> We have spent over 100 years going back and forth on party politics. It has done nothing to move the bar on justice.
You think there have been no advancements in "justice" since 1926? Either you are being hyperbolic, have no knowledge of history or you have a very idiosyncratic definition of justice.
There are people alive today who lived under Jim Crow laws. Is there any argument you would like to make that getting rid of them and enacting the other associated legislation in the 60s was not an advancement?
AI adoption is a huge shift from labor to capital. Its history repeating, now instead of muscle power being replaced its brain power.
The amount of capex flying around requires raising funds, there have been dozens of stories recently about investors demanding higher rates for AI bonds. MSFT et al need to get their balance sheets in order to get good rates. Also, everyone is waiting for the bubble to burst, getting the house in order ahead of it is very prudent.
Seems like a disappointing result, or at least an indication that a lot more work is needed. A 2x improvement in one type and no improvement on another certainly doesn't justify the costs of space manufacturing.
Iran has also supplied ballistic missiles to Russia. Ukraine attacked a Caspian ship of Iran's that was allegedly carrying arms over the summer.
Assistance has been mutual, though lately the flow has been more from Russia to Iran. Drone improvements, targeting intelligence and missile tactics to avoid Patriot interception.
> Russia's S300/S400 can absolutely down everything the USA has including F22 and F35 - stealth is an 'advantage' not 'cloaking device'.
Iran has (had?) S300 and maybe S400 yet downed no F35s despite many months of them in their airspace. I'm not suggesting US stealth makes the planes invulnerable but the evidence we have so far does not support your statement.
I don't mean to be demeaning but this statement betrays the wrong model of how these systems operate.
These are not 'point systems' with 'A on B' capabilities aka 'it works on this but not that'.
They are networked systems that work in the context of a layered AA strategy along with many other parts.
A single S300 system outside the context of a layered strategy is useless and will be picked off quickly.
We have ballpark estimations for their capabilities, and S400, in proper defensive posture, will hold out against anything NATO has ... for a while.
(Not accounting for 'magic' unknown gear that either side has)
AA defence will have long range radar, AWACS, satellite, other point systems, all kinds of EW (electronic warfare), and defensive patrols of various kinds. And we're now seeing Chinese passive systems deployed in Iran as well.
If that layered defence is very effectively managed, then it becomes very hard to pin the various pieces down. SEED munitions are maybe 60 miles range, and S400 can see F35's at 50 miles, that's a 'very tight' standoff even in a theoretical situation. If an adversary has AWACS then they're not going to use their tracking radars so the F35 has nothing to launch at.
There are all sorts of things adversaries can do to spook NATO AWACS off, push them back, which shortens the distance at which sorties can take place.
If a nation has 'all the layers' and they have good leadership, training, and are nimble and know what they are doing, they can be effective.
If there is 'kink in the armour' or the defence is piecemeal, it can be picked apart.
Think of it like those Roman Phalanx: we can't just say 'they have a certain shaped shield' - it's everything together. Coordination, training, tactics makes them hard to penetrate, but incompetence, exposed flank, etc. and they will break.
Also, Patriot is more capable, but given 'apparent doctrine' of limited munitions, the West has badly depleted inventories. Russia is pumping out enormous volumes of supplies. All of that means they get used differently.
You moved the goalposts. You originally said S300/400 could down any US stealth plane. Now you are saying that S300/400 can down any US stealth plane in concert with many other capabilities.
I don't think it's a matter of moving goalposts but rather a matter of what's implied when talking about these AD systems.
S400 and S300 are primarily designed to operate as an integral part of an AD networked components.
Iran didn't have the integrated network of S300 or S400, and Russian prior offers to provide it were declined.
We do not know S400 capabilites against the F-35 planes, but there is some evidence that they might be fairly effective.
This was a concern when Turkey purchased an S400 system ("It is not possible to both fly the F-35 in space where the S-400 is significantly operable." - Mike Pompeo) - Washington cancelled the deal with Turkey because of concerns that its low frequency radar can track and analyze F-35 operations (there are multiple sources on that).
My country is geothermal wonder and basically only does 10% of our power via geothermal.
We have water, decent legal system, safety, talent, infinite power. Could be printing money with datacenter buildouts. Instead in upcoming election good portion of promises is anti-AI.
At least in the case of wind the federal government has attacked via the permitting process. That limits what states can do, cutting taxes doesn't help if you can't build at all.
You think there have been no advancements in "justice" since 1926? Either you are being hyperbolic, have no knowledge of history or you have a very idiosyncratic definition of justice.
reply