Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Europe braces for mobile network blackouts

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 436 posts

Re: Europe braces for mobile network blackouts

#341

Post by brabel »

ajross wrote: post #272
brabel wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me, it's completely obvious the truth is the exact opposite. I feel like only someone who is no longer thinking rationally can claim that Russia would blow up their own pipeline and make it impossible, even after hostilities cease (yes, they will cease one day, they always do... or are you still hostile to Germany?), to get billions and billions of easy Euro flowing down on its coffers. If you know history you sho…

> If you know history you should understand that a "small" even like this, in a highly volatile situation like we have now, could easily trigger an irrational war no one can win to start. I would think that Putin knows that very well Isn't the very existence of a ground war in Ukraine clear evidence that Putin does not "know that very well"? Your point seems to be "Putin clearly won't escalate because he already esca…

Russia made it clear since the 1990's that if Ukraine ever tried to go the NATO way, they would intervene... this war was a long time coming.

Now, you can't compare invading Ukraine, right on Russia's backyard, with invading or attacking a NATO country (or its supplies in this case, which has the same effect).

My argument was not the Biden did it :D is that really what you read from what I wrote?? My argument is that someone in the West (or just on Ukraine's side), not thinking rationally anymore, may have been responsible. That's the only thing that fits with all we know so far - lots of people in the West see Putin as the new Hitler... would you do everything in your power to stop Hitler if you were in a position you believed you could?

If you believe only a Government has the capability to do such thing... then it's not so difficult to find one that would be "desperate" enough. Ukraine itself seems to be the one who would most benefit from NATO entering the war, right? But would they really risk getting caught and losing the trust of NATO? I don't know, but when your country is half in ruins you may not think straight anymore.

Re: Europe braces for mobile network blackouts

#342

Post by j-pb »

retinaros wrote: post #323
j-pb wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You accuse other of irrationality, yet you prop up a straw-man that's been debunked over and over again. Nobody argues that renewables deliver peak power all of the time. The goal is to have enough capacity and intermediary storage to be able to deliver constant peak power with both combined. The current economic situation would be much better had we spend all our money on renewables and storage instead of nuclear an…

there is no storage capability that would allow europe to work on renewable it doesnt scale just look at how your storage batteries are made! look ar how lithium is harvested please…

Theres plenty of other ways to store energy.

Insulated thermal for example is extremely cheap and can be retrofitted to existing power plants. All you need is a insulated steel vessel filled with something inert when heated, e.g. sand. If you want to go real fancy you could use quicklime, that could be used both as a bulk heat store and additonally releases more energy in it's hydration bonds than lithium ion batteries.

You can actually run a surprising amount of existing coal plants on iron dust, which when burned becomes iron oxide, which can then be recycled to metalic iron.

Northern germany has many salt caverns which can be used as pressurised air storage.

Southern germany also has huge pumped hydro storage potentials.

Batteries are one storage technology, there are plenty others, far cheaper if you just want bulk and dont't care about space.

Re: Europe braces for mobile network blackouts

#343

Post by mecsred »

mrtksn wrote: post #157
scifibestfi wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people are fed up with dangerously incompetent leadership, who literally laughed when warned to not be dependent on Russia for energy. It's not a meaningless culture war. The loss of energy means lower standard of living at best and mass death and famine at worst.

The solution is not obvious, it's obvious only to zealots. It's kind of obvious that the solution is in PHV and wind energy but you can fight it to death with people who would claim that it's obvious that the solution is Nuclear energy. This is not a good discussion, this is fanatics fighting. Anytime someone suggest simple solution to a big problem %99.9 of the time they don't actually have a simple and obvious solu…

"The solution is not obvious, it's obvious only to zealots. It's kind of obvious that the solution is [...]"

Seriously?

Re: Europe braces for mobile network blackouts

#344

Post by gambiting »

avgcorrection wrote: post #315
gambiting wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trying to scare EU/NATO to back off or a country of 50 million people will go without gas this winter isn't a rational theory? Seems like a very clear thing to threaten in this situation. >>Hence the obvious question: why would one theory be more likely than any other? Well, I mean, some theories are obviously more likely than others - it's more likely that Russia blew it up than that Japan blew it up, right?

