Good suggestions, thanks!
A trough or elevated bed or ongoing maintenance isn’t possible in the kind of quick hit unofficial guerilla action that i can do.
The thing that got me thinking it is that I’ve seen years-abandoned pots on nyc rooftops that have wild plants that grew themselves there. So the conditions (whatever they are) can easily support unattended plant life, so the question is which ones will work there that are good for pollinators or the environment?
Zillions of wild plants grow extremely well in unattended planter pots in nyc. They’re all over the place.
And there’s no such thing as “weeds”. A weed just means a plant that grew itself in a spot where a person didn’t want it to be. A weed is just a plant.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weed
When people set out empty planters of soil they always wind up growing lush with random plants. The question isn’t what plants can grow by themselves there, because that does itself. -
My question is what plants can i plant there that would be especially good for the environment?
That’s not true. There’s tons of plants that grow gangbusters in unattended street planters, and heck even cracks in the sidewalk
If you want to increase your ratio you can just seed something popular
That didn’t go the direction i thought it would. I thought the animal was gonna pull a magician out of the hat
Damn their kidneys must be monsters to process that much water every time they eat a little fishy
EDIT:
Actually it turns out they spit out all the water before swallowing. Makes much more sense
Their throat pouch can hold over 3 gallons (13 liters) of water, but they drain the water before swallowing their prey.
https://earthsky.org/earth/pelicans-are-the-masters-of-air-land-and-water/
College radio and commercial-free independent radio. Streaming over the net of course
So then i still don’t see the joke.
Panel 1: He lifts heavy weight
Panel 2: She tries to lift it but can’t
Panel 3: She congratulates
But it seems to be illustrated as being the same barbell in all the panels
Your confused about what I’m saying. The ARRAY OF RADAR STATIONS is emitters. I’m saying THE ATTACKERS AGAINST the array of radar stations only need to be passive detectors.
That’s the topic of the thread your replying in. Quote:
you could theoretically make a moderately large distributed array sprinkled over a few square kilometers
Your information about passive radar detection is not up to date. There are tons of passive detection of radar systems that by design do zero emission. The radar array stations will need to emit in order to function, but the enemy can find those radar emitters without emitting any energy of their own
I’m not understanding. Let’s say army A has a radar array of 500 relatively cheap radar stations. They clump them all into a 1 square km area. So now army Z drives some howitzers nearby (which aren’t detectable by ground based radar), waits till a radar station turns on, the passively locates the radar base station, and shoots a cheap shell at it which destroys it.
But if you say army A has the level of military equipment that can locate and destroy howitzers up to 30 km away in all directions, then what benefit does an array of concentrated radar stations provide?
Locating radar emissions is a passive process, it doesn’t reveal your own location. That’s why i said the radar array would have to have very strong defenses extending out 30 km in all 360 degree directions from each individual radar station. And if a group has that strong a level of military equipment already then i don’t see why they would need this huge redundant array of radar stations all concentrated in a small area.
Locating the radar base station? No that’s the easiest part. Radar is like turning on a Hollywood style searchlight pointing up into the sky. The instant you turn it on its extremely obvious where the radar searchlight is coming from
Unless I’m missing something in your plan i don’t think that would work well. If these radar stations aren’t surrounded by very serious defensive systems for hundreds of miles in every direction, then they’ll simply be blown up by dumb howitzer shells that only cost around 2000 dollars.
Howitzers are cheap, relatively long range, mobile, and accurate enough. If you don’t have strong enough defenses to prevent the howitzers from moving into range, then they’ll just blow up all your radar stations with cheap shells.
A petabyte is 1000 terabytes. There are commercial hard drives that are over 30 tb. So 33 of these drives hold 1 pb. Times ten makes 330 hard drives to hold 10 pb. All of those drives together would take up just one third of a single full height server rack like this.
https://www.quantumtechnologyequipment.net/products/s6llst3137
So not only wouldn’t it need a whole data center, in fact it wouldn’t even need a whole server room, and actually wouldn’t even need a whole server closet!
I calculated this all out only because I’m procrastinating😆
Like, names of presidents? Dude.