Where do you track that? Guess we need some new hostility on X.

We need this to be sustainable, so don't delete anything that somebody is paying for.

Calculate your cost to maintain events active.

Provide a tool to batch delete own events.

Make offers.

"Hey @username, you are storing 1.2GB of events on our servers for free. We want to keep it free but storing stuff costs money. Would you chip in to keep things free? Your data is popular and gets requested at about 200MB/month. Storing and serving it costs only 12ct/month and if you pay to this [invoice] we will keep all your around for at least another year. Click here to pull a backup of your data if you don't want us to keep it stored. Click here to help us weed out old data if you want to batch delete some of your events. We know it's not much but we'll award you a badge if you help us out."

Something kind, the recipient can feel proud about chipping in ...

Offer badges for support levels. If @username paid 144ct for another year, one badge. If user backed up, give a gadge. Why not? If user paid for himself and all their follows, give him a special badge etc.

You still trust the LLM more than the other maintainer. For each individual library that's probably a sane approach but collectively we are so screwed if the machine's master turns against us and builds backdoors into our products.

Vibe coding has us all boxing above our class. All the open source ultimately trained the machine and you hand over the reign to its masters. With custom built libs you give up on all the audit and careful considerations that went into them.

To through an LLM at it later, that's another story.

Garmin tries to get me to compete with my friends all the time. WTF? That's not what I want.

I just want a sensor that collects data without blaring it out to the internet. Tough ask, I know.

Love my Garmin watch except for the privacy invasion of it needing internet all the time while tracking my life. High quality private and open source options anybody?

A 0.25mm fibre optics tether isn't exactly "heavy cables". The drag would be about 4N at 150km/h or 8N at 200km/h. That's less than a kg equivalent.

I don't think you can just throw a tether at a Shahed drone to achieve this but the concept wouldn't make the drones much more expensive but infinitely more effective.

The weight of the tether would be minimal. FPV drones are used with 50km spools. In my concept you could go down to 100m. That weighs nothing and hardly drags.

To avoid tangling, you can have the forward tether in one tube at the tip and the backward tether in a different tube at the tail. These tubes could control where the tether is relative to the drone engine and the other tether to avoid tangling.

The chain would be self-organizing. Each drone only needs to keep a rough relative position to its leader. Even if frequent corrections reduce range, this is a solved problem.

So this concept uses RF as a fall-back, too but the long chain would add significant resistance to RF jamming.

The linked events reference the tethered FPV units, too. Thanks for replying anyway.

What if those drones camei in packs of 50, jam resistant and FPV controlled?

No plana but keeping the option reminds me of

https://youtu.be/bRkfDMChzlIi