On Monday, March 14, 2022 at 10:16:40 AM UTC-6, J. Clarke wrote:
> This is from Isabelle Khurshudyan, a/the Washington Post Moscow
> Correspondent, quoting Ukrainian battalion commander:
>
> “If you want to understand Russia and Ukraine, we Ukraine are Gondor.
> Russia is Mordor — very close and very dangerous. We need Gandalf and
> several hobbits.”
>
> <https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/03/14/questions-ukraine-russia-answers/>

Unfortunately, no one has found a Ring which, if thrown into a volcano,
will deactivate Russia's nuclear capabilities.

Here is my assessment of the likely course of events over the next several
months and the next few years.

1) Our hopes that sanctions against Russia will bite enough to lead to
a palace coup against Putin are likely to be disappointed.

2) Our hopes that the brave defenders of Ukraine will make things so
difficult for Russian troops there that Russia will give up are also
likely to be disappointed.

Russia sent in, as its first wave, conscripts that it knew would not be
fully effective. It has now sent in forces that Ukrainian fighters have
found more difficult to stop, and these forces are causing massive
civilian casualties in Ukraine.

This will continue. The result will be a humanitarian tragedy on a
colossal scale, far beyond what we have seen so far. The dead will
number in the millions, not the thousands.

3) After Ukraine? Georgia and Finland are two countries in a similar
situation to Ukraine, so they may be next. Perhaps even Sweden.

4) Once it is clear that the West does not have sufficient resolve to
ignore a nuclear threat in order to prevent millions of people from being
killed by Russian forces, NATO members will now be on the list. After
all, a treaty is just a piece of paper; if human lives don't have enough
importance to inspire bravery, a piece of paper will not.

Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia will be first.

Then? Poland. Norway. Germany. Denmark. Belgium. Italy.

5) France and Britain do have nuclear weapons. But not to the extent
of the United States or Russia or China. Therefore, a preemptive strike,
destroying the _Force de Frappe_ of France and the nuclear arms of
the United Kingdom may be possible.

However, the UK may have some submarines with nuclear missiles, I seem
to vaguely recall. In which case, Putin may have to settle for _Festung
Europa_.

World War III, and Russia has won. China wouldn't be able to save Europe's
bacon even if it bombed Pearl Harbor this time.

I'm not sure if Russia will invade Japan, or leave it, along with Taiwan and
South Korea, to China. Canada _could_ be gobbled up in stage 4 above,
but as it is uncomfortably close to the United States, Russia _may_ save
it for later.

ObSF: The Man in the High Castle.

As I said, the U.S. should have rushed troops to the borders of Ukraine
so as to prevent the process from getting started. Now Earth shall be
among the worlds on which intelligent life originated that got caught in
the Great Filter.

Global tyranny is as effective as global thermonuclear war in rendering
a planet irrelevant in the cosmic scheme of things - ancient China
illustrates how tyrants fear technological progress, as it upsets
applecarts and thus threatens their rule. So Earth will regress, and not
expand into space.

John Savard

On Monday, March 14, 2022 at 11:43:59 PM UTC-6, Quadibloc wrote:

> ObSF: The Man in the High Castle.

And who better to take on the role of John Smith in the Netflix
adaptation than Donald J. Trump?

John Savard

On Monday, March 14, 2022 at 11:43:59 PM UTC-6, Quadibloc wrote:

> ObSF: The Man in the High Castle.

However, the situation I foresee is more like the one outlined
in Robert Harris' work _Fatherland_, since I see the United States
as being likely to retain an independence of sorts in a world
dominated by Russia and China.

So Donald J. Trump gets to play the role of Joseph P. Kennedy.

John Savard

On Mon, 14 Mar 2022 23:43:31 -0700, Quadibloc wrote:

> On Monday, March 14, 2022 at 11:43:59 PM UTC-6, Quadibloc wrote:
>
>> ObSF: The Man in the High Castle.
>
> However, the situation I foresee is more like the one outlined in Robert
> Harris' work _Fatherland_, since I see the United States as being likely
> to retain an independence of sorts in a world dominated by Russia and
> China.
>
> So Donald J. Trump gets to play the role of Joseph P. Kennedy.
>
> John Savard

Well, /my/ model calls for Putin to be deposed April 23-30.
Between now and then news headlines will shout
about rising street protests inside Russia against Putin. The
number of those stories will increase gradually, overtaking the
number of stories about the invasion itself. Pundits will call it
"the new Russian Revolution."

