Y’all can down vote me all you want but it still won’t change the fact the United States has a functioning railroad system outside of passenger service. I only mention network size because it was the easiest metric to pull up. But the point is whatever metric you use outside of passenger service the US is in the top three countries which is something not possible unless you have a functioning railroad system.

• The US is third for tonnes per kilometer.[1]

• The US is second for tonnes hauled per year.[2]

• The US moves more intermodal containers by rail then all of Europe combined. [3]

It might seem like the United States doesn’t know how to run trains but in reality we have one of the best freight networks out there.

I’d also like to add that on the passenger side of things the US is really trying to improve but the investments haven’t had time to come to fruition yet. Amtrak has 768 siemens venture cars and 175 ALC-42 locomotives on order so it can expand to 39 new routes [4]. There’s been a significant amount of funding into high speed rails for other corridors outside of the northeast corridor [5].

No functioning rail system

Has largest railroad network in the world

Pick one or specify you mean passenger rail.

That site is full of false claims with zero sources to back up those claims which is pretty funny seeing as that article is claiming to be written by a retired corporate attorney. The site is also chocked full of SEO tricks which is possible why it was the first result that came up for you. For example on 5. the word drone is stealthily a link to another irrelevant article about drone deliveries on a different as sketchy site. Link hiding is a well known trick to gain the system and bump up your page.

In the United States that is not true. The airspace above your private property is only sorta yours. You are entitled to do whatever you like with the airspace however you do not have the right to dictate what can fly through your airspace.

Since drones are classified as aircraft by the FAA they are entitled to transit the navigable airspace just as a manned airplane might [1]

Navigable airspace is defined in ‘public law 85-726 -AUG. 23, 1968’

“Navigable airspace” means airspace above the minimum altitudes of flight prescribed by regulations issued under this Act, and shall include airspace needed to insure safety in take-off and landing of aircraft.

That is incorrect on a federal level, your milage may vary with city/country/state lawa. Federally in the United States the right to reasonable expectation of privacy does not extend to outside of your house per Hester v. United States, 265 U.S. 57 (1924). The government is allowed to surveil you from public airspace without a warrant per Florida v. Riley, 488 U.S. 445 (1989).

If it’s being operated over a home then it will almost certainly have to follow the rules on Operation Over People and those can be quite restrictive, especially for drones that weigh more than .55lbs.

That is incorrect… If you actually read the law you are trying to reference you will learn it’s a prohibition on flying over “open-air assemblies of people” and if you read the final rule report (found on the very bottom of the page you linked under resources) on page 128 & 129 you will see how the FAA classifies “open-air assemblies of people”.

The FAA received a few comments addressing the proposal to prohibit Category 3 operations over open-air assemblies of people. One commenter recommended the FAA clarify what it means by an “assembly of people” and provide a quantity or density of people that constitute a significant risk. The FAA has declined to define this term by regulation; rather, the FAA employs a case-by-case approach in determining how to apply the term “open-air assembly.”58 Whether an operational area is an open-air assembly is evaluated by considering the density of people who are not directly participating in the operation of the small unmanned aircraft and the size of the operational area. Such assemblies are usually associated with public spaces. The FAA considers some potential examples of open-air assemblies may include sporting events, concerts, parades, protests, political rallies, community festivals, or parks and beaches during certain events. Some potential examples that are less likely to be considered open-air assemblies include individual persons or families exiting a shopping center, athletes participating in friendly sports in an open area without spectators, individuals or small groups taking leisure in a park or on a beach, or individuals walking or riding a bike along a bike path, but whether an open-air assembly exists depends on a case-by-case determination based on the facts and circumstances of each case.

While the FAA refused to strictly give a definition, what was provided is enough to construed that private property does not constitute an “open-air assemblies of people”.

I’m not sure for the EU but in the USA the airspace above your private property is public domain and since drones are classified as aircraft they are entitled do fly over your property just as an airplane or helicopter might. When a drone is being used to record and surveillance it depends on local jurisdiction.

As much as I hate to say this, MDMA being used for treatment of mental illnesses might not be viable option because of it’s negative effects. I do not know if short term severe depression and long term memory loss is worth a reduction in PTSD. Maybe as a last resort medication similar to how methamphetamine is prescribed for drug resistant ADHD.

You will get leagues better picture quality using a camlink/capture card and a camera with clean HDMI out. A gopro is a good budget option but a used DLSR or mirrorless camera is going to be the best. Some DSLR and mirrorless cameras support video out over usb so you don’t even need a capture card. Here’s a guide on getting it to work on Linux with a camera capability list inside the guide. If you do want to go the capture card route I hear elgato’s camlink works in Linux.

Anyone who develops or sells nuclear weapons and anyone holding stock in those companies (former advisor or not) benifits from the testing of nuclear weapons.

Defense contracts include the costs of R&D which is why they are so lucrative for a business to take. By testing nuclear weapons those companies holding the contracts can bill us the taxpayers for their tests. To put in other words for every nuke they test is somewhere from 20 million to 100 million of taxpayer money going to a defense contractor pocket.