@dima3.bsky.social
Yes, the appeasniks don't understand that in words, they're ready to turn the world into a nuclear wasteland, but in actions, they're extremely rational and highly intelligent. Of course, while being evil and living in a world of delusions. They want greatness, not death.
December 12, 2025 at 8:24 AM
Yes, the appeasniks don't understand that in words, they're ready to turn the world into a nuclear wasteland, but in actions, they're extremely rational and highly intelligent. Of course, while being evil and living in a world of delusions. They want greatness, not death.
Why is Russia not afraid that there will be a nuclear war if its soldiers step into Ukraine, while you are afraid there will be a nuclear war if an American soldier steps into Ukraine? How does this make any sense?
December 11, 2025 at 10:19 PM
Why is Russia not afraid that there will be a nuclear war if its soldiers step into Ukraine, while you are afraid there will be a nuclear war if an American soldier steps into Ukraine? How does this make any sense?
Why is it that you and the West are terrified of nuclear war, and are thus ready to give Russia everything it wants (an appeasement approach aimed towards avoiding escalation, naturally leading to the opposite outcome), while Russia is apparently not scared of nuclear war, and loves to threaten it?
December 11, 2025 at 10:18 PM
Why is it that you and the West are terrified of nuclear war, and are thus ready to give Russia everything it wants (an appeasement approach aimed towards avoiding escalation, naturally leading to the opposite outcome), while Russia is apparently not scared of nuclear war, and loves to threaten it?
Probably moved over from the old PC? Can't imagine any reasons to buy a 1070ti.
December 11, 2025 at 11:54 AM
Probably moved over from the old PC? Can't imagine any reasons to buy a 1070ti.
There's really only one possible outcome of the US deploying forces to Ukraine - Putin declaring "SMO was victorious", and ending the war. There are enough laws to silence those who disagree with "victorious".
December 11, 2025 at 8:15 AM
There's really only one possible outcome of the US deploying forces to Ukraine - Putin declaring "SMO was victorious", and ending the war. There are enough laws to silence those who disagree with "victorious".
What makes you think Putin is suicidal?
Remember all the idiots fearing nuclear war if Ukraine is given any weapons at all? All the "red lines" crossed, including in Kursk? Russia always backs off when faced with power. It's fundamentally a cowardly bully.
Remember all the idiots fearing nuclear war if Ukraine is given any weapons at all? All the "red lines" crossed, including in Kursk? Russia always backs off when faced with power. It's fundamentally a cowardly bully.
December 11, 2025 at 8:12 AM
What makes you think Putin is suicidal?
Remember all the idiots fearing nuclear war if Ukraine is given any weapons at all? All the "red lines" crossed, including in Kursk? Russia always backs off when faced with power. It's fundamentally a cowardly bully.
Remember all the idiots fearing nuclear war if Ukraine is given any weapons at all? All the "red lines" crossed, including in Kursk? Russia always backs off when faced with power. It's fundamentally a cowardly bully.
Which of these two statements makes more sense?
1) The US and other western countries should be terrified of what Russia would do to them
2) Russia should be terrified of what the US and other countries would do to it.
Haven't seen much of #2 lately.
1) The US and other western countries should be terrified of what Russia would do to them
2) Russia should be terrified of what the US and other countries would do to it.
Haven't seen much of #2 lately.
November 30, 2025 at 7:58 PM
Which of these two statements makes more sense?
1) The US and other western countries should be terrified of what Russia would do to them
2) Russia should be terrified of what the US and other countries would do to it.
Haven't seen much of #2 lately.
1) The US and other western countries should be terrified of what Russia would do to them
2) Russia should be terrified of what the US and other countries would do to it.
Haven't seen much of #2 lately.
Imagine Reagan in charge in the US, or some other hawk. How would he respond to deliberate strikes on his military bases?
And, what's most importantly, what would Russia expect his response to be? Would it believe that striking the bases is safe?
And, what's most importantly, what would Russia expect his response to be? Would it believe that striking the bases is safe?
November 30, 2025 at 7:38 PM
Imagine Reagan in charge in the US, or some other hawk. How would he respond to deliberate strikes on his military bases?
And, what's most importantly, what would Russia expect his response to be? Would it believe that striking the bases is safe?
And, what's most importantly, what would Russia expect his response to be? Would it believe that striking the bases is safe?
