netstack
Texas is freedom land
No bio...
User ID: 647
Lots of countries have hit below their weight for centuries.
A cursory glance suggests that Iran did pretty well for itself…until it had to compete with Tsarist Russia.
South Africa was a strange, strange case. The collapse of apartheid meant that the former government was suddenly very motivated to remove its nuclear capabilities. Not sure those circumstances are present in Iran. Good video about it here.
That said, I agree that nuclear (or WMD) inspection is at least theoretically possible. The industrial capacity isn’t as dual-purpose as something like a chemical plant, right?
Almost as good as The Count of Monte Carlo.
Whoops.
I was going to say something along the lines of: “soft power” arguments traditionally don’t score many points with neocons or knee-jerk nationalists. Trying to rehabilitate Syria as a success of the RBIO feels like it’s missing the point.
Thanks, Obama?
In all seriousness, equating economic sanctions with hard power is more
Where'd you see anything about cutting off service?
As far as I can tell, Anthropic refused to do extra work beyond the scope of its contracts to implement those two things. The government is the one that decided to alter the deal.
I don't think that's a very good analogy.
This is more like the guys who built a nuclear powerplant. Then the government comes and says "can you remove some of those failsafes? we want to reserve the option to cause a catastrophic meltdown." Are the nuclear engineers obligated to do extra work to take off existing guardrails?
Actually, I think there are better analogies. Let's say a company makes cell phones, some of which are sold to the government. Then a party official comes in to demand that all government cell phones contain some plastic explosive. For legal purposes only, of course.
I think the company would be entirely within its rights to decline. Then the government could, also reasonably, terminate its contracts and go find someone who will agree. The market in action.What it shouldn't do, in my opinion, is destroy the entire company for not bending over backwards. That's cutting off your nose to spite your face. It's command-economy bullshit.
Actually, that kind of is what happened to Oppenheimer. He stepped on enough toes at the Commission to get investigated for disloyalty. His security clearance was stripped, and the U.S. lost a skilled and loyal scientist. Great deal, huh?
I should have been more clear. I was a little drunk and drafting a letter to my representative at the time. Great combination.
I think that this is the stupidest sort of gunboat diplomacy. It's a terrible deal for Anthropic, of course, but it's also shit for the government, for other AI companies, and for the broader U.S. technical advantage. Blowing up one of your best companies because they complied, but not enough, is dumb. Blowing up the only one who was already integrated into your operations is even stupider. China is laughing all the way to the bank.
It's not a good week to be working at Anthropic, huh?
It’s iconic, but I can no longer hear the line as anything other tha
Uncle Sam, put your hand
Down the backofmy pants…
No; what gave you that impression?
I figured it was something like this explanation. But I’ve been blissfully ignorant of this particular Main Character of Twitter.
it would be very symbolic
How do you mean? I find it hard to see the parallels between invading Ukraine and bombing Iran, other than both being terrible ideas. Russia’s invasion is of no particular historical significance to either US or Iran.
It is fascinating to see how something that was absolute NO in traditional rules of war "Generals do not take pot shots at each other" became normalized in the rules based order.
I doubt that Yamamoto or Nelson saw it that way. Decapitation strikes were historically limited more by capability than by “traditional rules.”
The rest of your links feel more like shotgun-spread booing. Wow, those outgroup members sure are icky today!
I’d say a combination of 1, 3 and 4. Social media does make otherwise-invisible relationships a matter of public record. Conversely, the plural of “tweet” is not “data”, and the existence of a story is itself invisible until it hits some critical mass.
Then again, I hate and resent this topic for a different reason, so maybe I’m just extrapolating.
Guards is great. Men at Arms is even stronger, IMO. Unlike some of the other sub-series, they transition pretty smoothly into more complex novels as the cast matures, so basically all of them are worth reading.
I’m personally fond of the Moist von Lipwig novels, where a con man is placed in charge of the postal service and then the central bank. But it’s been a long time.
Well, I finished A Canticle for Liebowitz. I was not expecting the mutant murder wasteland sections to be the least bleak parts.
I am very glad that we don’t live under the same pall of nuclear holocaust.
Shit, I’d say I’m unusually interested in linguistics, and I don’t think I understand formal grammar.
willing to notice what she actually wants
Our culture is so fixated on individualism that the contrarian pseudoreactionaries are reinventing women’s lib. Respect.
If that was trivial, we'd already be living in the singularity and/or matrix.
Oh, yeah. My first run I skipped the tutorial and didn’t realize that SLs were either vehicle or infantry, no overlap. I picked 4 inf. Got butchered in the first mission, and thought “this is tough but it’ll be worth it when I find an APC or two.” Oof.
Applying modern tabletop wargaming to an xcomlike is such a good concept that it outruns its supply lines. There’s just not enough content to explore the whole idea. I want air support and field engineers and Foxhole levels of bespoke armor variants. I want faction cooperation that goes beyond the stuff you bolt on your ship. I want the Menace not to show their whole hand in their first mission, and I want their campaign presence to add the kind of decision-making you get from leaving countries to burn in XCOM. It’s not there yet, and that’s a shame, but I still had a lot of fun with my one campaign.
I watched it and now I can't explain either.
Whoops. I was trying to gesture at the conditional probability P(M|E). If P(M&E) was constant/dropped, but P(M|E) went up, then yeah, P(E) must have dropped.
I don’t know why it dropped. Maybe the walkability scores really worked, and following them is enough to dodge almost all crime. Seems unlikely. Maybe law enforcement drove most criminals into hives of scum and villainy, and now word of mouth is enough to keep tourists from visiting Skid Row. Maybe COVID killed all the criminals first. Any number of stupid reasons.
But people aren’t acting like P(E) has improved, are they?
I am tempted to argue that this is a media phenomenon. That if people weren’t getting pictures of immigrants piped to their phones 24/7, they wouldn’t feel like P(E) was so high. I’m aware that this flatters my own biases, so I’ll try to discount it, but surely something like this is possible.
If the murder rate stays constant, but “rate per potential exposure” gets worse, someone is getting exposed at a higher rate. the people who are getting exposed must be making up the difference. Who? Shouldn’t it be strictly easier to tell which neighborhoods have turned into death traps?
- Prev
- Next

The word “trove” always makes me think of pirates. Did they find these using ground-penetrating radar, too?
Joking aside, I seem to recall you consistently going to bat for Russia. I have a hard time imagining you criticizing them for their tactics. Perhaps there’s some other group where you’d apply this standard? Do you subscribe to the case for reparations?
More options
Context Copy link