It looks like this article is using @ZLabe 's charts, he posts regularly about this on mastodon, if you're using the "follow" feature on here (or on a mastodon account) at all I definitely recommend following him.
AshDene
joined 2 years ago
Both "on the earth" and "on the moon" provide about the viewing angle of the sky (a semi-sphere). Unless we're tracking an object with multiple of these spaced around the earth to get 24/7 recordings the moon doesn't seem worse...
Even then, with two of these you could put them opposite eachother just barely into the "dark side" (side facing away from earth) of the moon and get nearly 360 degree coverage. You'd have to not literally be on the boundary/leave an earth sized gap in the coverage, but it would be pretty damn close.
But it claims it will become decentralized (unless something has changed in the last month or so).
Toronto, and the law I'm referring to is a city bylaw.
Pretty sure these people are trying to build a stylish helicopter more than anything else.
It looks like it's a giant quadcopter with wheels and a car shaped shell. It's hard to believe it has the lift to lift multiple people anyways...
I'm betting on ultralight. And toy for rich people, not for practical use.
Just in case you're not aware, armored trains are (or were) a thing. In the US they were used from the US civil war to early in the cold war (at the end there to transport nuclear weapons).
In the rest of the world... the most recent use is by Russia in their invasion of Ukraine.
I don't believe so. They'd have to remove identifying information, but my imperfect understanding is outside of that they are allowed to keep the content.
With the capability of modern surveillance technology (making it extremely hard to organize a rebellion), and the sophistication of modern weaponry (making it extremely hard to arm an army without state support) it strikes me as unlikely that you would ever get civil war in a single country world.
Civil war is already incredibly rare with plenty of outside actors happy to support trouble.
I certainly don't rule out mass strife and protests, but the question was about war, not suffering.
A single world spanning country.
If we don't kill ourselves off first it will probably happen eventually. Country sized used to be limited by things like communication latency, and the time it took to move forces around. Technology has shrunk the world so that those things no longer matter. The natural size limit on a country is almost certainly as large as the earth now.
It won't happen soon, cultures will take time to become similar enough to merge. Leadership structures take time to be absorbed into a greater one (EU style) or have to forcefully taken over (Chechnya style, thankfully very rare these days). But with no real impediment to countries growing larger, it will happen eventually. With no-one able to fund or support rebellion and modern technology making police actions extremely effective it may well last effectively forever.
Whether it's a democratic utopia, a dictatorial nightmare, or something in between for the common citizen is not yet defined. Either way, war, as in peer to peer conflict between sovereigns, will be over.
Phrasing it as "spotting potential swatting calls" is approaching it from the wrong direction.
Instead it should be "confirming that there is probable cause before moving in with weapons". A single call should not probable cause make.
We should really amend the law to be "and if they incorrectly deny a claim they have to pay 10 times more". Enough to make it cost more than it's worth if they do it intentionally, not enough to bankrupt them...