On a linguio-historical point "Cry Havoc" means something slightly more than a spanking. In medieval warfare a besieged city would be offered the chance to surrender with honour, and the inhabitants would keep their lives and their possessions. If they declined then the general of the besieging army might “Cry Havoc.” This would be a licence for the soldiers to pillage, kill and rape.
Sorry Max, but you missed out on all that.
Technical articles may get more or less attention, based upon one's current needs and interest, but non-technical stuff has a more general appeal and, if one is too busy at work (AND smart enough to recognize them by the headline) he/she can take a note and get back to it when at home. This just to say that, if the newsletter was strictly technical, it may lose a certain percentage of hits (mine, for sure and for what it's worth): this is something the Supreme Commander may want to have a thought on during the long winter evenings down in the bunker...
I get many bland newsletters stuffed full of vendor supplied technical content. The quirky bits and the engaging writing style is the differentiating factor which means this newsletter gets read and the others do not.
Drones are, in essence, flying autonomous vehicles. Pros and cons surrounding drones today might well foreshadow the debate over the development of self-driving cars. In the context of a strongly regulated aviation industry, "self-flying" drones pose a fresh challenge. How safe is it to fly drones in different environments? Should drones be required for visual line of sight – as are piloted airplanes? Join EE Times' Junko Yoshida as she moderates a panel of drone experts.