(ノ°Д°）ノ︵ sןןnoɔ 🇺🇦
@coulls.bsky.social
Jason Coulls. Toronto. British. Serial CTO, dad of twins, ex-C4ISR, ex-iHeartRadio iOS. Locksport. Bread baking. Tweets my own, not employers. Kylie/Debhead. Been here since practically day one, but I’m too boring for most. Has a habit of geek diving.
TL;DR = Pick a side, stick to it.
Dont do what I did:
* I’m highlighting a technical problem.
* I’m helping customers
* I’m highlighting a process issue.
Each of these means something else is compromised, meaning ultimately your point is also compromised.
Dont do what I did:
* I’m highlighting a technical problem.
* I’m helping customers
* I’m highlighting a process issue.
Each of these means something else is compromised, meaning ultimately your point is also compromised.
January 13, 2026 at 12:52 AM
TL;DR = Pick a side, stick to it.
Dont do what I did:
* I’m highlighting a technical problem.
* I’m helping customers
* I’m highlighting a process issue.
Each of these means something else is compromised, meaning ultimately your point is also compromised.
Dont do what I did:
* I’m highlighting a technical problem.
* I’m helping customers
* I’m highlighting a process issue.
Each of these means something else is compromised, meaning ultimately your point is also compromised.
All joking aside, there’s an important lesson here (been through this on a national level), even if the “benefit” or “ball and chain” is not immediately apparent.
Positive or negative adds up if you’re consistent. If you flip-flop on something, that final cumulative effect is diminished.
Positive or negative adds up if you’re consistent. If you flip-flop on something, that final cumulative effect is diminished.
January 13, 2026 at 12:49 AM
All joking aside, there’s an important lesson here (been through this on a national level), even if the “benefit” or “ball and chain” is not immediately apparent.
Positive or negative adds up if you’re consistent. If you flip-flop on something, that final cumulative effect is diminished.
Positive or negative adds up if you’re consistent. If you flip-flop on something, that final cumulative effect is diminished.
Just to put a candle on this cake:
Canada is at a non-zero risk of US aggression.
Greenland is a hell of a lot closer than The UK or Germany if thats where your “help” is coming from.
So it feels to me like the US is being played through Greenland.
Canada is at a non-zero risk of US aggression.
Greenland is a hell of a lot closer than The UK or Germany if thats where your “help” is coming from.
So it feels to me like the US is being played through Greenland.
January 13, 2026 at 12:36 AM
Just to put a candle on this cake:
Canada is at a non-zero risk of US aggression.
Greenland is a hell of a lot closer than The UK or Germany if thats where your “help” is coming from.
So it feels to me like the US is being played through Greenland.
Canada is at a non-zero risk of US aggression.
Greenland is a hell of a lot closer than The UK or Germany if thats where your “help” is coming from.
So it feels to me like the US is being played through Greenland.
So, now you have a bunch of NATO troops in the Greenland area.
It’s now effectively the “Western Flank”
Now switch to the US viewpoint.
Their “Eastern Flank” is the same place.
It’s now effectively the “Western Flank”
Now switch to the US viewpoint.
Their “Eastern Flank” is the same place.
January 13, 2026 at 12:33 AM
So, now you have a bunch of NATO troops in the Greenland area.
It’s now effectively the “Western Flank”
Now switch to the US viewpoint.
Their “Eastern Flank” is the same place.
It’s now effectively the “Western Flank”
Now switch to the US viewpoint.
Their “Eastern Flank” is the same place.
So, multiple European (and non European, like the UK) countries are de-escalating the US stance with “Fine - you are worried? We will all send some troops”.
You can probably see where I’m going.
You can probably see where I’m going.
January 13, 2026 at 12:31 AM
So, multiple European (and non European, like the UK) countries are de-escalating the US stance with “Fine - you are worried? We will all send some troops”.
You can probably see where I’m going.
You can probably see where I’m going.
Trump says “If we don’t take Greenland, someone else will”.
Removing the parallels of that rhetoric with Israelis and the West Bank, and concentrating on Greenland, remember that the US has bases there, and shut many more as it didn’t require defending.
Removing the parallels of that rhetoric with Israelis and the West Bank, and concentrating on Greenland, remember that the US has bases there, and shut many more as it didn’t require defending.
January 13, 2026 at 12:28 AM
Trump says “If we don’t take Greenland, someone else will”.
Removing the parallels of that rhetoric with Israelis and the West Bank, and concentrating on Greenland, remember that the US has bases there, and shut many more as it didn’t require defending.
Removing the parallels of that rhetoric with Israelis and the West Bank, and concentrating on Greenland, remember that the US has bases there, and shut many more as it didn’t require defending.
So, we have an “Eastern Flank” that acts as a tripwire. The USA is very familiar with this same strategy - which is why I wonder what’s going on here.
January 13, 2026 at 12:25 AM
So, we have an “Eastern Flank” that acts as a tripwire. The USA is very familiar with this same strategy - which is why I wonder what’s going on here.
Another example is Argentina in 1982 trying to take the Falklands.
Or Iraq trying to take Kuwait in 1990.
Like, if you miscalculate, you’re toast.
Or Iraq trying to take Kuwait in 1990.
Like, if you miscalculate, you’re toast.
January 13, 2026 at 12:23 AM
Another example is Argentina in 1982 trying to take the Falklands.
Or Iraq trying to take Kuwait in 1990.
Like, if you miscalculate, you’re toast.
Or Iraq trying to take Kuwait in 1990.
Like, if you miscalculate, you’re toast.
Now, tripwires can be a bluff.