No, it isn’t a rational theory. Because the only elaboration you have given is that you are a worried Polish person. Putin has already given quite brazen warnings like “remember that we have nukes”. And yet he would covertly sabotage Russia’s own pipeline? What kind of a limp-wristed warning is that? > Well, I mean, some theories are obviously more likely than others - it's more likely that Russia blew it up than tha…

>>No, it isn’t a rational theory.

Again, I don't really see why. What's so irrational about threatening enormous economical and societal consequences in a situation like this? Surely it's a credible threat? Is it just the fact that I'm Polish that bothers you about it, because you maybe think I can't keep a straight head about it?

>>What kind of a limp-wristed warning is that?|

The same one as poisoning your critics with unique poison that only Russia could have and then denying any responsibility, I guess? Sends a message, which is the main point.

>>Any more brilliant counters?

Do you think we can have this discussion without you being sarcastic?

Re: Europe braces for mobile network blackouts

#345

Post by brabel »

cinntaile wrote: post #245
brabel wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Russia has only turned off the tap after Europe had already turned off every possible economical tap flowing in the direction of Russia, so in a sense, Europe did it all by itself. Sure, it's the right thing to do for Europe as no one want to help Russia sponsor the war on Ukraine... but that doesn't change the fact that Russia wouldn't just turn off the tap without Europe turning highly hostile to it and basically l…

This is not true, Russia started reducing output last summer. Before their invasion of Ukraine.

They spent billions to create the second pipeline to *increase* exports... are you trying to say they didn't have interest in increasing output? Why?!

Re: Europe braces for mobile network blackouts

#346

Post by avgcorrection »

5560675260 wrote: post #336
avgcorrection wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it isn’t a rational theory. Because the only elaboration you have given is that you are a worried Polish person. Putin has already given quite brazen warnings like “remember that we have nukes”. And yet he would covertly sabotage Russia’s own pipeline? What kind of a limp-wristed warning is that? > Well, I mean, some theories are obviously more likely than others - it's more likely that Russia blew it up than tha…

Reminding about nukes doesn't work. The only outcome is being reminded by US that Russia will not survive consequences of using them. Nobody takes that as a serious treat. Now pipes being blown up in a somewhat deniable way is treat, because that's something that can realistically happen without Moscow being nuked in the process. Russia being a culprit here is so unthinkable for you probably because you vastly overes…

> Reminding about nukes doesn't work. The only outcome is being reminded by US that Russia will not survive consequences of using them. Nobody takes that as a serious treat.

The world would not survive the consequences of a full-scale nuclear war. It is still rational to fear nuclear war because hasty decisions could still bring it about.

> Russia being a culprit here is so unthinkable for you probably because you vastly overestimate value of pipelines being affected. NS2 was never going to deliver gas, NS1 was turned off, likely forever. And hey, Yamal is still there, unaffected, if Russia actually will want to sell anything to Europe instead of China.

So it is unthinkable to me because I overestimate the value of the affected pipelines. So Putin wanted to send a strong message by sabotaging useless infrastructure.

A light bulb has gone off and I can see things clearly...?

Refer to my other comment about blowing up a Russian ghost town to “send a message”. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33026408

Re: Europe braces for mobile network blackouts

#347

Post by hef19898 »

megous wrote: post #340
hef19898 wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where did you get that idea from? Without looking it up, I suspect Germany, as a NATO country, helped Ukraine as other NATO allies did. And supported the orange revolution, as the other EU nations did before 2014.

https://www.dw.com/en/rheinmetall-poised-to-honor-military-d...

Some quick numbers: 2020/21 exports of weapons from EU cointries to Russia were aroind 100 million (or thereabouts, might even include icebreakers, good luck using those for conquering Mariupol). Since February 2022 EU countries committed to send 2.5 billion of military gear to the Ukrainian forces.