On 2022-03-14 11:43 p.m., Quadibloc wrote:
> On Monday, March 14, 2022 at 10:16:40 AM UTC-6, J. Clarke wrote:
>> This is from Isabelle Khurshudyan, a/the Washington Post Moscow
>> Correspondent, quoting Ukrainian battalion commander:
>>
>> “If you want to understand Russia and Ukraine, we Ukraine are Gondor.
>> Russia is Mordor — very close and very dangerous. We need Gandalf and
>> several hobbits.”
>>
>> <https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/03/14/questions-ukraine-russia-answers/>
>
> Unfortunately, no one has found a Ring which, if thrown into a volcano,
> will deactivate Russia's nuclear capabilities.
>
> Here is my assessment of the likely course of events over the next several
> months and the next few years.
>
> 1) Our hopes that sanctions against Russia will bite enough to lead to
> a palace coup against Putin are likely to be disappointed.
>
> 2) Our hopes that the brave defenders of Ukraine will make things so
> difficult for Russian troops there that Russia will give up are also
> likely to be disappointed.
>
> Russia sent in, as its first wave, conscripts that it knew would not be
> fully effective. It has now sent in forces that Ukrainian fighters have
> found more difficult to stop, and these forces are causing massive
> civilian casualties in Ukraine.
>
> This will continue. The result will be a humanitarian tragedy on a
> colossal scale, far beyond what we have seen so far. The dead will
> number in the millions, not the thousands.
>
> 3) After Ukraine? Georgia and Finland are two countries in a similar
> situation to Ukraine, so they may be next. Perhaps even Sweden.
>
> 4) Once it is clear that the West does not have sufficient resolve to
> ignore a nuclear threat in order to prevent millions of people from being
> killed by Russian forces, NATO members will now be on the list. After
> all, a treaty is just a piece of paper; if human lives don't have enough
> importance to inspire bravery, a piece of paper will not.

I've got 40 years of Cold War that says you're wrong. Those pieces of
paper matter. Hitler thought that because France and Britain backed down
and abandoned Czechoslovakia that they'd keep on backing down. The
Russians know better. Putin grew up knowing that nuclear arsenals are
useful for dick waving but only as long as you don't push it too far.

On 15/03/2022 05:43, Quadibloc wrote:
> On Monday, March 14, 2022 at 10:16:40 AM UTC-6, J. Clarke wrote:
>> This is from Isabelle Khurshudyan, a/the Washington Post Moscow
>> Correspondent, quoting Ukrainian battalion commander:
>>
>> “If you want to understand Russia and Ukraine, we Ukraine are Gondor.
>> Russia is Mordor — very close and very dangerous. We need Gandalf and
>> several hobbits.”
>>
>> <https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/03/14/questions-ukraine-russia-answers/>
>
> Unfortunately, no one has found a Ring which, if thrown into a volcano,
> will deactivate Russia's nuclear capabilities.
>
> Here is my assessment of the likely course of events over the next several
> months and the next few years.
>
> 1) Our hopes that sanctions against Russia will bite enough to lead to
> a palace coup against Putin are likely to be disappointed.
>
> 2) Our hopes that the brave defenders of Ukraine will make things so
> difficult for Russian troops there that Russia will give up are also
> likely to be disappointed.
>
> Russia sent in, as its first wave, conscripts that it knew would not be
> fully effective. It has now sent in forces that Ukrainian fighters have
> found more difficult to stop, and these forces are causing massive
> civilian casualties in Ukraine.
>
> This will continue. The result will be a humanitarian tragedy on a
> colossal scale, far beyond what we have seen so far. The dead will
> number in the millions, not the thousands.
>
> 3) After Ukraine? Georgia and Finland are two countries in a similar
> situation to Ukraine, so they may be next. Perhaps even Sweden.
>
> 4) Once it is clear that the West does not have sufficient resolve to
> ignore a nuclear threat in order to prevent millions of people from being
> killed by Russian forces, NATO members will now be on the list. After
> all, a treaty is just a piece of paper; if human lives don't have enough
> importance to inspire bravery, a piece of paper will not.
>
> Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia will be first.
>
> Then? Poland. Norway. Germany. Denmark. Belgium. Italy.
>
> 5) France and Britain do have nuclear weapons. But not to the extent
> of the United States or Russia or China. Therefore, a preemptive strike,
> destroying the _Force de Frappe_ of France and the nuclear arms of
> the United Kingdom may be possible.
>
> However, the UK may have some submarines with nuclear missiles, I seem
> to vaguely recall. In which case, Putin may have to settle for _Festung
> Europa_.