But that bluff can backfire if miscalculated, thinking that people will go “no, we want peace not war!”.
Like when Japan bombed Pearl Harbour in 1941.
But that bluff can backfire if miscalculated, thinking that people will go “no, we want peace not war!”.
Like when Japan bombed Pearl Harbour in 1941.
January 13, 2026 at 12:21 AM
Now, tripwires can be a bluff.
But that bluff can backfire if miscalculated, thinking that people will go “no, we want peace not war!”.
Like when Japan bombed Pearl Harbour in 1941.
But that bluff can backfire if miscalculated, thinking that people will go “no, we want peace not war!”.
Like when Japan bombed Pearl Harbour in 1941.
In warfare, this can be construed as a “tripwire force”.
The basic logic is you have a small deterrent where the implications are “you mess with this, we’ll back it up and whoop you into next week”.
The basic logic is you have a small deterrent where the implications are “you mess with this, we’ll back it up and whoop you into next week”.
January 13, 2026 at 12:18 AM
In warfare, this can be construed as a “tripwire force”.
The basic logic is you have a small deterrent where the implications are “you mess with this, we’ll back it up and whoop you into next week”.
The basic logic is you have a small deterrent where the implications are “you mess with this, we’ll back it up and whoop you into next week”.
Some Americans don’t get NATO. I won’t spend time to appeal to them.
For everyone else;
We have a thing called the Eastern Flank. It’s a bunch of troops along the Eastern border like Poland (I’m oversimplifying) to basically create a line that Russia has to cross.
For everyone else;
We have a thing called the Eastern Flank. It’s a bunch of troops along the Eastern border like Poland (I’m oversimplifying) to basically create a line that Russia has to cross.
January 13, 2026 at 12:17 AM
Some Americans don’t get NATO. I won’t spend time to appeal to them.
For everyone else;
We have a thing called the Eastern Flank. It’s a bunch of troops along the Eastern border like Poland (I’m oversimplifying) to basically create a line that Russia has to cross.
For everyone else;
We have a thing called the Eastern Flank. It’s a bunch of troops along the Eastern border like Poland (I’m oversimplifying) to basically create a line that Russia has to cross.
The Greenland situation is an interesting one.
I was born East of it. I’ve spent about half my life West of it.
Time for talk about “Flanks”.
I was born East of it. I’ve spent about half my life West of it.
Time for talk about “Flanks”.
January 13, 2026 at 12:13 AM
The Greenland situation is an interesting one.
I was born East of it. I’ve spent about half my life West of it.
Time for talk about “Flanks”.
I was born East of it. I’ve spent about half my life West of it.
Time for talk about “Flanks”.
As someone that didn’t grow up in the USA, I’m naturally biased in a completely different way to how someone born in the USA is biased.
That’s literally how biases work.
That’s literally how biases work.
January 13, 2026 at 12:10 AM
As someone that didn’t grow up in the USA, I’m naturally biased in a completely different way to how someone born in the USA is biased.
That’s literally how biases work.
That’s literally how biases work.
I’m late to the party:
But I share your inquisitive nature into the batshit derailing of actually fixing the issue.
But I share your inquisitive nature into the batshit derailing of actually fixing the issue.
January 9, 2026 at 1:38 AM
I’m late to the party:
But I share your inquisitive nature into the batshit derailing of actually fixing the issue.
But I share your inquisitive nature into the batshit derailing of actually fixing the issue.
End result is you know it’s a bot as that is not a human response.
January 9, 2026 at 1:25 AM
End result is you know it’s a bot as that is not a human response.
It’s like history repeating.
January 9, 2026 at 1:15 AM
It’s like history repeating.
I’m used to weird AI.
But this was a new level of weirdness.
You cannot trust an AI where the math is the COS() of two meased up answers.
But this was a new level of weirdness.
You cannot trust an AI where the math is the COS() of two meased up answers.
January 9, 2026 at 12:55 AM
I’m used to weird AI.
But this was a new level of weirdness.
You cannot trust an AI where the math is the COS() of two meased up answers.
But this was a new level of weirdness.
You cannot trust an AI where the math is the COS() of two meased up answers.
It’s was a nice thought.
I threw it at AI.
OMFG. It agreed with everything.
If I 180’d, it was like “that” is the question.
Or “You just asked what everyone glosses over”.
I threw it at AI.
OMFG. It agreed with everything.
If I 180’d, it was like “that” is the question.
Or “You just asked what everyone glosses over”.
January 9, 2026 at 12:52 AM
It’s was a nice thought.
I threw it at AI.
OMFG. It agreed with everything.
If I 180’d, it was like “that” is the question.
Or “You just asked what everyone glosses over”.
I threw it at AI.
OMFG. It agreed with everything.
If I 180’d, it was like “that” is the question.
Or “You just asked what everyone glosses over”.
But last week, for reasons I’m sure I’ll regret, I pondered that if mass is an excitation in the Higgs field, and we know energy is conserved, then where is the deficit?
“Obviously, the deficit is the cause of stuff equalizing - and we see that on the Higgs field and call it “Gravity”.
“Obviously, the deficit is the cause of stuff equalizing - and we see that on the Higgs field and call it “Gravity”.
January 9, 2026 at 12:50 AM
But last week, for reasons I’m sure I’ll regret, I pondered that if mass is an excitation in the Higgs field, and we know energy is conserved, then where is the deficit?
“Obviously, the deficit is the cause of stuff equalizing - and we see that on the Higgs field and call it “Gravity”.
“Obviously, the deficit is the cause of stuff equalizing - and we see that on the Higgs field and call it “Gravity”.