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.