fuoqi

Well, to be fair, it's suspiciously close in time to the recent US/UK/France permission to use long-range missiles against the Russian territory. So it may be indeed a transparent hint towards them from Russia regarding how asymmetric response could look like.

Zero substance? It was reported by Ukrainska Pravda (and Ukraine is far from being famous for its freedom of press) not by some Russian propaganda outlet. It's the same as saying that WSJ citing "sources" has zero substance.

Regardless, you can believe that the West did not provide any assurance to Ukraine during the Istanbul talks and that Russia has blown its own pipeline. It's your right.

So according to this principle, Russia can send military aid to the Syrian government to strike the US military bases on its territory and the US should not be able to retaliate?

It's like 3rd or 4th submission of this news today? One of the previous discussions: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42175676

The Russian military doctrine is quite different from the US one. It places far more importance on artillery and anti-air forces than on air superiority. The Russian army clearly sucks at maneuver warfare and together with the unrealistically optimistic views which were prevalent in the Russian government (read Putin), it explains perfectly well the extremely poor performance in the first months. The performance in the recent months shows results of a more "comfortable" for the Russian army mode of warfare.

Also note that the Russian army was not "fully committed", it was not using conscripts (there was a small scale deployment of conscripts, but after the public scandal they were quickly removed from Ukraine) and did not fully pull forces from all its military districts.

Meanwhile Ukraine was fighting in the total war mode from the first days (they do not pull "recruits" from streets in the broad daylight into military buses just for the fun of it) with huge external support. And having the well trained by the West ideologically charged army backbone with 8 years of practical warfare experience has helped immensely in the first months.

>fly jets near

It's regularly done by both sides. And not only with jets, but also with nuclear-capable strategic bombers.

>over their airspace

Shooting it down will be a no-brainer for Russia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1960_U-2_incident

>If attacks escalate it will be Russia that escalated every time.

So sending jets into their airspace is not an escalation, but shooting down the plain is? Yeap, you are not a diplomat.

Should I remind you how US reacted to the Soviet military presence in Cuba? On the US scale Ukraine is somewhere between Mexico and Texas in importance for Russia from the military point of view.

The West was actively supplying Ukraine since 2014, especially after the Debaltsevo embarrassment. Yes, it pales in comparison to the post 2022 levels, but it still was far from insignificant. Even your Wikipedia link lists a lot of pre-2022 aid and I am pretty sure this page is far from being comprehensive.

And it's even without mentioning the direct role of Boris Johnson in tanking the Istanbul accords.

13th largest backed by the whole NATO and other US-aligned countries. They send almost everything they can outside of nuclear weapons, the most cutting edge military tech, and people (well, outside of a limited contingent of "advisors"). Let's be honest, without this backing the war would've ended in the first month as was drafted in Istanbul.

Looks like a pretty transparent hint on how response to the recent US/UK/France permission to use long-range missiles against the Russian territory could look like. The Nord Stream sabotage has opened Pandora's box almost exactly how it was predicted in Cryptonomicon.

Yeah, I wish they have just used dates for user-facing releases. At least, it would contain some useful information.

The US can not build a unified grid. Japan still suffers from the moronic 50/60 Hz split. Energy rich regions in the eastern Russia have tiny energy links with the energy hungry regions of China. And you still want to seriously claim that the world grid could be practical in this century?

But you will trust any unsubstantiated slander disseminated in mass media by interested parties as long as it paints Russia in a bad light. Got it.

80% sounds like a BS number. It's cited on Wikipedia, but references are either "opinions" or do not contain such information at all.

A proper study [1] shows mean infection rate of ~20% in the worst regions (Far East and North) with the highest rate up to 47%. The situation should be better in the western regions. For comparison, in the US studies show ~4% infection rate [2], so situation in Russia is relatively bad, but improves steadily since 90s and it's far from being catastrophic as the 80% number paints it.

[1]: https://www.tibl-journal.com/jour/article/view/1706

[2]: https://www.cdc.gov/tb/hcp/clinical-overview/latent-tubercul...

"Russian disinformation" is so overused, it started to loose most of the meaning. Russia gets attributed to anything politicians do not like. It's an old trick of shifting blame from internal failures to external enemies.

Remember the "Russian disinformation" about Hunter's laptop? And then people are surprised by the falling trust in government and mainstream media.

Russia/China/Iran/North Korea/etc. certainly try to play on potential weaknesses of the US, but, let's be honest, they are amateurs compared to the US actions across the globe. But the root issue is with existence and expansion of various weakness points, not with hostile actors pressing on them.

Funny, how the other submission [1] sent at the same time and now having 7 votes is one of the main page, while this one with 11 votes can be seen only on the "new" page.

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41933078

It look like the Biden's Executive Order 14071 may be behind the ban. See this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5Ec5jrpLVk (discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41933079). If true, then potential consequences may be much farther than just the Linux kernel and can affect the wider open source development.