Of course, this is fantasy, nobody has the balls to do this. But of course every western country is currently looking at the possibility of acquiring it's own nukes, seeing it as a far better deterrent than American guarantees. The only working deterrent.
November 30, 2025 at 6:29 PM
Of course, this is fantasy, nobody has the balls to do this. But of course every western country is currently looking at the possibility of acquiring it's own nukes, seeing it as a far better deterrent than American guarantees. The only working deterrent.
One of the ways to deter Russia is to force it to experience fear after analyzing the risks. Placing foreign nukes on Ukrainian soil does nothing, but giving Ukraine control over nukes could be a source of fear. Russia would know that if Ukraine is cornered, Moscow might disappear.
November 30, 2025 at 6:27 PM
One of the ways to deter Russia is to force it to experience fear after analyzing the risks. Placing foreign nukes on Ukrainian soil does nothing, but giving Ukraine control over nukes could be a source of fear. Russia would know that if Ukraine is cornered, Moscow might disappear.
Even if it knew that the US might respond to that in full force? Why?
November 30, 2025 at 6:24 PM
Even if it knew that the US might respond to that in full force? Why?
Let's suppose the US grows some balls and establishes a few military bases in Ukraine, and also announces the transfer of nukes to one of them. Why would this mean an immediate war with Russia?
November 30, 2025 at 5:48 PM
Let's suppose the US grows some balls and establishes a few military bases in Ukraine, and also announces the transfer of nukes to one of them. Why would this mean an immediate war with Russia?
Also, since AI can easily pass the Turing test, and is hard to quickly tell apart from an actual human - I don't hate the term. Why not. It's good at imitating intelligence artificially.
November 28, 2025 at 6:16 AM
Also, since AI can easily pass the Turing test, and is hard to quickly tell apart from an actual human - I don't hate the term. Why not. It's good at imitating intelligence artificially.
That sounds like a marketing problem rather than a tool problem. If you listen to techbros like Altman, AI is already better at everything than humans. This being bullshit doesn't make it useless.
Whether or not it's a net negative for humanity is another debate.
Whether or not it's a net negative for humanity is another debate.
November 28, 2025 at 5:54 AM
That sounds like a marketing problem rather than a tool problem. If you listen to techbros like Altman, AI is already better at everything than humans. This being bullshit doesn't make it useless.
Whether or not it's a net negative for humanity is another debate.
Whether or not it's a net negative for humanity is another debate.
The people who refuse to touch it and deny it having any uses are as stupid as those who use it for everything.
November 27, 2025 at 1:29 PM
The people who refuse to touch it and deny it having any uses are as stupid as those who use it for everything.
AI is not a magical intelligence that knows everything.
AI is a tool. As any tool, it has its limitations.
I frequently use it for search - it's better than Google at finding references and links (the summary is less useful).
It's amazing at writing small Python scripts, and saves tons of time.
AI is a tool. As any tool, it has its limitations.
I frequently use it for search - it's better than Google at finding references and links (the summary is less useful).
It's amazing at writing small Python scripts, and saves tons of time.
November 27, 2025 at 1:27 PM
AI is not a magical intelligence that knows everything.
AI is a tool. As any tool, it has its limitations.
I frequently use it for search - it's better than Google at finding references and links (the summary is less useful).
It's amazing at writing small Python scripts, and saves tons of time.
AI is a tool. As any tool, it has its limitations.
I frequently use it for search - it's better than Google at finding references and links (the summary is less useful).
It's amazing at writing small Python scripts, and saves tons of time.
"Artificial intelligence" is "[472, 16895, 11478]" in AI terms (tokens). Can you easily count how many times "A" pops up there? What about a seven year old? Also no? Well, why would you expect an AI to be really good at it then?
AI is a tool, you're holding it wrong.
AI is a tool, you're holding it wrong.
November 27, 2025 at 1:25 PM
"Artificial intelligence" is "[472, 16895, 11478]" in AI terms (tokens). Can you easily count how many times "A" pops up there? What about a seven year old? Also no? Well, why would you expect an AI to be really good at it then?
AI is a tool, you're holding it wrong.
AI is a tool, you're holding it wrong.
So just to make sure I understand you correctly.
You're saying that if PL-15 had a range of 200-300km, then it can reliably kill anything 200-300km away.
Is this accurate?
You're saying that if PL-15 had a range of 200-300km, then it can reliably kill anything 200-300km away.
Is this accurate?
