No, you’re supposed to make fun of the US for not being able to maintain a supply line to a war they started themselves.

So, they sent their navy to the middle East with no plans on establishing or maintaining a supply line?

This is hilarious levels of incompetence.

I’ll be honest, I didn’t exactly proof read every word either.

I think what they meant with parabolic reflector is the reciever. They mentioned they 3d printed a reciever to achieve recors breaking efficency (short range). It’s not so easy to gather and convert the microwaves into electric energy. And it’s probably not very easy to create a concentrated beam either.

But that was my interpretation. I’m not going to pretend I understand everything about this. I could be wrong.

I think the technology to have satellites charge drones in the sky is at least 50 years away.

We already have concentrated microwave beams. And they do suffer immense energy loss on longer distances.

If you want to transfer energy via microwaves, your efficency will reach single digits real fast on any meaningful distance.

You are right that the inverse square law doesn’t realistically apply with concentrated beams. But you still have energy loss. Lots of it.

But don’t take my word for it. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-25251-w

Yes but you are charging through a conductive cable. It’s not even remotely the same as charging something with microwaves.

The power delivered decreases exponentially with distance. I’m sure you’ve heard the phrase “inverse square law”.

Because you divide the effect and gain by 4pi(r^2) meaning your output is decreased by 75% every time you double the distance.

You’re going to need ridiculously powerful hardware and an enormous amount of electricity to run it on any meaningful distance.

Yikes… if that’s what you gathered from my comment. I feel sorry that your educational system failed you.

Please… Read the examples they give you in your link. It’s very obvious which “kind of” they refer to.

The sequence of words are the same but the meaning is not.

When you say “my kind of people” you are talking about your kin.

Look, you are free to write however you want. I really don’t care. I just find it sad that people don’t know how or which words to use.

What we say and how it’s written are two very different things.

In Swedish we have plenty of words that are pronounced identically, but they are spelled differently.

English is not much different. Take “you’re” and “your”. The pronounciations are almost identical, and in many dialects they are identical.

Yes. That’s kinda my point. And in the context of human kind. We refer to it as “my kind of people” in writing.

It shows that people don’t read books anymore.

I see, so when you’re complimenting people you say “that’s kinda you”?

Or would you say “that’s kind of you”?

Feel free to say it out loud and let me know

By all means, tell me how I’m wrong. I’d love to know

Yes, but in this context, “kind” have a different meaning so you can’t use the contracted informal version of “kind of”. It’s like instead of saying

“oh how kind of you to hold the door for me”

You say: “oh how kinda you to hold the door for me”

It just doesn’t make sense.

“My kinda people” 🤦

Can we also turn off community posts? Why am I seeing them from random people I don’t give a shit about. I don’t even want to see them from the people I do care about.

And neither is a phonetic alphabet. They’re spelling alphabets. But that doesn’t sound as cool

They don’t believe in other planets, at all. They’re just projections on the firmament. Or some stupid shit like that.

Kind of cool how every single government in the world all cooperate on this to give the illusion of a spherical earth. I mean, imagine how much money they spend on flying an airplane 24/7 to make it look like ISS is in space. And who’s gonna project Saturn at all times just in case John over in Manchester wants to take a look with his telescope?

A true marvel of human cooperation

Not gonna vent much at all if you put in on a carpet…

It will. I can assure you the government have far more resources at their disposal than you do.

For sure. I suppose I just don’t get why everyone is making a fuzz over the ship when every single country would do the same.

War is not a game.

I understand you dislike the action that took place. I also think it was cowardly. But it simply does not change the fact that warships are legitimate targets in war.

Regardless of what the USA would like to call it or if it had congressional approval or not.