How many people think this way, jump ship, and end up being wrong?

It's not physically possible for the smell of peanuts to cause any kind of allergic reaction, as explained by the link above. That doesn't mean that the feeling you're getting isn't real, but it's caused by the (rightful) fear that you have about peanuts.

Is that risk really any different from anywhere else in society? Yes, if you have a truly severe peanut allergy, you may have to wipe down every surface you touch. Being on an airplane vs. anywhere else doesn't change that.

Even sweetened peanut butter like Jif is pretty healthy. It's something like 90% peanut butter, 9% sugar, and 1% other oils. Total composition is like 50% fat, 20% protein, 10% fiber, and 10% sugar.

Biscoff spread is more like 40% fat, 35% sugar, and 20% other carbs. No protein or fiber.

BYD has made the more practical cousin of this, and you can actually buy it. They have a car which jumps over potholes automatically: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIKAn8yDkpA

I mean, a hoagie is a broodje, just the bread is not as good. The quality difference in mayonnaise outside of Belgium insane too.

Dog food is probably particularly prone to creating particles that she could breath because it is essentially pellets of powder

> minus water evaporated from leafs

They varies wildly between different crops. Ideally, farmers in drought prone regions should be choosing crops that don't just dump all the water into the atmosphere (but current economic incentives/excessively cheap industrial water mean this is not happening).

Also, a lot of water evaporates from the soil before it ever gets sucked up by the plants.

I suppose since Anthropic's T&Cs allow them to have a person read your chats, that makes it violate the law. Of course, if Anthropic didn't have that in their T&Cs, it wouldn't have been illegal to write.

And it would never have been read by a person (wink wink)

The SR-71 wasn't randomly retired, though. The tactical need to go really fast at a high altitude disappeared because you can now get the same intel from satellites and stealth aircraft. The real question is why do you suddenly need that capability again?

Planning for the possibility that access to space may become denied, and wanting a backup option. If the enemy takes out your spy satellite, how else are you going to get photos of the warzone?

Even in that case, cheap and unmanned would be much more cost efficient.

The SR-71 was uncontested in the 70'ies, but it wouldn't be today. Today it would be vulnerable. Missiles reach higher and fly faster. There are missiles that are designed to intercept ICBM's, which come in faster than a Mach-3 SR-71.

Radar detection, tracking and firing has also become much more effective in the last 60 years.