More than a vague recall, the UK has four nuclear submarines armed with
ICBMs (MIRVed warheads) and at least one is always at sea on patrol.
(The others are in port having maintenance, or crew rotations, or
training, but can put to sea in times of crisis). One of the main tasks
of RAF and Royal Navy surface patrols in the area is to keep Russian
aircraft and ships away from the sea lanes around the Scottish base for
NATO subs.

The French have something similar, but I'm not sure what their
constant-vigilance policy is.

>
> World War III, and Russia has won. China wouldn't be able to save Europe's
> bacon even if it bombed Pearl Harbor this time.
>
> I'm not sure if Russia will invade Japan, or leave it, along with Taiwan and
> South Korea, to China. Canada _could_ be gobbled up in stage 4 above,
> but as it is uncomfortably close to the United States, Russia _may_ save
> it for later.
>
> ObSF: The Man in the High Castle.
>
> As I said, the U.S. should have rushed troops to the borders of Ukraine
> so as to prevent the process from getting started. Now Earth shall be
> among the worlds on which intelligent life originated that got caught in
> the Great Filter.
>
> Global tyranny is as effective as global thermonuclear war in rendering
> a planet irrelevant in the cosmic scheme of things - ancient China
> illustrates how tyrants fear technological progress, as it upsets
> applecarts and thus threatens their rule. So Earth will regress, and not
> expand into space.
>
> John Savard

On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 5:39:59 AM UTC-6, J. Clarke wrote:

> Russia, already a client state of China, isn't going to be doing much
> dominating in that world.

It's true that sanctions have made Russia more dependent on China,
however, once it has Western Europe under its control, it will have
sources for a number of items.

John Savard

On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 2:14:01 AM UTC-6, David Johnston wrote:
> Putin grew up knowing that nuclear arsenals are
> useful for dick waving but only as long as you don't push it too far.

Humans have died in Ukraine. That should *already* be too far.

If a nuclear threat is sufficient to force a country to stand idly by as
what happens to Ukraine is happening, that is strong evidence that
it is an absolutely effective threat.

Of course, I _could_ be wrong. But is that really the way to bet?

John Savard

On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 1:59:21 AM UTC-6, Charles Packer wrote:

> Well, /my/ model calls for Putin to be deposed April 23-30.
> Between now and then news headlines will shout
> about rising street protests inside Russia against Putin. The
> number of those stories will increase gradually, overtaking the
> number of stories about the invasion itself. Pundits will call it
> "the new Russian Revolution."

While a _palace_ coup is at least possible, for Putin to be
brought down by a _popular_ revolution seems extremely
unlikely.

Of course, given the changes in Russia under Gorbachev and Yeltsin,
it's possible Putin _may_ find that he does not have functional organs
of repression available to him at some point.

Sadly, however, I think that in any country it is possible to staff a
secret police with enough thugs.

John Savard

On 15/03/2022 00.43, Quadibloc wrote:

> Global tyranny is as effective as global thermonuclear war in rendering
> a planet irrelevant in the cosmic scheme of things - ancient China
> illustrates how tyrants fear technological progress, as it upsets
> applecarts and thus threatens their rule. So Earth will regress, and not
> expand into space.

It sounds like _They Shall Have Stars_, in which Russia/USSR "won"
by default, setting space travel back by several centuries.

<http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1028>
--
Michael F. Stemper
This sentence no verb.