I guess details and context still matter.

Re: Europe braces for mobile network blackouts

#348

Post by MichaelCollins »

tomp wrote: post #292
MichaelCollins wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Germans particularly have a lot of good reason to dislike nuclear weapons . If the Soviet Union had ever sent tanks through the Fulda Gap, NATO would have dropped a lot of tactical nukes on Germany to stop it. They had plans for it all drawn up, weapon systems invented specifically for this, etc. NATO and the Soviets were both planning to actually continue fighting through a nuclear war. Those in power viewed a nucle…

This is beyond illogical. Funny enough, having nuclear weapons is the best way BAR NONE to avoid becoming a nuclear (or any other kind of) battlefield.

There were a ton of nuclear weapons in Germany, that didn't belong to Germany, and I think those nukes ultimately dissuaded the feared war. It's easy to see in hindsight that there was no war, but at the time the situation seemed very dangerous.

Re: Europe braces for mobile network blackouts

#349

Post by DiogenesKynikos »

Maursault wrote: post #337
DiogenesKynikos wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I cannot see how one can claim that the US invasion of Iraq was less barbaric than the Russian invasion of the Ukraine. First of all, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis died. The US practiced torture, as we all found out when the pictures of Abu Ghraib came out. The US worked with Shiite militias that conducted ethnic cleansing and torture on a massive scale. The US put down uprisings in places like Sadr City, Najaf and…

> I cannot see how one can claim that the US invasion of Iraq was less barbaric than the Russian invasion of the Ukraine. First of all, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis died. >> Estimates of the total number of Iraqi war-related deaths are highly disputed. According to Keith Krause of the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva, Switzerland, "the consensus seems to be that around 150,000 pe…

Estimates of total deaths in Iraq due to the war generally come up with a figure of several hundred thousand. You can look at the page you linked to for examples of these studies.

Iraq Body Count tracked 120k individually verifiable civilian deaths in Iraq through 2011 (a figure that has increased significantly since, due to the rise of ISIS, which was a side-effect of the Iraq War). But in a war zone, many (maybe even most) deaths go unrecorded. If you use survey methods (going random homes to ask for death certificates) to try to get a statistical estimate of the number of deaths, you find a number that is a factor of a few higher, as several studies in Iraq have shown.

Re: Europe braces for mobile network blackouts

#350

Post by brabel »

5560675260 wrote: post #336
avgcorrection wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it isn’t a rational theory. Because the only elaboration you have given is that you are a worried Polish person. Putin has already given quite brazen warnings like “remember that we have nukes”. And yet he would covertly sabotage Russia’s own pipeline? What kind of a limp-wristed warning is that? > Well, I mean, some theories are obviously more likely than others - it's more likely that Russia blew it up than tha…

Reminding about nukes doesn't work. The only outcome is being reminded by US that Russia will not survive consequences of using them. Nobody takes that as a serious treat. Now pipes being blown up in a somewhat deniable way is treat, because that's something that can realistically happen without Moscow being nuked in the process. Russia being a culprit here is so unthinkable for you probably because you vastly overes…

> Nobody takes that as a serious treat.

You misunderstood the threat (probably because news are always distorting things and people tend to believe uncritically in times of war). Putin's threat is very clear: he will use tactical nukes ("small" scale ones) to defend "Russia" against aggression... by annexing part of Ukraine, he gets the excuse he needed to use them against Ukrainian forces... that's why the Kremlin keeps pointing out to their "nuclear doctrine" which states that Russia may use nukes in self-defense. The annexation makes total sense when you understand that.

People claiming the threats are directed at western Europe countries are misinformed or trying to generate panic intentionally. If that was the actual threat, you would be right, it wouldn't be a serious one... but the one he actually meant is very close to becoming a reality... just wait a few weeks and you'll see it... specially in case Ukraine continues imparting serious losses on Russian forces. There's approximately zero chance Russia will just go away from the territories it occupies now.

Post reply on HN