October 17, 2025 at 7:57 AM
So just to make sure I understand you correctly.
You're saying that if PL-15 had a range of 200-300km, then it can reliably kill anything 200-300km away.
Is this accurate?
You're saying that if PL-15 had a range of 200-300km, then it can reliably kill anything 200-300km away.
Is this accurate?
Maybe you don't know what NEZ means? Again, just ask.
October 17, 2025 at 7:56 AM
Maybe you don't know what NEZ means? Again, just ask.
What exactly do you not understand that needs clarification?
Everything I mentioned is very basic.
Everything I mentioned is very basic.
October 17, 2025 at 7:55 AM
What exactly do you not understand that needs clarification?
Everything I mentioned is very basic.
Everything I mentioned is very basic.
If the pilot believes that he's outside of the missile's range, and doesn't need to take any action - well, the missile has a much higher chance of striking a hit than if he rapidly turns around as soon as the launch happens.
October 17, 2025 at 7:53 AM
If the pilot believes that he's outside of the missile's range, and doesn't need to take any action - well, the missile has a much higher chance of striking a hit than if he rapidly turns around as soon as the launch happens.
Yes, I've just explained the main points to you in bsky.app/profile/dima.... If something is unclear, just ask.
If you believe that "oper range 200–300 km" means "anything 200-300km away is dead", you might have a slight misunderstanding. There's a lot a pilot can do to evade a missile.
If you believe that "oper range 200–300 km" means "anything 200-300km away is dead", you might have a slight misunderstanding. There's a lot a pilot can do to evade a missile.
Long range air to air missiles are essentially flying elephants, they lose energy and range rapidly on any maneuvers. Their NEZ against an agile target like a Rafale will be pretty short.
The European Meteor, having an air-breathing engine, has an advantage against maneuvering targets.
The European Meteor, having an air-breathing engine, has an advantage against maneuvering targets.
October 17, 2025 at 7:52 AM
Yes, I've just explained the main points to you in bsky.app/profile/dima.... If something is unclear, just ask.
If you believe that "oper range 200–300 km" means "anything 200-300km away is dead", you might have a slight misunderstanding. There's a lot a pilot can do to evade a missile.
If you believe that "oper range 200–300 km" means "anything 200-300km away is dead", you might have a slight misunderstanding. There's a lot a pilot can do to evade a missile.
Long range air to air missiles are essentially flying elephants, they lose energy and range rapidly on any maneuvers. Their NEZ against an agile target like a Rafale will be pretty short.
The European Meteor, having an air-breathing engine, has an advantage against maneuvering targets.
The European Meteor, having an air-breathing engine, has an advantage against maneuvering targets.
October 17, 2025 at 7:48 AM
Long range air to air missiles are essentially flying elephants, they lose energy and range rapidly on any maneuvers. Their NEZ against an agile target like a Rafale will be pretty short.
The European Meteor, having an air-breathing engine, has an advantage against maneuvering targets.
The European Meteor, having an air-breathing engine, has an advantage against maneuvering targets.
The Indians went "haha, those stupid Pakistanis launched something at us, no way they can reach us, so no need for evasive maneuvers and countermeasures" to "OH SHI" pretty fast.
October 17, 2025 at 7:42 AM
The Indians went "haha, those stupid Pakistanis launched something at us, no way they can reach us, so no need for evasive maneuvers and countermeasures" to "OH SHI" pretty fast.
That's literally what I said above.
"Central to its downing was an Indian intelligence failure concerning the range of the China-made PL-15 missile fired by the J-10 fighter."
Repeat after me: any jet can be shot down by any other jet if its tactics are stupid enough. It could have been a WWII jet.
"Central to its downing was an Indian intelligence failure concerning the range of the China-made PL-15 missile fired by the J-10 fighter."
Repeat after me: any jet can be shot down by any other jet if its tactics are stupid enough. It could have been a WWII jet.
October 17, 2025 at 7:40 AM
That's literally what I said above.
"Central to its downing was an Indian intelligence failure concerning the range of the China-made PL-15 missile fired by the J-10 fighter."
Repeat after me: any jet can be shot down by any other jet if its tactics are stupid enough. It could have been a WWII jet.
"Central to its downing was an Indian intelligence failure concerning the range of the China-made PL-15 missile fired by the J-10 fighter."
Repeat after me: any jet can be shot down by any other jet if its tactics are stupid enough. It could have been a WWII jet.