On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 10:39:46 AM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Mar 2022 04:51:22 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
> <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>
> >On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 5:39:59 AM UTC-6, J. Clarke wrote:
> >
> >> Russia, already a client state of China, isn't going to be doing much
> >> dominating in that world.
> >
> >It's true that sanctions have made Russia more dependent on China,
> >however, once it has Western Europe under its control, it will have
> >sources for a number of items.
> Now, today, Russia can't take Ukraine without Chinese weapons. There's
> no way it's going to take down Germany, even if the rest of NATO
> doesn't kick in.

Outside of social media, Russia is making slow, brutal advances on most
fronts. If Putin is ready to take the causalities, he'll be able to kill or drive
out Zelensky from the ruins of Kyiv within a couple weeks, and put his flag
on the rubble. He simply has the cannon fodder and equipment to overwhelm
formal military opposition.

What he won't be able to do is install a working puppet government, or
hold the country indefinitely.

It is true that, if the nuke option is not invoked, NATO could wipe the
floor with Russia. But that's a very uncertain 'if'.

I'm hoping for a palace coup.

pt

On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 8:39:46 AM UTC-6, J. Clarke wrote:

> Now, today, Russia can't take Ukraine without Chinese weapons. There's
> no way it's going to take down Germany, even if the rest of NATO
> doesn't kick in.

Russia and China are both denying that China is selling Russia weapons
for use in Ukraine. Captured Russian drones show that Russia is using a
lot of imported chips in its weapons, but if China did start making military
sales to Russia for this war, *it* would start feeling the wrath of the
United States, even if applying sanctions to China would be far more painful
for the West than not trading with a largely irrelevant Russia.

I was just watching a YouTube video on how Russia "couldn't survive" Western
tech sanctions. I knew beforehand that China's domestic fabs can only make
chips down to 14nm, which is behind the times, but not that terrible. The video
noted that Russia's most advanced fab... can only make chips at 65nm.

Oh, that means they're hopeless, right?

A 3 GHz Core 2 Duo and a 2.67 GHz Core 2 Quad were made by Intel on a 65nm
process. 65 nm is where Dennard scaling came to an end. Later process nodes let
you put more on a single die, and let you make chips that used less energy...
but 65nm is... adequate. It is possible to make do with that fairly nicely if one has to.

John Savard

On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 9:31:58 AM UTC-6, pete...@gmail.com wrote:

> It is true that, if the nuke option is not invoked, NATO could wipe the
> floor with Russia. But that's a very uncertain 'if'.

I certainly can understand the extreme reluctance of the U.S. government
to take any risk of global thermonuclear war.

Unfortunately, while that is laudable from some perspectives, the net result
is that Russia can do whatever it wants. Which is why Ukraine should have
been put under the equivalent of Article 5 protection *before this happened*,
which would have been almost certain to have prevented the current tragedy
without any risk of nuclear war.

It isn't Zelensky, it's Biden who "poked the bear" foolishly - by refusing Russia's
"security" demands without providing Ukraine with ironclad protection.

John Savard

On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 9:31:58 AM UTC-6, pete...@gmail.com wrote:

> Outside of social media, Russia is making slow, brutal advances on most
> fronts. If Putin is ready to take the causalities, he'll be able to kill or drive
> out Zelensky from the ruins of Kyiv within a couple weeks, and put his flag
> on the rubble. He simply has the cannon fodder and equipment to overwhelm
> formal military opposition.

> What he won't be able to do is install a working puppet government, or
> hold the country indefinitely.

Once you've reduced the country to rubble, then you can also kill enough
of its people, so as to install a puppet government that works because it's
governing a population of Russian settlers.

> It is true that, if the nuke option is not invoked, NATO could wipe the
> floor with Russia. But that's a very uncertain 'if'.
>
> I'm hoping for a palace coup.

I would like that to happen. It certainly could happen. However, I
would not like my life to depend on it happening soon. So the Ukrainian
people should not be in this awkward position.

John Savard

Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> schrieb:
> On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 5:39:59 AM UTC-6, J. Clarke wrote:
>
>> Russia, already a client state of China, isn't going to be doing much
>> dominating in that world.
>
> It's true that sanctions have made Russia more dependent on China,
> however, once it has Western Europe under its control, it will have
> sources for a number of items.

