Basman

Jammers aren't a fool proof solution to drones. They can't hit every frequency and with advanced AI you can preprogram the path and action of an autonomous unit rendering jamming innefective. Not to mention jamming only covers a certain radius. A kamikaze drone might get jammed once it enters a jammers radius but if its already locked on a target its momentum will still carry it forward, though less precisely. The best way to beat enemy material is to undermine enemy logistics. Its why air superiority is so valuable. You fight drones by blowing up the drone factory. Also, tech is everything. Its why its an arms race. Not a bulk-out. That much is obvious. Its not like armies are rolling out unproven prototypes en masse to the degree where it would be strategically detrimental. The US spends billions testing and improving tech, much of it never getting to see the battlefield outside of prototyping.

What makes drones so succesful right now is that they are simple and cheap. Air locomotion is the simplest plane of travel to navigate and the function of a drone is to either drop munition or just crash into a target. But if you start introducing complexity like guns or ground maunevering you start undermining the core concept of why drones work. What if the gun jams or you get stuck in mud or a myriad other malfunctions born from complexity? Malfunctions that could be easily resolved by crew end up making the drone inoperable. The US has tried and failed to create unmanned tanks for this exact reason. Heavy drone use is also a result from stagnant frontlines with no air superioty. Air superiority could undermine the logistics of drones. That said, there is a lot of room to explore within the concept of cheap explosive drones, like a drone swarm.

Drones are way scarier than a plane or a tank because of how omnipresent they are due to being so spammable and hard to combat directly. The "zoom~" of a drone is going to trigger PTSD in future war veterans.

What would be the alternative to a monopoly of violence if the goal is to run a safe and just society? The advantage of a monopoly of violence is that you can then regulate violence. And the police is relatively well regulated and monitored as far as a public service goes. Of course there will be mistakes but that doesn't make the framework as a whole faulty. Police holding a monopoly over violence means you can sue them.

How is speaking French virtue signaling? He has a French name and Canada is a bilingual country between French and English. I know nothing about Canadian politics. Is French a minority language?

Its gross how blatant he is with censorship when that is why he proposed to buy Twitter in the first place. Censorship for thee but not for me.

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/12/20/europe/germany-christmas-market-car-intl-latam/index.html 50 year old doctor Taleb al-Abdulmoshen of Saudi-Arabian decent has been named as the suspect. A now deleted twitter feed shows anti-muslim sentiment and critique of islamification of Germany. Exact motive has not been released by the police yet according to the article. Why couldn't he done this during halloween instead? why does he have to ruin christmas like that 😢.

If it wasn't for the deep Stage Orange barbarity of the US, America would be one of if not the best country in the world to live in. And I'm not saying that as some kind of nationalist. I'm not even American. Its the richest and most diverse country in the world. All of the world's militaries combined couldn't hope to invade. Other countries would kill to have America's problems.

Its vice-versa I think. Dems like Joe Biden are the only ones instating regulations of big companies.

Adding to this, we live in an age of unprecedented abundance. Historical material security, political freedom, freedom to travel, freedom from violence, freedom to live your life as you see fit.

Upon reflection, it is kind of gross of me to make light of such a tragic situation.

What exactly makes it ethically imperative in the first place to connect an adoptee with their biological family? Its the first time I've ever heard of such being a concern. Its presumptious as a premise if you think about it as you assume the child even wants to meet their biological parents. How do you know? It also assumes biological kinship to have some kind of special significance. Does it? In my experience, my connections are what I made of them. Being family made it simply easier to bridge that connection but there is no guarantee that would apply to everyone equally. They already have your family in that case.

What would he get out of it though? 200 wounded later, now what?

People hate American insurance companies. This is not a shock in the least. Besides, girls sending love letters and underwear to prisoners is nothing new either. Its a thrill for them.

I enjoy seeing how the cops work and process crime, though it gets overly dramatic at points and the titles are very clickbaity and sensational often in a "Reddit justice boner" kind of way.

I'm too young to remember the 90s.

Despite the hype, VR isn't going to replace traditional gaming with a controller/K&M for the simple reason that its more active, less convenient and limited in the kind of games you can play due to controls. Despite the technology improving in cost, comfort and general user experience over time, you can't beat just turning on a console/pc and booting up a game, no space required, no motion sickness. VR is arguably just a gimmick albeit a fun one. It'll most likely develop as its own niche as a different medium. Right now its lacking both on a hardware and software level. Its uncomfortable to use and there are very few games for it. Though retrofitting old games for VR seems to be a fun and viable way to justify VR, giving tried and true games new life, like Half Life 2 VR and Doom 3. Old games retrofitted for VR tend to be more fun I've heard, probably because games purpose built for VR tend to be kind of tech demos in a sense instead of just fun games. Halo CE VR, GTA V VR, Bioshock VR, Dishonored VR, should all be no brainers at this point.

It's more of a thought experiment than something I'm seriously considering. It's an good question though. What if your morals are bullshit? Then what? Why not just be evil? What is wrong with it exactly?

You shouldn't outsource your thinking in general. ChatGPT is good for making general statements which you can then use to launch further research. The fact that it can seamlessly comment on any niche topic make it uniquely useful as a tool.

One day politicians will all look like this:

A neat compromise if law can't be taught in school is free resources/counceling for navigating legal matters, maybe like some AI thing.

The golden rule is more an ethical/behavioral standard. It doesn't say anything about making friends. You can be an asshole and still make plenty of friends and breed plenty.

I think school shootings as a concept proliferates itself culturally within the US. Bullying isn't unique to America but school shootings are. It reminds me of those African tribes that lived in peace until they learned of the concept of war. Then they started wiping each other out. They literally didn't know that violence was an option until someone told them. Considering that school shootings didn't happen till the 90s yet guns being ubiquitious long before makes me think something similair is happening in the US. Gun control will be a cornerstone of combating mass shootings like this.

Its a form of lashing out due to bullying. There's no real grand plan. If you have a grand plan you don't throw yourself into the meat grinder in a loud and bombastic way. You recruit others to throw their lives away and/or use bombs.

Is altruism inherently more truthful? Its essentially just a different kind of self-bias if you think about it. Many vegans feel sorry for animals just because they are cute and tend to prioritize inividual welfare over collectives, like for example releasing mink into the wild. Those same mink then end up destroying the ecosystem, driving multiple bird species into extinction. Compassion can get really stupid and untruthful and by that extent many vegans are stupid. I argue that vegans prioritize their ideals over truth.