My point is that do not act surprised when you will see a noticeable reduction of contributions from Russian, Chinese, etc. developers. Most of people leaving (or not joining in the first place) will not be as visible as the Sergey's goodbye. By itself it may not be a huge deal, especially in the near term, but it compounds with other factors like dwindling (relative) popularity of C and the recent Rust debacle.

>And where exactly is Linus this evil strawman you created?

"Strawman"? Sure...

https://typeblog.net/55833/getting-called-paid-actor-by-linu...

I don't think many Western developers understand how much damage Linus just single-handedly dealt to the accumulated respect and trust towards the Linux Foundation leadership. If you think that the Russian IT community will think "damn, this evil Putin, we need to overthrow him", think again after taking a look at these discussions (in Russian) [1][2]. And many developers from other countries (especially from China) certainly have started to think "hm, we may be next" and act accordingly because of that, e.g. by not actively participating in the Linux development in the first place.

They could've handled it MUCH better, most people understand that the removal by itself is understandable (properly navigating the current regime of sanctions is extremely hard and it's better for an US-based organization to be conservative, doubly so with people from the directly sanctioned companies like Baikal Electronics), but lack of transparency, sneakiness, and the extremely aggressive, unnecessary and dehumanizing remarks from Linus just the situation from unfortunate bad to extreme worse.

[1]: https://habr.com/ru/news/852962/comments/

[2]: https://www.linux.org.ru/news/linux-general/17766938/page3#c...

Not allowing unpaid labor of Russian developers in your software project somehow damages the Russian economy?

Why it's done now when no new sweeping sanctions were introduced? Was Linux Foundation "circumventing" sanctions for many-many months?

The US also has active sanctions targeting Huawei, but there is a fair number of people in the maintainers list with Huawei e-mails. Double standards much?

UPD: As expected, downwotes is the only response to those questions.

In good faith I will just assume that you are incredibly naive.

Go read discussions in the Russian IT communities [1] [2]. The overwhelming reaction is not "let's go overthrow Putin!", but strong negative reaction, loss of respect, and alienation towards Linus, even across those who explicitly against the war and Putin.

[1]: https://habr.com/ru/news/852962/comments/

[2]: https://www.linux.org.ru/news/linux-general/17766938/page3#c...

No, he is a direct participant in the cited discussion.

Such hardworking Russian bots, wow. They wrote WHOLE 20+ emails in several hours!

Linus just dehumanized everyone who dares to disagree with the change and/or ask about why it was done on the 3rd year of the war (an increasingly common way of dealing with opponents, unfortunately). No one even tries to explain why this "compliance" selectively applies to ru emails (oh, look the maintainer has graduated from the Moscow State University! He is surely a Putin agent!), but not to Huawei ones. And how reverting the change became equivalent to "supporting Russian aggression" I simply can not comprehend.

Today he has dealt a huge damage to the Linux reputation among non-Western developers. Do not act surprised when, for example, Chinese developers and organizations will start behave accordingly.

Such a blatant BS rationalization... The commit literally talks about "compliance". This is nothing more than an easy alternative to navigating the obscure sanctioning regime. It's like self-censorship, people/companies do this because of the fear that their activity may fall under sanctions, even though it highly likely does not.

If your system relies on people being in "a free country with rights and ethics", then you have a bad system widely open to abuse. After all, who decides which country is "free" and which is not? White house? Should you exclude people from all "non-free" countries?

China next? And then they cry that Linux does not have enough maintainers...

The problem is that the company in question can act freely from the US government. Should I remind you what triggered this animosity toward Kaspersky in the first place? https://www.wired.com/story/nsa-leak-kaspersky-labs/

Higher inflation levels in the upcoming decades are effectively inevitable with the parabolic public debt levels and zero political appetite for reducing budget deficits. Things like quickly approaching insolvency of the Social Security program only make the situation worse. As soon as the public debt market (including repo) will see any issues the Fed will quickly ride to the rescue, inflation be damned. We've clearly seen it right before the pandemic and with UK gilts.

It does not matter what the inflation target is. It's likely we will see double digit inflation spikes with "hard work" of bringing it back to target levels (be it 2% or 4%), so on average you will get anything but the target level.

And before someone mentions Japan, read this: https://www.lynalden.com/economic-japanification

Attacks on US bases in the region have become a routine. Expect more casualties in the following months and years.

The US does not has a good response to this escalation. It could continue to bomb proxies, but it has almost no effect and it may even be counter-productive since it plays right into the Iranian propaganda, especially in the light of the Gaza war. Meanwhile, a big war with Iran would be a VERY risky endeavor with extremely unpredictable consequences for the global economy.

When you define a set of axioms, you implicitly define all possible math inside this set. Mathematicians then "discover" useful or interesting math in this implicit pile.

In turn, introduction of a new (useful) axioms set can be called an "invention".

If an economy is advanced enough to allow it, it would stay 2-day weekend with 4 working days. I think it would be more balanced than the 4-day workweek which slowly gets traction today.