circuscritic @ circuscritic @lemmy.ca

Posts

0

Comments

981

Joined

2 yr. ago

....why does Lemmy's noncredible insist on being lesscredible, or even credible?

But thanks for the write up and graphics to show me why WWII era naval torpedoes weren't actually mounted on those hard points lol.

.....you don't have OOBM on every single networked device and terminal? Have you never heard of the buddy system?

You should probably start writing up an RFP. I'd suggest you also consider doubling up on the company issued phones per user.

If they already have an ATT phone, get them a Verizon one as well, or vice versa.

At my company we're already way past that. We're actually starting to import workers to provide human OOBM.

You don't answer my call? I'll just text the migrant worker we chained to your leg to flick your ear until you pick up.

Maybe that sounds extreme, but guess who's company wasn't impacted by the Crowdstrike outage.

Pretty sure those are Mark 14's.

He's basing it on none of that. Newsweek pumps out Biden copium articles like crazy and the same few rotating accounts post every single one of them.

Allies spy on each other, it's not unusual or shocking.

Eventually she will be exchanged as part of some backroom deal, or in exchange for someone imprisoned in SK for providing information to the CIA.

You're operating under the assumption that this "intelligence" is legitimate or being provided in good faith.

If we accept that this intelligence even exists, there is a big difference between a state sanctioned plot, and signal intercepts between a couple hard-line officers blowing smoke up each other's asses.

All recent events show that Iran has consistently acted with restraint and moderation when dealing the theat of American military escalation.

Color me skeptical that they would blow past all other major escalation paths, and skip straight to one that guarantees a multi-month long air campaign to flatten their entire country, followed by a ground invasion, and occupation.

Iraq may have worked out strategically for Iran because of the cluster fuck that the occupation was, but that doesn't mean they want that for themselves.

This isn't a court of law, or the privatized forced mandatory arbitration that has mostly replaced it.

Out of curiosity, in your view, what has Google done to deserve the benefit of the doubt?

The cost per round is a lot more than just power generation when talking about lasers.

The wear on tear on lasers is a lot different than other systems and when the case is being made for their cost effectiveness they need to be factored in, instead of the highly misleading figures that only prices out electricity.

There is no doubt that lasers will play a bigger and bigger role in combat systems, especially in a layered air defense networks.

But it's dishonest how these articles only cite the cost of electricity. It would be like citing the cost of a single shell of artillery to imply that is the only expenditure when the system is used.

Just like a Howitzer, the parts on lasers experience wear and tear, but to replace them cost a hell of a lot more than a new barrel.

Yes, in the long-term lasers will be more cost-effective than ground to air missile interceptors*, but any reporting that is clearly trying to make an argument for cost savings, should have the integrity to get figures that factor in battlefield maintenance of those systems.

*When applicable. Lasers will not remove the need for any existing systems, but will provide a cost savings by providing additional options for the air defense system's operators.

This copium is off the charts ridiculous.

I don't want Trump to win, which is why I think it's incredibly unhelpful to spread the delusion that current polling is favorable to a Biden victory.

That wasn't even true before the debate, but at least there were enough polls within the margin of error that it was possible.

Biden's polling has only gone down since then, while Trump's have trended upwards. Not by the same margins, but still, opposite directions.

This article is actually arguing about changes in polls that are less than 0.5%, seriously, it's a joke...

Here is an aggregated page that links out to over 50 different polls for Georgia, one of the states mentioned in the article where Trump it's supposedly hurting, according to that article:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/us/elections/polls-president-georgia.html

Here's that same aggregated polling information for the other two states mentioned in the article:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/us/elections/polls-president-michigan.html

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/us/elections/polls-president-north-carolina.html

Take a look and tell me if that article, much less it's headline, have any bearing on reality.

Wake me when a hemorrhagic fever crosses the Rockies.

Probably a lot less than even the last time they tried this, back in 2022. But if it lasts longer than a month, then they will have made progress.

I hope they call it CNN Plus Two

Yes, but that was before everyone saw a sundowning POTUS on that debate stage.

Attitudes have changed amongst the DNC establishment, at least according to the reporting.

Anecdotally, I've heard similar feelings echoed in far left/socialist circles.

I will say I haven't seen any new polling that take recent events into account. I assume those figures exist, I just haven't seen you come across my feeds yet.

ISO certification does require a bit more effort than just the bare minimum necessary to legally advertise specific claims about a product.

That doesn't mean all M-Disc manufacturing is immune to shitty business practices of a manufacturer, but they do have to meet certain manufacturing specifications.

Yes, they can choose to either NOT be a professional artist, or to work with Live Nation and Ticket Master.

It's one, or the other.

Monopolies are the opposite of choice.

You're delusional.

You went out of your way to find one of the very few polls showing positive news for Biden in Michigan and then posted links to their company website where they write blog entries based on the results of their market research.

Additionally, you're badmouthing anyone who points out that Morning Consult's latest Michigan polls are outliers.

Maybe they actually have the best current methodology, but unless you want to write up a white paper on why that is, stop speaking ill of anyone who points out that their poll is an outlier, or that your link isn't to a news article, but to a market research company's blog.

Especially when those commenters come with sources, such as the link to aggregated page of 65 polls that I posted. Which by the way, includes Morning Consult's figures as well.

I wasn't kidding, it is actually the blog of that market research/polling firm.

It's dressed up a bit to make it seem like it's delivering news, but it's primarily just writing up their own market research and polling data in the form of articles, or more accurately, blog posts.

This poll is a notable outlier... The article is basically just a blog post from the polling outfit itself...

Here's results on 65 different polls for Michigan:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/us/elections/polls-president-michigan.html

The vast majority of polls have Trump leading Michigan, but a lot of those are also within the margin of error and otherwise very close.

What is with Lemmy's insistence on pretending that the debate either didn't hurt Biden, or actually helped him?

It's like a lot of people here actually believe that by pretending nothing is wrong, that means nothing is wrong.

FYI that New York Times link is simply an easy aggregated URL that shows the results for, and then directly links to 65 different polls for Michigan.