"Don't ask to ask, just ask" is great in general, but if I tell someone this, I'm not trying to schedule a single call. It's more asking for permission to call whenever. Depending on who you and your friends are, it can be necessary to give this heads-up at least once so that, as another user put it, they don't get a panic attack from an unexpected phone call. As an older Gen Z, it feels like no one my age really calls each other out-of-the-blue, and you need something like this to establish it.
I realize there are generational differences but I still default to the assumption that calling people whenever (outside of 10PM-7AM for non-emergencies) is fine, unless someone specifically tells me otherwise
No, I don't need something like that to establish anything. My friends are relatively sane it appears. Neither do I expect such a behaviour from anyone. I have a phone, feature of that is you can call me. Complaining about that is weird. If you don't want calls, turn the thing off... But yeah, I realize in other parts of the world, there seem to be different "rules". However, still very weird to me.
Good read (as is the next article in the series), but you can tell it hasn't been proofread due to "paypa׀.com" being described as a danger. Maybe in a different font than the website's, but in that case, maybe this should have been rendered out.
Costa Rica and Paraguay coverage was added recently (within the last year iirc). The author notes Paraguay as an example of a country that was not yet in the dataset they sourced from.
El Salvador does have a decent amount of coverage on street view, but this was done by El Salvador Maps (if you pan the camera down, you'll see this name on the cars used to capture the coverage). The dataset is curated by a member of the Geoguessr community, in which "unofficial" coverage like this is disregarded, which is why you won't see it included.
I might be misunderstanding something about atproto, but isn't it always possible to export data from bluesky because all it takes is reading your data, which is done by any app interacting with your pds anyway? If they block that, they're blocking atproto functionality entirely, no?
> If they block that, they're blocking atproto functionality entirely, no?
Keep in mind, twitter got rid of their API. Google got rid of XMPP federation. Bluesky breaking or defederating atproto wouldn't impact most users, so they'd probably get less outcry than those examples.
Does this do anything differently from https://backloggd.com/? I've been using Backloggd a lot over the past year and I'm not sure how this is different (aside from being ad-free, which is nice)
Backloggd is our main "competitor", and we know most people are already familiar with it. But going from their roadmap (https://backloggd.com/roadmap/), we already have:
- A mobile app
- Steam and PSN integration
- A recommendations system
- Social Page (?)
not sure what they building, but we're trying to keep most of our stuff shareable. For example, you can share a nice Letterboxxed-style image of your game reviews. We're also close to shipping something like this for recent played games, similar to what these third party tools do for LastFM.
We both use IGDB as source, so there's no difference in the actual catalogue of games.
I use tools such as Google Maps and Open Street Maps, and I cut/paste, mostly just by eyeball, with the relevant things I might be interested in - the train stations of Rome, for example, and so on. Google Earth is also great for this, but I confess that the last one I made for myself (Berlin), I just screengrabbed and pasted my friends # in place, with the train details, etc.
There's something comforting about knowing how to get around when the power goes out. Since I enjoy roaming adventures requiring navigation, making little maps for myself is basically just how I roll .. got me where I needed to be.
A lot of historians are drawing parallels between recent events and the events leading up to WW1. I’m not an expert, but it isn’t absurd to say that it could happen.
What? If they could have predicted the severity of WWII, Chamberlain and the rest wouldn't have tried to appease Hitler or delay.
Predicting the severity of events in advance is difficult. I wouldn't listen to what historians predict today. Every catastrophe is different, but despite this people like to pretend (after the fact) all the signs were there and were obvious.
For all we know Ukraine will stay confined and China will just keep being belligerent but take no action.
TSMC controls 60% of global semiconductor production, not "90%+." If your argument is: "well, they control the advanced nodes!!" - if Taiwan is attacked, the things you're using these advanced chips for will no longer be relevant.
Missiles and radar powered by Intel/Altera chips will do the job just fine until more domestic fab capacity can be spun up. Most defense products are running on processes from two decades or more ago and are already legally forced to consider adversarial supply chain issues.
2. "the things you're using these advanced chips for will no longer be relevant", "Missiles and radar powered by Intel/Altera chips will do the job just fine until more domestic fab capacity can be spun up." Hard-disagree. US advantage is in high resolution AESA sensors, thermals, and fast advanced processing and comms. We aren't talking Tomahawks and PESA radars when it comes to competitive advantage.
Finally, there is a reason why domestic fab capacity is ramping up slowly in the US and Russia doesn't have such capability to speak of - it's hard and the major powers are behind.
Which defense contractor is using a sub-10nm process node for products? Every F35 chip is >90nm.
Which adversary would these chips yield an advantage against in a nuclear war?
Domestic fab capacity is ramping up slowly because these facilities are multi-billion-dollar, multi-decade endeavors. Intel's existing domestic fabs can make everything a war-fighting nation could need, capacity and capability-wise.
If true, and I have no reason to doubt you based on the accuracy of your previous messages, you have made your point. I definitely don't know the F-35 chip specs.
> Recent Armenia vs Azerbaijan (supported by Turkey) war. More tension on border.
I completely missed the Armenia/Azerbaijan conflict, but from what I can tell, tensions there don't seem likely to pull many other countries into it. Curious if you have thoughts on that.
> Posturing in Africa by Russia, France, and China.
Can you explain why this would lead to a potential world war? Most of what I can find about this is foreign countries vying for economic influence, which seems unlikely to burst into conflict, especially one that would become a world war.
