The combat range of both is less than diameter_pacific/2 so they are pretty safe.
The US doesn't have any enemies within range of the Chinese jets and the US won't sell the F22 to anybody near china.
They are both techno-wank projects to make generals feel cool and to keep a few aerospace companies in business. It took a while but we have finally corrupted them to be just like us - and we did the chinese as well!
> The US doesn't have any enemies within range of the Chinese jets
The US has plenty of allies within range of the J-20, for example Taiwan, Korea, Japan. If China was to fight any of these countries, and the US got involved, air combat between the J-20 and F-22 is quite likely.
> They are both techno-wank projects to make generals feel cool and to keep a few aerospace companies in business.
There's an element of truth in that, yes. But it's been axiomatic in warfare from about 1940 onwards that air superiority is really important in a ground or naval campaign. (So they aren't just useless toys.)
This is changing as UAVs and smart missiles take over roles currently performed by manned aircraft.
Don't just read the newspaper your goverment gives you, Some times they are totally lies.
How low the IQ a person have to get to think that your so called "citizenry war"(if it exists) need a fighter?
Are you still thinking that the picture from Nepal's rebellion is from China?
Oh your holly god , I strongly advise you to go to China find out by your own eyes!
Considering they have been securing massive massive mineral resources in africa for the next 50-100 years, I am sure that we will be at war with them in the next 20.
Fresh water? That's the silliest thing I've heard in a while. Drinking water is easy to make from salt water, it's just more expensive than pumping it from a nearby lake. But making it is about a billion times cheaper than starting a war.
Not according to National Geographic. Sorry, I can't find any links, but I have the magazine with me:
... "We're going to see rising tensions over shared water resources, including political disputes between farmers, between farmers and cities, and between human and ecological demands for water," says Peter Gleick, a water expert and president of the Pacific Institute in Oakland, California. "And I believe more of these tensions will lead to violence"
In India:
"We wake up every morning fighting over water," says Kamal Bhate, a local astrologer. In a nearby slum, a teenage boy was recently beaten to death for cutting in line.
"Peace between Pakistan and India may hinge as much on water as on Nuclear weapons for the counties must share the glacier-dependent Indus"
"The biggest question mark hangs over China, which controls the sources of the regions major rivers. It's damming of the Mekong has sparked anger downstream in Indochina. If Beijing follows through on tentative places to divert the Brahmaputra, it could provoke its rival, India, in the very region where the two countries fought a war in 1962."
Back to what you said, Desalination leaves behind a concentrated brine, which can technically harm the environment and the water supply itself. "Brine discharges are especially tricky to dispose of and they're also raising the sanity parts of the Persian Gulf. The saltier the water becomes, the more expensive it becomes to desalinate."
Desalination may be a billion dollars cheaper, but in the long term - it's not. (for now anyway). People who don't have a load of money will not be able to afford this water. What happens then?
Desalinated water costs 50 cents per cubic metre in Singapore. 8 cups of water per day * 365 days gives 2/3 of a cubic meter. 35 cents per person per year. Even the poorest of the poor can afford that.
Individual people will fight over water. If you don't get enough to drink, you die. That's worth fighting over.
Governments fighting over water is stupid. Yes, I know governments being stupid is pretty commonplace, but it's our place to tell them they're stupid, not egg them on, like you and NatGeo are doing.
> Desalinated water costs 50 cents per cubic metre in Singapore. 8 cups of water per day times 365 days gives 2/3 of a cubic meter. 35 cents per person per year. Even the poorest of the poor can afford that.
The issue is irrigation, not drinking water.
Food to feed a person requires farming. If the natural rainfall isn't enough, it requires irrigation too. Lots of farming is done with irrigation, as has been true for millenia.
Far better to teach the farmers dryland farming techniques rather than destroying their soil through the use of irrigation. Wheat can be grown in areas that only receive 12 inches of rain a year, which is technically considered a desert.
(09:50:48 PM) sjuxax: Guy on HN said this: "ffmpeg only has a working webm decoder. xvp8 (the x264-based encoder) hasn't been touched for a few months and is basically vaporware"
(09:50:50 PM) sjuxax: true?
...
(09:52:34 PM) Dark_Shikari: not quite true
(09:52:42 PM) Dark_Shikari: close, but not quite.
(09:52:58 PM) Dark_Shikari: 1) the github tree hasn't been updated
(09:53:05 PM) Dark_Shikari: there is more stuff that isn't in the tree yet
(09:53:13 PM) Dark_Shikari: 2) Ronald is dealing with his first baby boy, give him some slack
(09:53:20 PM) Dark_Shikari: 3) Google just hired him full-time for a year to work solely on xvp8
and later on...
(10:12:27 PM) Dark_Shikari: tl;dr: it's kinda vaporware, there's a bit of work done, but it will stop being vaporware in march when Ronald goes to work for Google.
Assuming you're sjuxax, thank you for the research! I think a lot of us sometimes forget how simple it is to go to the primary sources in cases like this.
As much as google can seem pretty sinister these days, it's reassuring that their strategy for implementing a video decoder is "hire the dev on the leading open source project for a year."
Google as always wants us to use their beta software. This thread has generated much debates. I'm always suspicious when big corporation touts ideology as their cause. Don't fall into the pray. Just asked the question "Where is the money?" and you can guess the real reason for their move. Google seems to think that they have the clouts to influence all area of humanity, in this case the audio/visual entertainment industry that includes set top boxes, chip and hardware makers etc. They are fighter all wars (MS Office, iPhone, Bing, Facebook) by spreading themselves thinly. I believe these few years will see the start of decline of Google as a company.
But compared to the previous 'hack' that needed a $50K radio and weeks of post-processing it's pretty good.
Especialyl since it also demonstrates how to target a particular phone - the previous GSM cracks captured all the packets on all the phones in a cell, so it was only much later you worked out which was the phone you were looking for - too late if they moved to a new cell while you were recording.
Our plan to destroy them is working, it got rid of the USSR, now China, just the USA to go.