Unfortunately social media website make it difficult to delete accounts. I wouldn't have minded if the options were to verify through bio-metrics or delete account.
I tried this, and got a reply with a link, that redirected me to the age verification again. I replied to this asking them to manually delete my account, and they manually verified that I was an adult without asking for bio-metric verification. I just my calm, but critical emails convinced them, along with my paid subscription history that I was an adult :).
Oh so you can log in and use the site as normal again now?
I emailed privacy@substackinc.com back and forth a couple of times and today they deleted my account and refunded my last payment. They were very polite and helpful.
The ability to load recompiled code on running processes makes it possible to change live services on the fly. I worked for a low budget mobile operator in SE-Asia where there were no test platforms, and every change was on the live servers. Erlang made changes fast, as small changes were trivial, while large changes were broken down into small changes, implemented individually, and tested. Rolling back was fast, as I kept the original code before modifying. No convoluted build structures, and praying the rollout to production doesn't throw unexpected errors.
Programming languages stress reusable code, where you get reusable processes (eg interface to the SMSC)in Erlang, which you would need messaging servers in other languages.
China knows NATO will turn on them if Russia is defeated. Also, the narrative that Russia launched an unprovoked attack on Ukraine isn't strong outside the West. It's more complex, starting with Bush announcing Ukraine eligible for NATO membership, the Maidan coup, and 8 years of civil war against the 4 Eastern Oblasts that voted to secede from Ukraine.
Mmm,
I don't see how the historical context for the conflict is relevant
> 4 Eastern Oblasts that voted to secede from Ukraine
I mean.. "lol"
Most importantly for the current topic,
there is no international mechanism for regions to legally secede.
This is basically "not okay".
China can't possibly approve of that.
The whole Chinese claim to Taiwan rests on that not being okay.
Your first point makes more sense.
Maybe the goal is tieing up Europe with an idiotic conflict?
But they undermine themselves and don't really win much of anything
Freezing Russian assets was the beginning. Sanctions against Russia backfired, cutting them off from SWIFT encouraged alternatives as did Lloyd's of London refusing to insure Russian ships. All it did was make the non-NATO world develop alternatives.
GDP PPP is being used to compare countries productivity more often now. Australia has high GDP but low productivity as most is sunk into expensive, unproductive real estate. Every country has their rust belts and undeveloped rural areas.
The people on the ground know how the war is going - there are no more Ukrainians volunteering to fight. Winning attracts, and Russia doesn't need conscription. Amazingly, Ukraine is now recruiting 60+ year old men to fight.
https://kyivindependent.com/zelensky-signs-law-allowing-over...
Like most, you're confusing conscription with mobilization, something the Western media conveniently repeatedly plays into.
Russia, and many other countries - like everywhere in Scandinavia, has compulsory military enlistment or conscription. But these people generally are not eligible to be sent abroad to participate in conflicts. Instead it's used for training. After that training they are then required to sign up for the equivalent of the US Selective Service where, after after some years (2 in Russia), they may be called up, or mobilized, for participation in any conflict. Russia carried out one very small scale mobilization very early on in the war. It led to hundreds of thousands of Russians leaving the country and was generally exceptionally unpopular. Since then their entire army has been 100% volunteer forces.
By contrast Ukraine immediately, after the war began, made it illegal for men of "fighting age" (18-60) to leave the country and declared a general mobilization such that any man of "fighting age" can be immediately mobilized and sent to the front. This had led to them at times literally dragging people off the streets, beating them into submission when necessary (with more than a few 'deaths in training'), giving then some performative training, and then sending them to the front. And the like the GP mentioned, they recently passed a law to allow even 60+ year olds to enlist, limiting potential medical exemptions, and more. In other words - they are simply running out of people.
So Russia has been essentially fighting a war of attrition against an endless hoard of people armed with hundreds of billions of dollars in the Western gear, directed by Western instructors, using Western intelligence, and winning. It's going to be difficult for any developed nation, including the US, to ever fight a real war like this - because people aren't going to tolerate general mobilization, let alone people coming back in body bags by the hundreds of thousands, for the sake of geopolitics half way around the world. Even Russia has managed to do so only by offering extremely high wages for their soldiers, but it's unclear what this will entail once the war winds down. Hopefully they have not found themselves in the US trap where they suddenly essentially have to always be at war to keep their economy chugging along.