See what BirAdam said - he is correct. Armenia / Azer is a direct cause of Russia being drawn into Ukraine, insofar that Russia "guaranteed" peace and had a contingent of "peacekeepers" in Armenia. What you see is an acceleration on conflicts in areas that were held back by global stability before. Now that Russia couldn't react, Azer backed by Turkey (and arguably other powers in the West) pushed Armenia out of Nagorny Karabakh. If Russia wasn't in Ukraine, this would likely look like Georgia in 2008 where Russia would use this as an excuse to take some land. Instead they did nothing, because they are busy.
Africa is too much to summarize - basically look into what Wagner and US PMCs were doing there. It's just more proxy conflict.
To support this, all of these proxy wars have covert units by the major nuclear powers conducting efforts directly against the other side. If these are ever exposed directly, political pressures will likely escalate the war. The moment one side starts to lose decidedly, nuclear war will likely occur.
I also don't know what a world war looks like in the nuclear age. Proxy wars are bad enough, to be sure, but a world war seems difficult when many nations can glass the planet.
We were closer to nuclear war in the 1960s and 1970s than we are today. Sure we don’t have it as good as they did in the ‘90s and 2000s but you wouldn’t know it from the depression and anxiety stats over time, which suggests that the geopolitical situation isn’t the main driver here.
I'm pretty sure that the research showing the risk of nuclear winter being exaggerated is specifically intended to make nuclear war "thinkable" in a way it wasn't towards the end of the Cold War. It's one small part of a broader trend in elite consensus-making over the last 10 years or so. As a member of the Posadist 4th International, I approve, of course.
Among other things, perhaps the recent bombing of the Iranian section of a consulate in Damas, Syria by Israel, to which Iran responded by war threats.
I did in fact miss this, thanks. I'm not as convinced by other commenters' references to Putin's nuclear threats, but the Middle East erupting into a broader conflict with the US joining in seems at least somewhat plausible to me. Another comment mentioned the potential of the US entering a war in defense of Taiwan, which also seems quite plausible to me given China really wants Taiwan back and Taiwan is much more critical to the US than, say, Ukraine.
What should they do to be taken seriously? Just hit the Washington D.C once?
On the other hand, do you really think any nuclear power, be it Russia, USA, China, would allow being defeated in an existential war and just dissolve without bringing down the whole world?
There is a more than likely chance that China will invade Taiwan by 2030 and US will possibly intervene to stop that slaughter. Is that fear mongering?
Yes. There's no source, no nuance, no justification, no explanation, no analysis, no hope, no details, it's as pure a jolt of dense negative emotion in one sentence as you can manage. You're choosing emotionally charged words like 'slaughter'. You're speculating that something halfway around the world will involve the reader's home country, because that makes it feel closer and more scary. It's absolutely fearmongering.
So if someone https://twitter.com/DAlperovitch/status/1473362460673515527 told Ukrainians in 2021 that they were going to be invaded by Russia, which would mean 100,000+ of them killed and maimed, would you also say they were "fear mongering?"
There were many people on HN, like you, the Russian government, and Snowden literally saying people were "fear mongering" because they were warning about the fact of the Russian invasion.
Do you have any evidence or track record to support your position? Any Russian invasion predictions you called successfully? If not, I'd leave dismissals of current US Gov. understanding of the situation to the full time geo-pol pro's who do successfully predict things.
"FEARMONGERING meaning: 1. the action of intentionally trying to make people afraid of something when this is not necessary"
> "told Ukrainians in 2021 that they were going to be invaded by Russia, which would mean 100,000+ of them killed and maimed, would you also say they were "fear mongering"
Maybe, this depends if they were commenting with good evidence because they were trying to get Ukranians to fight or escape, or if they were commenting because they wanted to make Ukranians afraid. The Ukrainian government saying "imminent invasion, 100,000+ of us will die, here's what we need to be doing" might not be fearmongering, Russia saying "we're imminently invading, 100,000+ of you will die" might be fearmongering. Americans telling each other "Russia will invade Ukraine, 100,000+ people will die, the world is ending, mass slaughter!, NATO will fall, Europe is history! Russia will move onto Georgia and then Poland!" absolutely would be fearmongering.
> "Do you have any evidence or track record to support your position?"
My position is that your comment is fearmongering. My evidence is your comment.
> "If not, I'd leave dismissals of current US Gov. understanding of the situation to the full time geo-pol pro's who do successfully predict things."
I'm not dismissing US Gov understanding of the situation, I'm criticising your fearmongering echoing of things. Do you have any track record of helping stop China invading Taiwan? If not, stop spreading fear for upvotes and leave the warfare preparations to the pros.
Ah, then your position falls apart. The more people would've been aware of Russia's plans for Ukraine, the earlier and better a formidable defense could've been. Same in as in Taiwan. That requires people understanding what the future possibly holds and how to deter the worst case.
HN readers being scared of 'slaughter' in Taiwan, with no source and no explanation of the claim, is 'necessary'? It going to help mount a formidable defense?
Do you have any evidence or track record to support your position?
You're not helping your point by not making any substantive argument. The same full time think tank analysis that predicted the Russian invasion by months is also predicting the same here. Your track record is worse unless you can point me to any coverage of the impending Russian invasion you have...
Helping either side will still kill people, and likely kill more people, and likely lengthen the war.
The USA should not involve itself in the affairs of others. Period. It’s just a modern form of colonialism where the UsA views itself as superior and a possessor of all knowledge and goodness and therefore the rest of the globe needs its help. This is not the case.
You should read Leviathan and World Order. When order breaks down, it opens up short term opportunistic destruction instead of correctly resolving the prisoners' dilemnas. See the Azerbaijani assault on Nagorno-Karabakh for what happens when Russia doesn't have the focus to maintain order. The US got a lot of shit for not preventing the Rwandan genocide. But according to you, nonintervention was a good thing.
