you have to re-login everywhere.
And that's just the tip of the iceberg. Lmk if you have questions, though.
So others have already talked about how great Star Trek is. I agree with them, but I think that literally everyone has missed the point of your question:
https://startrek.website
It's its own lemmy instance. It was spawned from the migration away from reddit, and it's stayed alive since. So combine an active former-reddit community with lemmy and a good reason to all rally around, and finally the final ingredient of federation, and the Star Trek related rooms will always be on every server, and they'll always be populated.
Yeah the headline is stupid bait.
They already built it. They're trying to contribute the change upstream.
Which is technically "requesting higher core support", but is a very obnoxious way to phrase it.
I very rarely care for what most 62 year olds have to say about the capabilities about the theoretical limits of computation.
This isn't much different.
Unfortunately if you let Junior play in legacy code once, it'll learn some nasty habits and make more of it from scratch, usually when you're trying to sleep.
Source?
M8, this ain't Stack Overflow...
OP, this title is stupidly misleading and incorrect, you should change it immediately.
The Taliban seized the DOMAIN, aka the ownership of the
queer.af
name that people could type into their browsers, and their system would resolve into an IP address.As the Taliban control
Af
ghanistan, (see where the domain comes from), this was inevitable and the instance owners were already planning to retire the instance as they didn't want to give money to the Taliban to keep it up.The INSTANCE, aka the physical server, was not in Afghanistan, and still has its IP address(es), and so has had absolutely nothing happen to it.