circuscritic

@circuscritic@lemmy.ca

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

circuscritic,

Yes, that is the most likely outcome based on all available historical data.

But, I will say the DA and local court system don’t seem to be playing along with making it easy.

So, while money is a statistically significant predictor in these situations, it’s not providence.

circuscritic, (edited )

I agree, but I will say that the armorer was exceptionally negligent. Like, seriously went above and beyond to be unsafe in her role and her handling of the weapons.

But even though she does bear some responsibility, ultimately it was Baldwin’s fault. Not because he pulled the trigger, but because he was in charge of the conditions on set, was aware of all the safety concerns raised the crew, and he was responsible for keeping the completely unqualified armorer on the crew.

circuscritic, (edited )

No kidding. When I read that, my first thought was, “He’s clearly at least above the median intelligence of his fellow Arizona GOP reps, if not in the top 10% of their entire conference”

Anyone who read the article AND has experience with the Arizona GOP, probably thought the same thing.

The Arizona GOP collects some of the dumbest people alive.

circuscritic, (edited )

There’s a lot more to sovereign monetary policy than currency exchange rates, such as the capital controls being exercised here

circuscritic,

The major problems isn’t Windows 11 usability, although those issues due exist. UI and workflow issues can typically get addressed, or mitigated, by 3rd party tools.

The real concerns are the exponential increases in spyware, such as the AI recovery tool that records all user interactions, or the native advertising inside of the system itself e.g. Start Menu ads.

If native AI data collection and advertising is baked into all nooks and crannies of the system, the ability of users to mitigate those threats becomes extraordinarily difficult, if not impossible to completely resolve.

circuscritic, (edited )

Even if you trust that one feature will actually be disabled, that was just one example.

Do you really believe you can disable and remove all of the numerous data collection and spyware components that are baked into all aspects of the OS?

I’m not saying no one should use Windows 11, but they should be honest with themselves about the trade-off they’re accepting.

circuscritic,

An appropriate SDR, or a prefab kit you can buy online.

Relay attacks on keyless systems are nothing new, plenty of documentation and articles you can use to read up on the specifics.

circuscritic,

Now hear me out, do you think that might have something to do with their market share relative to ALL other cars on the road?

When a KIA gets stolen, the owner will likely get it back, although probably a lot more worse for wear.

Thieves using relay attacks are most likely part of, or connected to, professional auto theft groups e.g. chop shops, overseas car markets, etc.

‘FUCK the LAPD' Shirt Maker's Entire Shop Sold Out After Cops Threaten Him (www.404media.co)

The creator of a “FUCK the LAPD” shirt sold out not only his entire stock of that shirt but also sold out many of his other designs after the Los Angeles Police Department Foundation made an intellectual property threat against them that claimed they owned the letters ‘LAPD.’

circuscritic, (edited )

Great read, thanks for sharing.

FYI there’s a link in that article that goes to the initial, and much more brief, walkthrough of the original letter, and it’s comically short response.

circuscritic, (edited )

This isn’t a murder trial. This can have significantly adverse affects on the punitive damages.

Just look at the Alex Jones trial for a recent example.

circuscritic, (edited )

That’s irrelevant to my point, which was that destroying evidence in a trial with monetary damages can result in increased damages, instead of avoiding them.

If you’re still not getting it, you should reread the comment thread and to see the context for that example being used.

‘What’s the Problem?’ Zelensky Challenges West Over Hesitations. (www.nytimes.com)

With his army struggling to fend off fierce Russian advances all across the front, President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine urged the United States and Europe to do more to defend his nation, dismissing fears of nuclear escalation and proposing that NATO planes shoot down Russian missiles in Ukrainian airspace....

circuscritic, (edited )

They have thousands*. Although due to the high cost and difficulty of maintaining them over decades, it’s quite possible that only hundreds will actually detonate once they reach their targets.

Which is still enough to cause a nuclear winter.

*Thousands of warheads, but many of those will be MIRV, so a single ICBM can impact multiple locations.

circuscritic, (edited )

You know what doesn’t convince people to rethink how they view America, or empire?

Arbitrarily inserting comments like that into topics where they’re disconnected and off topic.

Wait a minute…are you a DoD contractor whose mission it is to make any critic of America look whiney and detached from reality?

circuscritic,

It’s wrong precisely because Taiwan is a client state…

circuscritic, (edited )

Dear god, no…just no.

I wish the West would arm Ukraine with squadrons of 4.5 gen airframes, fully stocked and layered air defense systems, hundreds of Abrams/Leopard II’s, and setup massive training facilities in bordering NATO counties.

However, putting NATO troops in theatre is such an absurd escalatory risk that I refuse to believe it’s not intentionally designed to prompt a full scale military intervention.

Training troops isn’t a huge escalation, nor is Estonian trainers getting blown up (bad as that would be). But if this policy moves forward, it’s only a matter of time before a dozen, or more, American or British trainers get blown up, and that could very easily ignite that powder keg into something that can’t be contained, because the hawks won’t want it to be.

