191–200 of 249 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> So what does my anecdata tell us? Nothing. You are surely right there, but having played with a ton of kids from all nationalities as well (football, handball, whatever) this episode still stood out for me, because it was much more brutal than anything else I had experienced out of tournaments and "serious" games. The game in question here was not even a hotel tournament, it was just a "hey, wanna play a round"-kin…
Should I judge all individuals by the country they come from? Within your own country, have you met people who are great and others who are not? Even within your own school or workplace? Although governments that run countries would have you believe there is such a thing as a country - this is merely a fiction that is commonly believed. There are no countries, just beliefs. There are no collectives either - that too…
Interesting question, but not one that my post circled about. As someone who grew up at the border between three nations/languages I can assure you that even within a 100 mile radius differing history and culture can change how a average person from that nation behaves. This is curious and one can spend a lot of time pondering about where these slight differences come from – and learn a lot about other cultures and maybe even your own on the way.
What one should – however – not do is extrapolating the character of individuals from their perceived nationality (something I never suggested would be a good idea).
> There are no countries, just beliefs.
Citation needed. I also believe that the idea of the nation is indeed a story we tell ourselves. But firstly stories we tell ourselves are incredibly powerful: They shape actual physical reality and individual actions, and secondly the difference in languages does shape our thinking and our actions and this also has been studied. Nation borders are often also language borders.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not if the media are state controlled.
Yes, ergo this take of ”people are either good or evil, regardless of country, religion etc.” is proven false
The common people are not "all the same". They can be made to hate and kill others, and under some leaders, in some eras and so on.
Yet — extrapolating from predominant culture in a country to everybody living in it is wrong as well.
I grew up in a 40% right wing environment and I got out of there as soon as I had the chance. Others either don't have the chance or can't so it because other things bind them to a place. The free spirits in such places suffer immensly. Yet you could argue that you are not helping them if you just tolerate their outrageous leaders.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Yeltsin regime was more democratic to you? How so?
More democratic to what? To an autocracy? Yes by definition
What I specifically want to hear from you - presumably someone knowledgeable about the political history of the Russian Federation - is how the Yeltsin administration was more democratic. Because my understanding is that the Yeltsin administration was extremely unstable (ie Yeltsin shelling the Russian white house after trying to unconstitutionally dissolve the parliament).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the crucial thing to understand is that current Russia isn’t just some “failed state” - it’s a crime syndicate that, due to historical mistake in 1990, was allowed to get its own country. See this thread for explanations: https://twitter.com/kamilkazani/status/1502673952572854278?s...
That assertion is rather unsatisfying given that Russia is indeed a nation state with 1000 or so years of history.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But these signals are from the real GPS birds, and they are really the ones for Las Vegas three weeks ago. They are completely authentic.
It sounds like you are referring to a replay attack. Mental model tweak: The signals aren't for a specific location, they are world-wide. So the "for Las Vegas" part doesn't work. Replay attacks are just a kind of denial of service. In that case, you may as well just use jamming. Spoofing attacks are far more dangerous, and cryptographic signing defeats them effectively.
The whole point of GPS is that the differential in signal timing between the signals from the transmitters on different satellites tells you how far you are from those satellites, and thus if you know where the satellites are supposed to be, that tells you where you must be.
As a result, recording the signals in a desert outside Las Vegas three weeks ago is by far the easiest way to get... drum roll... the signals which when received by your GPS receiver right now will convince it that right now it's three weeks ago and it is just outside Las Vegas.
> Replay attacks are just a kind of denial of service
Nope, as explained they're actually a very common and effective spoofing tactic. The receiver doesn't say "No service" it will tell you that you're outside Las Vegas three weeks ago.
> Spoofing attacks are far more dangerous, and cryptographic signing defeats them effectively.
Spoofing attacks use the same principle (although of course they'll tell your receiver it's a few milli-seconds ago and it is somewhere nearby, not outside Las Vegas three weeks ago).
Signatures make no major difference, this data is authentic it's just second hand. Everything checks out, that's why they do it.
The clear suggestion is that it is Russia doing it. Other than as an f-u, I don’t understand why they would though. If I have an effective weapon (GPS spoofer), surely I don’t want to alert the enemy to it, lest they develop defences. So eg say NATO were overreliant on GPS, incidents of spoofing like this will cause them to rethink and reduce that reliance, or harden the system.
Suggesting Russians are playing a rational game here? I think the cover has been pulled on the Russian "master strategy".. it's literally a hierarchy of terror and lies, where everyone will do whatever it takes to please the irrational autocrat. I have been spamming this lecture everywhere since the war started and again I think anyone who's still questioning the Russian operative reality should watch it: Evaluation…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
More democratic to what? To an autocracy? Yes by definition
That's not really an argument. All you've done is label the Yeltsin administration a democracy, and the Putin administration an autocracy, and then told me a democracy is more democratic than an autocracy. What I specifically want to hear from you - presumably someone knowledgeable about the political history of the Russian Federation - is how the Yeltsin administration was more democratic. Because my understanding i…
Yes, their attempt was a miserable failure in many ways, but it was a democracy, albeit a very shallow one.
The clear suggestion is that it is Russia doing it. Other than as an f-u, I don’t understand why they would though. If I have an effective weapon (GPS spoofer), surely I don’t want to alert the enemy to it, lest they develop defences. So eg say NATO were overreliant on GPS, incidents of spoofing like this will cause them to rethink and reduce that reliance, or harden the system.
If I were a NATO commander, I'd love to make sure the troops know how to do their basic shit even without GPS. It is entirely plausible that (in a major conflict) the GPS would be either jammed or destroyed, and I wouldn't like to be caught with my pants down.
However, if I were a NATO commander, I'd have trouble using GPS jammers near my training grounds, as it would cause interference to the civilians, who would loudly complain.
I think if I were a NATO commander, I'd pay Russians to jam the GPS for me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Suggesting Russians are playing a rational game here? I think the cover has been pulled on the Russian "master strategy".. it's literally a hierarchy of terror and lies, where everyone will do whatever it takes to please the irrational autocrat. I have been spamming this lecture everywhere since the war started and again I think anyone who's still questioning the Russian operative reality should watch it: Evaluation…
[dead]
Examples my friend, we need concrete examples. Otherwise this is like all other pro-Kreml astroturfing accounts which cry about Russia being misrepresented except they can never show any example exactly how they are being misrepresented.
Simply arguing semantics of pravda and istina and then calling the lecture false doesn’t mean anything.
And as it happens I read the Rob Lee article February 21st or 22nd in anticipation of the attack.
Question to you is - how does it provide anything of a conflicting point to the lecture? Zelensky tries to distance Ukraine from Russian political interference, so its OK to raze the country to the ground because…???