throwrqX

Doesn't seem like a particularly bad thing to me. Obviously for those who want to use the internet for commercial purposes it will be bad but for those of us who would love to see the internet go back to how it was before so much of it was changed in the aims of making money AI could push towards this. Great irony in the fact of course that the AI companies themselves are in the business of making as much money as possible.

The purpose of a system is what it does

There's no such thing as an "impenetrable DMZ" so I don't know why you bring that up. Even the most fortified borders can have gaping holes as the October 7 attack showed. The US can't force anything either. During the Yom Kippur War when the US was a lot more hesitant about giving aid the only result was Israel threatening to use nuclear weapons against the Arab armies.

The paper says it makes a connection between human experimentation and foreign policy but I don't really see it. Scientists were interested in how these chemicals or biological agents worked and I don't think it would have made a difference to them whether they worked for the military, or a civilian health agency, or a corporation. Similarly for nuclear materials post WW2 the thinking at the time was that nuclear energy was going to become widespread and so there was plenty of reason to study the effect of nuclear material on the human body without taking into consideration anything foreign policy related.

> You can search all you want but there is no evidence or proof whatsoever of EU countries spying USA top government officials.

Nonsense. https://www.france24.com/en/20131024-nsa-france-spying-squar... https://www.dw.com/en/german-intelligence-spied-on-white-hou...

Well like any subject, you start by studying their history. Declassified documents take a while to become declassified but are a rich source of history. Then historians write books based on those documents and you can get a more reasonable idea of how things worked and fit into a broader picture. For more recent activities it's obviously more difficult but occasionally you get leaks that give you a sneak peek of what is happening (eg Snowden).

Every time this comes up people talk about protecting privacy and anonymity and what not and while luckily for us most of the time the laws die out they still do pass on occasion. The fundamental issue to me is that society still wants to protect against pedophiles or drug dealers or whatever other group more than protect privacy. As an example, how many people here could go on television onto some talk program or news show with their real name and face and tell a child abuse victim that while their concerns may be valid they are wrong and they should shut up? I doubt very many. I ran into a similar scenario once defending privacy when a lady who said she was abused as a child came into the conversation and told her story to the crowd. As you can imagine the crowd was very supportive of her and my concerns were more or less dismissed afterwards. There is nothing technical I could say that could persuade them as much as the poor lady's life story could.

I don't see how this is a "weird asian supremacy replacement theory" when Britain wholesale welcomes these changes as a part of their future, many Western countries welcome immigrants for a) brain drain from other countries and b) so their economies maintain growth. Nothing supremacist in that and nothing I said implies anything about supremacy or Asians beyond the fact I myself have Asian heritage.

I don't have any real care for it either way because I'll be likely dead by the time it happens, I am just pointing out demographic trends. However I don't see what your point about dog whistling far-right viewpoints is for. Britain as a whole is completely supportive of current demographic trends and I don't see any serious rejection of it in politics the way you might if one brought it up in a non-Western nation.

Not to worry, as someone also of Asian descent in a hundred or so years the amount of those living in the current British Isles with heritage to the colonialists will become a small minority and hopefully out of power (as I doubt the majority will want to be ruled by a minority).

They can also be solved by developing their own industry. Not sure they want to spend the money on it though.

SkyNews reported from their "sources" that it is understood that:

- The armed forces would run out of ammunition "in a few days" if called upon to fight

- The UK lacks the ability to defend its skies against the level of missile and drone strikes that Ukraine is enduring

- It would take five to 10 years for the army to be able to field a war-fighting division of some 25,000 to 30,000 troops backed by tanks, artillery and helicopters

- Some 30% of UK forces on high readiness are reservists who are unable to mobilise within NATO timelines - "so we'd turn up under strength"

- The majority of the army's fleet of armoured vehicles, including tanks, was built between 30 to 60 years ago and full replacements are not due for years

Source: https://news.sky.com/story/us-general-warns-british-army-no-...

Some of those comments are perhaps a bit unfair but it's well known the weakness of European armies.

If the Soviet Union was still around today would be interesting to see how they would deal with modern science regarding gender and sexuality. Modern Russia keeps many of the same cultural ideas from the Soviet Union yet they are very much against it.

The reddit board of directors? That doesn't seem right https://www.bloomberg.com/profile/company/0893288D:US

The Wikipedia article quotes V. D. Zakhmatov to say this kind of attack was never possible in the first place because the control systems were either manual or analog, not digital.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At_the_Abyss

It is was very naive why did no one take it literally when he first said it? Back then it was very clear what he meant.

Russia would only be losing potential revenue if the pipelines would be getting used any time soon, which is highly unlikely. They already did turn off the gas, now this just confirms it for the long term, with the added bonus of lots of people immediately blaming the US for it. Middle Eastern nations would benefit far more than the US, which has basically sold all of its capacity for LNG already. The EU is looking to sign LNG deals with those nations, see for example Scholz touring the Gulf region recently.

Russia has every interest in escalating so that the EU backs off from supporting Ukraine. If you watch Russian state tv this is very obvious.

Any evidence for genocides of pro-Russian populations in Donbas similar to Serbia's of Albanians?