That kind of defeats the purpose of “help the Ukrainians defeat Russia in Ukraine, to prevent a wider war”.

circuscritic, (edited )

You’re misunderstanding where my concerns are placed, and why.

Imagine a Russian cruise missile volley hits the mess hall, or barracks, and kills 30-50 Americans.

How do you think an American administration would respond?

How will the Russians respond to the Americans response?

What rung of escalation ladder do we end up at?

What happens when another strike kills 15 UK troops the following week?

How will the UK respond?

How will the Russians respond to that?

How much further until the last rung?

Yes, we both agree that Ukraine needs support, and much more then they’re getting.

But I don’t think you’re fully appreciating the risks associated with deploying active duty NATO troops to Ukraine.

circuscritic, (edited )

It’s NOT just about what Russia wants…

This is the type of plan that hawks in the west would draw up because THEY want the casus belli to justify deploying combat troops.

That’s my point. Those risks are intentionally high, because that’s what they want.

And no, that’s not okay. Russia has no chance to win a conventional conflict against the West, period.

What do you think they’ll do to avoid that crushing defeat by NATO forces right on their border, and within their occupied territory?

circuscritic, (edited )

…are you seriously claiming that a direct conflict with NATO forces on their borders, or within their occupied territories, wouldn’t change Russia’s strategic calculus in regards to the use of nuclear weapons?

Please, tell me what base of geopolitical knowledge, or Russian military doctrine, are you basing this on?

Because every white paper and analysis of Russian First Strike Doctrine that I’ve read, would seem to fly in the face of your claims. So… please put my mind at rest and show me the sources that I’m missing here.

circuscritic, (edited )

Holy shit …

No, I’m saying flood Ukraine with Western arms because it’s worth it.

But putting in active duty NATO troops is a sure fire ticket to an uncontrollable escalation.

I have to admit though, seeing all you keyboard strategists act like force on force conflict between NATO and Russia is no big deal, makes me believe either you’re all genuine idiots, or are actually pushing a coordinated message yourselves. Most likely it’s the former, but that’s just a guess.

circuscritic,

Ah, so I guess that’s a “no” on you providing a single source to backup your claims, or disprove mine.

Nice touch claiming that I’m “concern trolling”, but it’s pretty obvious who the troll is here.

circuscritic, (edited )

Start here:

fpri.org/…/russias-nuclear-policy-after-ukraine/

ft.com/…/f18e6e1f-5c3d-4554-aee5-50a730b306b7

www.csis.org/analysis/russias-nuclear-doctrine

Pay close attention to parts that discuss strategy and doctrine regarding the use of tactical nuclear weapons.

Also, lol at your lame personal attacks. Either get educated on the topics you speak on, or just shut up.

It seems to me that all your claims are based on a mixture of your feels and "trust me bro".

circuscritic, (edited )

Next time, open the actual document.

"There is also talk that Russia is working to develop low-yield nuclear weapons and/or modernizing its nonstrategic nuclear weapons, perhaps with the intent of creating a class of nuclear weapons less likely to draw a nuclear counterattack and are therefore more “usable.”

That paper is from 2016, and those tactical nuclear weapons are now in service.

Also, as I’ve already written, I don’t view flooding Ukraine with Western arms as a significant risk to the escalation ladder. That is not the case for force on force conflict with NATO, especially on Russia’s doorstep. Which again, is laid out in their doctrine.

To clear, I just said to start with those links. You should definitely branch out and spend a lot more time reading up, because clearly you haven’t yet.

Please, finish reading all those documents, and then read some more, and then show me all the white papers, academic articles, or think tank papers that support your position, or disprove mine.

circuscritic, (edited )

No, he’s saying that national Democracts leverage the black community for votes, and in exchange, repeatedly screw them over - when they manage to remember they exist outside of election cycles.

At least, that’s how I read his comment. It is only partially intelligible.

circuscritic,

It’s possible they think that, but it’s not something that is made clear through their comments here, at least not to me. But that’s mostly because they’re very poorly written, like I said, only partially intelligible.

circuscritic, (edited )

…it absolutely is illegal to provide OTC substances to children in your daycare without a signed release from each parent.

As it’s so clearly illegal, I was genuinely curious if your comment crusade was because you had a moral objection to it being illegal…hence my asking for clarification.

Additionally, this was an unlicensed daycare, and there might be additional restrictions in place regulating the dispensing of any substance to children, but you can look up the relevant NH regulations if you’re curious.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • JUstTest
  • kavyap
  • DreamBathrooms
  • cisconetworking
  • khanakhh
  • mdbf
  • magazineikmin
  • modclub
  • InstantRegret
  • rosin
  • Youngstown
  • slotface
  • Durango
  • tacticalgear
  • megavids
  • ngwrru68w68
  • everett
  • tester
  • cubers
  • normalnudes
  • thenastyranch
  • osvaldo12
  • GTA5RPClips
  • ethstaker
  • Leos
  • provamag3
  • anitta
  • lostlight
  • All magazines