When you download a torrent, you're downloading it from someone else's computer. That 'someone else' is usually an individual, not some file sharing site with redundant servers.

When you download a torrent, someone had to send it. It's a small cost for individual torrents, but they had to pay for energy, internet connection, hard drives etc. If more people seed the torrent, you get a small bit of it from each seed, spreading the burden.

If no-one with the torrent has their computer on and seeding it, you cannot download the file, because there is no-one to download it from. If there are several seeds with the torrent, then you can still download it even if one or more seeds turn the computer off at night, delete the file, or are overloaded.

Yeah, I posted it to the wrong sub.

Even 95% is on the low side. Most residential-grade PV grid-tie inverters are listed as something like 97.5%. Higher voltage versions tend to do better.

Yeah, filters essentially store power during one part of the cycle and release it during another. Net power lost is fairly minimal, though not zero. DC needs filtering too: all those switchmode power supplies are very choppy.

Oh, indeed. I'm just pointing out that terrible & illegal DRM is hardly a new practice.

You can't really have effective copy protection on any disc that can be played in a basic CD player; they're just too simple.

So Sony's approach was to put an autorun installer for a 'music player' on the disk too. If installed, it attempted to lock your CD drive from being used by any other software and couldn't be easily uninstalled. And they pirated open-source software (yes, that's possible) to build it.

SMH My Head.

Try the Sony BMG Rootkit, contained on music CDs:

In 2005 it was revealed that the implementation of copy protection measures on about 22 million CDs distributed by Sony BMG installed one of two pieces of software that provided a form of digital rights management (DRM) by modifying the operating system to interfere with CD copying. Neither program could easily be uninstalled, and they created vulnerabilities that were exploited by unrelated malware. One of the programs would install and "phone home" with reports on the user's private listening habits, even if the user refused its end-user license agreement (EULA), while the other was not mentioned in the EULA at all. Both programs contained code from several pieces of copylefted free software in an apparent infringement of copyright, and configured the operating system to hide the software's existence, leading to both programs being classified as rootkits.

Well, that's certainly the answer.

I wouldn't have thought you'd want to put a building quite that close to the waterfront even in a Fjord, but apparently they did.

SpaceX has enough of a lead over everyone else that I don't think them simply being denied government contracts is feasible, in a too-big-to-fail way.

You'd see some kind of forced nationalisation or being strongarmed into selling to another defense contractor on national security grounds.

Elmo might choose some kind of "if I can't have it, no one can" sabotage though.

I don't think the US/Canada usually does that style of power pole, with three phases on a crossarm and no neutral below.

Barriers on what looks like a pretty low-traffic low-risk road too.

I would think somewhere Scandinavia or central Europe. NZ wouldn't put barriers like that up.

Rock wall near bottom of picture screams old.

Indeed. Just need to remember that AI can and will hallucinate entire studies or court cases into existence.

'Reckless disregard for the truth' shows up sometimes, especially in e.g. defamation.

If the AI cites some legal case from 2015 or a random medical article, you probably need to ensure that those articles actually exist, and not simply assume that the AI is right.

If the AI said that a month's supply of Fentanyl is the recommended treatment for a headache, no reasonable person is going to believe it. That means that if you say that you believe that, the court isn't going to consider you a reasonable person.

IANAL either.

'Reckless disregard for the truth' shows up sometimes, especially in e.g. defamation.

If the AI cites some legal case from 2015 or a random medical article, you probably need to ensure that those articles actually exist, and not simply assume that the AI is right.

If the AI said that a month's supply of Fentanyl is the recommended treatment for a headache, no reasonable person is going to believe it. That means that if you say that you believe that, the court isn't going to consider you a reasonable person.