> end of war

The vast majority of weapons and support to Ukraine is coming from the US, Britain and Eastern European countries, not Western ones. Even if Germany and France started taking in gas from Russia it would only marginally affect the amount of support coming in for Ukraine and certainly wouldn't come even close to ending the war. The energy catastrophe is unlikely to happen too beyond what is already happening (ie companies having to shutdown due to high energy prices). See: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-09-27/europe-is...

No this does not mean Europe will freeze, and honestly this was never going to happen. Worst case is lots of companies will fail. See: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-09-27/europe-is...

Everything the US does to Europeans Europeans do back to them. Why do you think the spying allegations went away so quickly? Because German and French intelligence spy on the US as well, and so it's better for both parties if they just shut up about it. Everybody spies on everybody, that's the entire reason of existence for intelligence agencies that every country has.

You act like countries in the EU don't have their own intelligence agencies. If the US was behind it they will find out very quickly.

If you are going to go this route may as well blame Middle Eastern countries who have a lot more capacity for selling gas to the EU than the US does.

People like Michael McFaul is exactly why the invasion happened in the first place because the Obama admin was weak on Russia after the 2014 invasion. They are the opposite of ideologues.

I don't understand why people here seem to think Russia is acting rationally. The fact they continue the invasion when losing is clearly irrational. They threaten mass nuclear bombardment of Europe nearly daily. I don't see any long term rationality in Putin's government in the slightest.

There will be no salvaging the relationship between Germany and Russia for a long time unless Putin gets replaced, even during winter. The absolute worst case scenario (the only one I see where Germany could have gone to Russia for gas) where people die from cold in their homes is never going to happen. Only yesterday BloombergNEF published a report saying Europe was ready for a complete cut off from Russian gas from October 1, and that includes commercial uses too which take up a big chunk and would obviously be redirected should there be any threat of people dying of cold.

> Russia almost certainly sabotaged a LNG terminal in Texas a few months ago

What evidence is there for this?

> It drives the wedge further between EU and Russia

On the contrary, should the EU find that the US was behind the explosions it would cause an absolute rift between the US-EU relationship, and in particular with Germany.

I like the sarcasm but if you read the report that originally started this review (you can find it in the attached link) you'll find the propaganda in this specific case didn't seem particularly effective. Quoting:

> It also reveals a somewhat damning tidbit when talking about the reach and impact of these campaigns; according to the report, “the vast majority of posts and tweets we reviewed received no more than a handful of likes or retweets, and only 19% of the covert assets we identified had more than 1,000 followers.” What’s more, the two accounts with the most followers explicitly said they were tied to the US military. I’ll try not to think about how much all this cost when I’m paying my taxes next year.

Had US social media agencies been fully in bed with the feds such a report would have never been produced in the first place. Remember, conspiracists always talk about shadowy organizations or groups of people with near omnipotent power - an idea these agencies themselves would like perpetuated to make it seem resistance is futile.

https://www.theverge.com/2022/8/25/23322214/us-government-pr...

Why would it matter who produces them? They would be bought where it's cheapest to buy them, that doesn't necessary mean they lack the ability to produce them domestically if needed. Russia's military expenditure adjusted for purchasing power is far more than any individual country in the EU indeed it's more than all the great powers of the EU combined. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/roiw.12536

Russia's air force pilots would be getting more combat experience compared to French pilots whose only would are less active in doing strikes in Africa and the Middle East. This applies to their armed forces in general in comparison to EU armies. I would agree their electronic warfare has been lackluster so far in Ukraine and that sanctions will continue to cause problems but in the long term I am not so sure their effect would be so great if Russia was planning years ahead. Also I would mention there's lots of Russian sympathizers in the EU and the increased amount of espionage that would occur beforehand, it would likely be a lot more brazen than it currently is. I can't find the source right now but recently I read some military commentators talking about how Russia has a much higher industrial capacity than the US currently has too. I would assume this applies to the EU. Even if they lack lots of high tech stuff they can still mass produce more lower tech fighters and so on.

I would be very cautious underestimating Russia's military ability just because of the fuck up in Ukraine. At the start people were calling it the end of the tank in the modern military too but now more wiser heads are prevailing.

Considering what percentage of tech workers in the West and therefore on this forum are of Asian heritage I doubt there is much brainwashing going on beyond the typical lack of knowledge on culture or history and so on.

No, the fundamental reason Europe doesn't enjoy friendly relations with Russia is because Europe is liberal and Russia is not. I'm not an American either. The US has enough of its own internal problems and their military actions aren't ones where millions of Americans settle on the territories they fought on so I don't buy the argument that their political or economic system is based on having an external enemy. It certainly wasn't that way before WW2 nor afterwards, especially given how big their domestic market is. The reason they have been consistently involved in international conflicts is primarily because they were violently against Communism spreading around the world. Most things stem from that. Take your examples, North Korea is a direct hold over from the Cold War. Taliban/ISIS is religious extremism that came about from Cold War conflicts. Iran is because they are a threat to America's ally in the Middle East, Israel, which was only created post WW2 and heavily involved in several Cold War conflicts.