That's what I don't get.

There are racing sports that are about the technology, then the constructors are a main component of the sport (like in F1), or the gear is standardized (at least to a point where there's no meaningful difference).

Roughly 30% of published, peer-reviewed scientific studies are estimated to be not reproducible. Because nobody takes peer reviews seriously and everyone is just rewarded for publishing, no matter how much of it is garbage.

Remember the "chocolate helps you lose weight" study that went through every stupid newspaper? It was obvious garbage, employing p-hacking, using a fake researcher's name, using a made-up university institute. And yet it went through peer review without issue, was published in a journal and was picked up by every newspaper under the sun.

Then the author stepped forward and said he only created this fake study to show how easy it is to publish a garbage paper. The thing he didn't expect was that nobody cared. Nobody printed anything about him retracting his own obviously fake study. No consequences at all were taken to his finding.

Because everyone is incentivized to publish every piece of toilet paper they can find, and nobody cares about the quality.

Tbh, these artist renditions are almost completely made up. They are made up, because the press won't print a "We found a piece of bone shrapnel and we guess it might belong to a dinosaur", but they totally will print a nice image of a dinosaur from Jurassic Park, no matter if it's truthful or just purely made up.

Science is hard and getting proper science published in regular non-scientific press is even harder, unless you make crap up.

That's why the fake "chocolate helps you loose weight" study made it into every newspaper front page in existence, while the reveal by the author that the study was faked was completely not covered at all. (He did that to expose how easy it is to get fake science published. He just didn't expect how little anyone in media cared whether the science published is actually science.)

Real science is hard. Fake science is easy. Debunks and negative peer reviews are just not published. Hence, there's a huge amount of garbage science floating around and hardly anyone disputes it. Because of blind, unquestioning, religious faith in science.

Is there any decent way to run Plasma Mobile in Termux by now?

It's a broadband bang that can be heard across the whole spectrum. It becomes audible when listening to radio broadcasts.

Regular radio transmissions are comparatively narrow band, allowing lots of simultaneous transmissions in the same airspace, each on its own frequency. The spark gap transistor is very wide band, so it basically sounds as if you are sending a bang sound across all radio frequencies at the same time.

It wouldn't destroy radio equipment, but the radio transmissions. It's basically as if you'd use a radio jammer as a morse code transmitter.

The original white house was burned to the ground by British/Canadian troops in 1814.

Yeah, ok, that counts as a war on US soil, but that's still over 200 years ago.

Not to mention about 100 different American Indian Wars, though some of those were more slaughter than war.

Hard to really count them as wars for the reason you mentioned.

Pretty much the first type of commercially viable radio transmitter was the spark-gap transmitter ("Knallfunkensender" in German). It worked by charging up some capacitors to up to 100kV and then letting them spark. This spark sent a massive banging noise on the whole radio spectrum, which could then be turned into an audible noise using a very simple receiver. That was then used to send morse codes (or similar encodings).

They went into service around 1900, and by 1920 it was illegal to use these because they would disrupt any and all other radio transmissions in the area with a massive loud bang.

This.

There are often actual limits to what can be done, and there are practical limits. Especially in the early days of a technology it's really hard to understand which limits are actual limits, practical limits or only short-term limits.

For example, in the 1800s, people thought that going faster than 30km/h would pose permanent health risks and wouldn't be practical at all. We now know that 30km/h isn't fast at all, but we do know that 1300km/h is pretty much the hard speed limit for land travel and that 200-300km/h is the practical limit for land travel (above that it becomes so power-inefficient and so dangerous that there's hardly a point).

So when looking at the technology in an early state, it's really hard to know what kind of limit you have hit.

I'm not sure either of these events can even be counted as an attack. Pearl Harbour is roughly 3800km from the mainland. It's basically an overseas territory. An attack there is like saying the Falkland War was an attack on the UK.

And 9/11 was a terrorist attack, not a war. While it was a big attack, it was still only carried out by a handful of non-state-actors. That's quite a different thing than an actual military attack by a country.

Afaik, the last war on US soil was the civil war.

This is it. Yes, a registration/ID system can make the tasks of a tyrannical government slightly easier, but not having one didn't exactly stop ICE raids. On the contrary, having such a system would make it much easier for legal immigrants to prove that they are legal and it could help them against illegal deportation due to misidentification.

And in any case the problem is the tyrannical government, not the ID system.

And that's 60W while charging. In idle with the screen off, low end laptops often consume as little as 2-3W. Which is not far off from a pi.