>The Chechens most at risk of being coercively recruited are critcs of the authorites, family
members of vocal critcs, drug and alcohol users as well as members of the LGBT community.
The Chechen authorites have used coercive recruitment to get rid of what they call the
undesirables. In general, any deviaton from the norms and rules of Kadyrov’s leadership could
be used to coercively recruit Chechens. In this regard, the Chechen authorites use forced
recruitment as a form of punishment in Chechnya. Although certain groups can be identfied as
being more at risk than others, there is also a high degree of unpredictability and arbitrariness
in the actons of Chechen authorites in regards to coercive recruitment.
Chechnya has its own laws on just about everything. It's ruled by Islamic Law such that homosexuality, alcohol consumption, and even pork consumption are illegal there. They also have their own laws and culture with regards to war and were even completely excluded from the partial mobilization and allowed to do their own thing, as usual. It's a negligible part of Russia (about 1% by population) and not representative of Russian law or norms.
It also took 18 months to insert the people, set up the shell company, smuggle materials, manufacture, etc. It also had the advantage of surprise - the first such attack at such a distance from the front line. Is it unlikely such an attack will be replicated, just as a box-cutter hijack of 747s attack against buildings will not succeed again.
Soldiers adapt - deploying in groups of 3-4, moving along tree lines, and hiding in buildings/trenches. One of Patrick Lancaster's (an American journalist covering the war from the Donbas) videos has him hiding with a group of soldiers while a drone is overhead - the twigs and branches of the bushes and trees makes it impossible for a drone traveling at a moderate speed to see them, and would entangle the drone if it did attack.
Drones are being operated in layers based on range and capability. This applies to both long range / heavy payload drones and small / fast fpvs.
Long range, heavy payload, ISR drones with excellent optics and thermals are helping to spot targets from very far away that small groups of fpv operators can search and target.
Smaller drones must be somewhat closer, so this can't happen too far away from where are currently.
Depending on the terrain and what the enemy is using to adapt (like fiber optic tether for drones like a TOE missile, or like AI targeting and terminal guidance to counter controls + GPS jamming), fpv drones can be a liability (tree cover, rubble) or have a big impact.
What a lot of units are doing for tree cover is what is called a VT fuse for mortars or artillery. These can be configured to burst at tree height. Artillery/indirect often have coverage over top of drone units to cover their advance with smoke if need be, and much further range than FPV drone operations do without some sort of comms relay (could be another airborne drone relaying).
Yeah. Don't group up though. The first round of indirect fire is normally the most deadly.
It seems like you are making the point that there are large ranges of drones, and other weapons are required when drones are not effective, which I agree with. Drones aren't as cost effective as your earlier example of 12 soldiers being killed by a few drones. I can't find the interview, but a Ukranian drone operator said on average 15-20 FPVs were needed to wound/kill a soldier (80% are jammed). Just as it takes 1000 bullets to kill a soldier, it takes lots of drones (on average) to kill a soldier, making the cost-effectiveness worse.
I'm saying they're not acting alone, and alluding to battlefield conditions changing and combatants adapting as they have done since warfare started.
They are using Combined Arms doctrine to support their drones now. Instead of drones supporting everything else, everything else is in support of drones and drone dominance.
The supply chain and cost is a big part of it.
As both sides continue to develop new and better AI targeting systems, RF jamming will cease to be effective and they'll have to move to laser jamming of the optical systems. As that is no longer effective, swarm tactics counter the laser tactics. Currently counter-swarm attack methods for drone-swarms are being investigated, because nobody knows of a cost effective way to stop this. Even the drone supply chain is very easy to do much of very near the front lines. Carbon fiber and some heavy duty airframes are harder. It's SO CHEAP compared to any comparable weapon.
This is nonsense. Drones get all the attention because of the novelty and that they obviously have become very important, but you're being beyond hyperbolic. Artillery is still the king of war and responsible for something like 80% of all battlefield casualties. This has become even more true now with drones having eyes in the sky everywhere enabling artillery to become even more devastating.