I _thought_ I heard some heavy vehicle in the street today...
I'm sure it was a Russion tank. No, wait, it was the garbage
collection.

On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 5:43:59 AM UTC, Quadibloc wrote:
> On Monday, March 14, 2022 at 10:16:40 AM UTC-6, J. Clarke wrote:
> > This is from Isabelle Khurshudyan, a/the Washington Post Moscow
> > Correspondent, quoting Ukrainian battalion commander:
> >
> > “If you want to understand Russia and Ukraine, we Ukraine are Gondor.
> > Russia is Mordor — very close and very dangerous. We need Gandalf and
> > several hobbits.”
> >
> > <https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/03/14/questions-ukraine-russia-answers/>
> Unfortunately, no one has found a Ring which, if thrown into a volcano,
> will deactivate Russia's nuclear capabilities.
>
> Here is my assessment of the likely course of events over the next several
> months and the next few years.
>
> 1) Our hopes that sanctions against Russia will bite enough to lead to
> a palace coup against Putin are likely to be disappointed.
>
> 2) Our hopes that the brave defenders of Ukraine will make things so
> difficult for Russian troops there that Russia will give up are also
> likely to be disappointed.
>
> Russia sent in, as its first wave, conscripts that it knew would not be
> fully effective. It has now sent in forces that Ukrainian fighters have
> found more difficult to stop, and these forces are causing massive
> civilian casualties in Ukraine.
>
> This will continue. The result will be a humanitarian tragedy on a
> colossal scale, far beyond what we have seen so far. The dead will
> number in the millions, not the thousands.
>
> 3) After Ukraine? Georgia and Finland are two countries in a similar
> situation to Ukraine, so they may be next. Perhaps even Sweden.
>
> 4) Once it is clear that the West does not have sufficient resolve to
> ignore a nuclear threat in order to prevent millions of people from being
> killed by Russian forces, NATO members will now be on the list. After
> all, a treaty is just a piece of paper; if human lives don't have enough
> importance to inspire bravery, a piece of paper will not.
>
> Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia will be first.
>
> Then? Poland. Norway. Germany. Denmark. Belgium. Italy.
>
> 5) France and Britain do have nuclear weapons. But not to the extent
> of the United States or Russia or China. Therefore, a preemptive strike,
> destroying the _Force de Frappe_ of France and the nuclear arms of
> the United Kingdom may be possible.
>
> However, the UK may have some submarines with nuclear missiles, I seem
> to vaguely recall. In which case, Putin may have to settle for _Festung
> Europa_.
>
> World War III, and Russia has won. China wouldn't be able to save Europe's
> bacon even if it bombed Pearl Harbor this time.
>
> I'm not sure if Russia will invade Japan, or leave it, along with Taiwan and
> South Korea, to China. Canada _could_ be gobbled up in stage 4 above,
> but as it is uncomfortably close to the United States, Russia _may_ save
> it for later.
>
> ObSF: The Man in the High Castle.
>
> As I said, the U.S. should have rushed troops to the borders of Ukraine
> so as to prevent the process from getting started. Now Earth shall be
> among the worlds on which intelligent life originated that got caught in
> the Great Filter.
>
> Global tyranny is as effective as global thermonuclear war in rendering
> a planet irrelevant in the cosmic scheme of things - ancient China
> illustrates how tyrants fear technological progress, as it upsets
> applecarts and thus threatens their rule. So Earth will regress, and not
> expand into space.
>
> John Savard

The Ukraine strategy and the likely course of events should be familiar to anybody who has read Tolkien or the stories of a more bloodthirsty age that were Tolkien's source material. It certainly rings a bell with somebody whose heritage of oral history and tradition (such as it is) includes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Derry

The Ukrainians are sending their women and children - as far as they can - out of the conflict zone, while retaining every able bodied man. They do not assume victory. They do plan to resist without ceasing to the last man. They very gratefully accept weapons such as light anti-tank missiles which give them some surprising advantages, but these are not necessary to the plan. The effect - that a Russian victory will gain only a devastated and depopulated country, rendering it unprofitable - can be achieved without them.

