The yields are much higher, and the number of warheads is insane, but there are only so many targets. Should the worst come to pass, there will be a lot of overlap, devastated areas hit multiple times. Also, a lot of these will be aimed at mostly empty space where the silos live, in order to stop the enemy from second / third strikes. I think the idea that everyone will launch everything all at once is just not likely.

He planned at losing, but being the colossal loser he is...he accidentally snatched victory from the jaws of defeat. He's such a loser he can't even lose right.

Do you people even listen to yourselves?

What? You're not going to advocate for it??? I thought you were invoking some kind of principle or something.

You're down with Russia killing far more Ukrainians, whom they claim are their own people?

You're down with what China's doing to the Uyghurs, whom they claim are their own people?

And while we're on the topic, how many Iranians should we be willing to kill to save them from their leaders? Nuclear extermination would surely do it... do you advocate that?

But maybe it won't take that much. Regime change in Afghanistan only cost 2000 American lives, 175,000 Afghan lives, and 2,000,000,000,000 dollars, but we sure got rid of those sorry... What? They're back in power?

Only the simplest minds think intervention automagically yields the intended result. In fact the current sorry situation in Iran is a direct result of us trying to "fix" things more to our liking in the middle of last century.

So... Should we attack every country that slaughters its own people?

JAH thinks that the % of people who don't trust the USG is because "The USG refused to take my theories seriously when I edged my way into the deep end of the pool". That says more than enough about how seriously anyone not wearing a tin foil hat should be taking anything he says. Note to JAH: It's not always about you.

No, they want to "correct" it to harbor only mainstream hallucinations.

Google learned to embrace, extend and extinguish right out of Microsoft's playbook. They were excellent students and you can see the results in how email and web "standards" work today.

The difference is that when Microsoft did it the authorities eventually started getting in their way to promote more openness and competition again. So far there is little sign that anyone intends to challenge the way a few tech giants have recently been capturing long-established standards that we rely on for what have become vital services and effectively taking ownership for their own purposes. The governments and their regulators are either asleep at the wheel or, if you're a bit less trusting, bought and paid for.

Do you often use VeraCrypt on a company-managed device? I'm sure if you do then it's with the knowledge and consent of your IT department and they'll be responsible for managing any consequences of the VeraCrypt issue according to their official policy as well.

Regulators back then were understood to be particular type of highly accurate clock that was used as a baseline for time keeping: other clocks were set and updated based on the Regulator. The root word was also contemporaneously used in a medical context; e.g. regular bowel movements, regular heart beat. Later, it was applied to devices which control gas pressure.

Does that mean the government, (or the king, since the root of regular is Rex from Latin) had authority over those clocks, or was particularly concerned with his subjects intestinal health, or the pressure of their gas? Of course not.

In the face of zionism, left and right are meaningless concepts. The adherents of that...philosophy...forever sit in the middle, tipping the scales in whichever direction is most likely to achieve the results they desire. The zionist by their nature just happens to most closely align with the religious fundamentalist Christians who want to bring Christ back, and see prosecuting wars in the Middle East as the way to fulfill the scriptures. Even in the absence of a religious element, they'll just as surely play the left or right with economics, securities, and promises of making personal fortunes by investing in the war complex and using their positions of power to always escalate the situation so the grift can be perpetuated.

Allow me to posit the following: we could very well be minding our own business but still strongly influence the rest of the world. For example, if a company wishes to do business in America -- the world's largest and most lucrative commercial market -- they must comply with US laws. This is no different than any other country. You may not like it, but that's how commercial business works, and it'd be no different if someone like North Korea had the market everyone wanted. You'd just be complaining about a different country.

Don't like it? Don't do business in the US and you're free to do whatever you want. You'll be excluding yourself from probably 70% of the available market, but you're free to make that choice.

Don't forget, your argument can be turned around quite easily: you could mind your own business and stop trying to tell the US how to do business according to your wants/needs. Funny how that works.

You're blissfully unaware of how national sovereignty works.

Good luck getting the US to accommodate an Interpol extradition request for 4chan and its personnel. There's no reason the US would agree to it since 4chan has violated no US law. So long as 4chan operates in the US exclusively and violates no US laws, they are effectively beyond the reach of the UK government. They could presumably nab some 4chan executive if they ever visited the UK, but all one has to do to avoid that is just not visit the UK.

This is how international legal disputes have been handled since the dawn of international legal disputes. Don't trust me, look it up, I'm sure chatgpt can fill you in.

Or chloromidians? Was there any mention of chlorine on it?

In the absence of chlorine, would flouromidians form? Would flouromidian-based life have any unusual properties?

Or whatever it is that tricorders detect?

Or souls? Did it make a detour through our solar system to pick up a few souls for later use?

Never would have believed it was a fake.

Yes. So far, the LLM tools seem to be much more useful for general research purposes, analysing existing code, or producing example/prototype code to illustrate a specific point. I haven't found them very useful for much of my serious work writing production code yet. At best, they are hit and miss with the easy stuff, and by the time you've reviewed everything with sufficient care to have confidence in it, the potential productivity benefits have been reduced considerably. Meanwhile even the current state of the art models are worse than useless for the more research-level stuff we do. We try them out fairly regularly but they make many bad assumptions and then completely fail to generate acceptable quality code when told no, those are not acceptable and they really do need to produce a complete and robust solution of the original problem that is suitable for professional use.