Win or lose, this is an event which will reverberate down the ages, just as much as the seige mentioned above. Should Ukraine go down, it will still establish a precedent which Putin's next target might well at least claim that it plans to live up to, as a form of deterrence. It is also unfortunately going to poison Ukrainian-Russian relations for some time to come, unless Russia not only discards Putin, but undergoes a change as striking as that undertaken by Nazi Germany after the war.

Sanctions against Russia are justified not just to support Ukraine in the short term, but because Russia has revealed itself as an aggressor with no obvious limit to its appetite. In that context, a trade between the Russia and another nation is only justifiable if the gain from that trade which Russia uses to buy armaments is less than the gain from the trade that the other party uses to buy armaments. Since Russia devotes a large proportion of its GDP to military spending, it must be assumed that this will not normally be the case.

(FWIW both France and Britain have (separate) patrol schedules with one nuclear armed submarine at sea at all times for nuclear deterrance. Supposedly Britain's nuclear response is designed to be capable of destroying at least one major Russian city, such as St Petersburg, with the aim of making a nuclear strike against Britain by Russia unprofitable).

On 2022-03-15 5:55 a.m., Quadibloc wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 2:14:01 AM UTC-6, David Johnston wrote:
>> Putin grew up knowing that nuclear arsenals are
>> useful for dick waving but only as long as you don't push it too far.
>
> Humans have died in Ukraine. That should *already* be too far.
>
> If a nuclear threat is sufficient to force a country to stand idly by as
> what happens to Ukraine is happening, that is strong evidence that
> it is an absolutely effective threat.
>
> Of course, I _could_ be wrong. But is that really the way to bet?

Yes. Betting you are wrong is absolutely the way to bet. If the United
States stands by and does nothing while an actual NATO member is
attacked then NATO and all of the United States's other alliances are
done and with them the United States's position as a superpower. Nobody
goes to war out of compassion. After all, the war will almost never
fail to cause more suffering than it responds to. That's why people
tell you that you are crazy when you keep suggesting it. People do go
to war to protect their positions of power/safety/wealth.

On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 11:07:42 AM UTC-6, Thomas Koenig wrote:

> I'm sure it was a Russion tank. No, wait, it was the garbage
> collection.

Which is, of course why, if you want to do serious work, you want to
use a language with statically allocated variables. That way, your
processing won't be delayed for long periods of time at random
intervals.

John Savard

On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 11:25:10 AM UTC-6, mcdow...@sky.com wrote:
> It is also unfortunately going to poison Ukrainian-Russian relations
> for some time to come, unless Russia not only discards Putin, but
> undergoes a change as striking as that undertaken by Nazi Germany
> after the war.

I'm not sure how it follows that this is an _unfortunate_ consequence.

For Russia to experience in the future the contempt it has earned by
its actions seems only just and fitting.

So if Russia does cease hostilities against Ukraine, for some other cause
than it doing so in return for a removal of sanctions... the current
sanctions should remain in place until and unless such a "dramatic change"
takes place (with Russia being kept out of Ukraine in future by Article 5, not
the threat of sanctions, which doesn't work).

John Savard

On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 11:36:47 AM UTC-6, David Johnston wrote:
> If the United
> States stands by and does nothing while an actual NATO member is
> attacked then NATO and all of the United States's other alliances are
> done and with them the United States's position as a superpower.

That's true.
But I suspect that it standing by and not doing all that much while
Ukraine suffers what it is is hardly dong much good to the United
States' position as a superpower.
For that matter, what about abandoning Vietnam?

The mistake is not failing to plunge in ahead with an armed
confrontation with Russian forces on Ukrainian soil despite a
nuclear threat. The mistake was not thinking a move ahead,
and giving Ukraine the effective equivalent of Article 5 protection
*prior* to the invasion, *prior* to Putin making such threats.

And this mistake was made as far back as G. W. Bush, so Joe
Biden is not alone to blame, nor would the $400 million in aid
that Trump corruptly held up be the critical factor.
Basically, the U.S. seems to have forgotten what it knew about
what it takes to _be_ a superpower back in the Cold War era.
But then, Putin isn't calling for the workers of the world to throw
off their chains, so he is no threat to billionaire Trump donors.
They can fawn over him like their predecessors fawned over
Mussolini and even Hitler before the war.
I very much hope I'm wrong, but it looks like the U.S. is *already*
on the way out.
But it's too late to right its course in Ukraine without frightful risks,
and how can it right its course in general if nearly half its voters...
prefer the defeatist isolationism of Donald Trump?
And it's a plus that both the Republican Party *and* Vladimir
Putin see nothing wrong with rigging elections. The _new_
United States and Russia should get along just fine, with each
other and with China. What things are like for the people who
live in such a world is another matter.

John Savard

On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 12:17:18 PM UTC-6, J. Clarke wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Mar 2022 08:40:32 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
> <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:

> >It isn't Zelensky, it's Biden who "poked the bear" foolishly - by refusing Russia's
> >"security" demands without providing Ukraine with ironclad protection.
> What "security" demands were those?

That Ukraine must never join NATO. Back around February 12, this stuff
was in the news.

John Savard

On 2022-03-15, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 11:07:42 AM UTC-6, Thomas Koenig wrote:
>
>> I'm sure it was a Russion tank. No, wait, it was the garbage
>> collection.
>
> Which is, of course why, if you want to do serious work, you want to
> use a language with statically allocated variables. That way, your
> processing won't be delayed for long periods of time at random
> intervals.
> John Savard

Very impressive! You knowledge of programming matches your knowledge in
other disciplines!

I know of no serious work in any related field to mine that relies on
statically allocated variables. Data, and therefore memory, management
is crucial but it is much too limiting to use static variables. Good
garbage collection works very well - bad garbage collection used poorly
can indeed cause long random delays. (I used other techniques in my major
programs.)

Chris

J Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> schrieb:
> On Tue, 15 Mar 2022 08:34:04 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc

>>A 3 GHz Core 2 Duo and a 2.67 GHz Core 2 Quad were made by Intel on a 65nm
>>process. 65 nm is where Dennard scaling came to an end. Later process nodes let
>>you put more on a single die, and let you make chips that used less energy...
>>but 65nm is... adequate. It is possible to make do with that fairly nicely if one has to.

We are now discussing computer architecture in rec.arts.sf.written and
science fiction in comp.arch. What is the world coming to?

> The thing is, on the modern battlefield, "fairly nicely" doesn't cut
> it.

Success or failure on the battlefield will not be determined by the
speed of a consumer-grade or server-grade CPU. Military equipment
is often decades old, and the long development and certification
process usually means that anything that is put into brand-new
military production is already outdated by civilian standards :-)

On 3/15/2022 6:51 AM, Quadibloc wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 5:39:59 AM UTC-6, J. Clarke wrote:
>
>> Russia, already a client state of China, isn't going to be doing much
>> dominating in that world.
>
> It's true that sanctions have made Russia more dependent on China,
> however, once it has Western Europe under its control, it will have
> sources for a number of items.
>
> John Savard

In another couple of weeks, there will not be a building left standing
in Ukraine.

Lynn

On 3/15/2022 10:34 AM, Quadibloc wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 8:39:46 AM UTC-6, J. Clarke wrote:
>
>> Now, today, Russia can't take Ukraine without Chinese weapons. There's
>> no way it's going to take down Germany, even if the rest of NATO
>> doesn't kick in.
>
> Russia and China are both denying that China is selling Russia weapons
> for use in Ukraine. Captured Russian drones show that Russia is using a
> lot of imported chips in its weapons, but if China did start making military
> sales to Russia for this war, *it* would start feeling the wrath of the
> United States, even if applying sanctions to China would be far more painful
> for the West than not trading with a largely irrelevant Russia.
>
> I was just watching a YouTube video on how Russia "couldn't survive" Western
> tech sanctions. I knew beforehand that China's domestic fabs can only make
> chips down to 14nm, which is behind the times, but not that terrible. The video
> noted that Russia's most advanced fab... can only make chips at 65nm.

That is probably those triple state chips: Yes, no, and maybe.

Lynn