101–110 of 119 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The list of countries "casually arming up" and talking about bringing back conscription is a little concerning.
As someone who went through conscription in Germany, the last year to do so (I think), it's a huge relief to me. Almost three decades of neglect and naivete have made the world less safe, not more. Deterrence works.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As someone who went through conscription in Germany, the last year to do so (I think), it's a huge relief to me. Almost three decades of neglect and naivete have made the world less safe, not more. Deterrence works.
Question from a fellow European - Germany has conscription? What?
It’s hardly gonna be mass production with 100 staff, hardly worth mentioning. I think Motorola had a fab in the South West once upon a time. And Inmos in Newport in the South East.
Newport, South Wales has a fab that specialises in silicon for power electronics
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I grew up with the story that Hong Kong was just as off limits to China as Taiwan was Not sure when you grew up but that has been obviously false for at least 40 years
the brits gave up hong kong in the 90s. as soon as that happened no one was expecting them to back the case. however, i suppose the brits were optimistic so they didnt have to have regret about losing a colony. i think taiwan might get some defense but only cause shit is made there and the west cant pretend the chinese wont flex their power
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm under the impression that time is actually working for China and that they don't really require a war; they'll catch up economically soon enough (5-10y) that a war doesn't benefit them at all, and only the US would benefit from one right now, while they still have a chance of nipping their primacy in the bud.
If Nationalism weren’t a factor, there is essentially zero reason for the PRC to ever invade Taiwan. Nationalism is a factor and the PRC is a totalitarian dictatorship. They’re going to go after what they consider their “rogue province” sooner or later, and whether it benefits them economically or not is a footnote.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Some major global powers (i.e. China) have a vested interest in that escalation. Having the US tied down in two other conflicts means significantly less resources. Which means Middle East and Ukraine are already part of a global-ish war. Proxy wars, so far, but in service of a larger goal. (No, I don't think China necessarily instigated, but they're sure supporting ongoing conflict) As part of that, I'd also assume t…
I'm under the impression that time is actually working for China and that they don't really require a war; they'll catch up economically soon enough (5-10y) that a war doesn't benefit them at all, and only the US would benefit from one right now, while they still have a chance of nipping their primacy in the bud.
But also: For China, Taiwan is only to a very limited extent about the economy. It is about ideology. For the US, a war now would be a bad idea - only slightly better than it would be a little later. There's an increasing gap in naval abilities (that'll - so the Pentagon thinks officially - close in the 2030s)
That means that we're currently in an unstable time. War is possible, but not a given. Meanwhile, if war happens, the US can't fight on three fronts. And so both Ukraine and the mideast conflicts strengthen China's hand if it comes to war, and weaken the US's. Similarly, an independent EU with at least some manufacturing capability lessens US constraints.
At the moment, things are all about shaping the odds.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If Nationalism weren’t a factor, there is essentially zero reason for the PRC to ever invade Taiwan. Nationalism is a factor and the PRC is a totalitarian dictatorship. They’re going to go after what they consider their “rogue province” sooner or later, and whether it benefits them economically or not is a footnote.
Them being a totalitarian dictatorship doesn't necessarily mean they're stupid. I doubt they would risk their economy just because of Taiwan. They may go after it at some point in the future when the odds are in their favor (because they're obviously not right now), but I doubt it'll be soon.
No, but it does mean that they are significantly more prone to irrational decisions. And Xi's not exactly ultra-rational to start with.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Them being a totalitarian dictatorship doesn't necessarily mean they're stupid. I doubt they would risk their economy just because of Taiwan. They may go after it at some point in the future when the odds are in their favor (because they're obviously not right now), but I doubt it'll be soon.
> Them being a totalitarian dictatorship doesn't necessarily mean they're stupid. No, but it does mean that they are significantly more prone to irrational decisions. And Xi's not exactly ultra-rational to start with.
The PRC has actually managed to successfully stave off a few leadership crisis’s already, but one of the ways they did so was by moving away from a dictatorship of one and establishing term limits and a model that encourages leadership to think about the next generation and ready a successor. Xi Jinping just re-established a dictatorship of one with an unlimited term length and will presumably serve as the PRC’s strongman dictator for the rest of his natural life creating new opportunities for a succession crisis or for himself to just fall prone to old age. He wasn’t shy about killing off anyone that could have challenged him during his initial election to Premier and associated offices, we have no reason to think he’ll be any different than any other tinpot dictator in history and kill off anyone that looks like they might be gathering too much influence under his rule or looking just a little too eager to be his successor.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the sense in that literally everything in the world is quantum, sure. But no, I mean sensors which derive their input channel from explicitly quantum effects. Gravometers, magnometers, atomic clocks, etc. are often quantum sensors.
possibly you meant 'gravimeters'; a gravometer is evidently a 19th-century density measurement instrument. plenty of gravimeters are as purely classical as anything electrical is, and those that prominently feature quantum effects are superconducting gravimeters. i don't see how a gaas fab is relevant to either mems gravimeters or superconducting gravimeters! similarly 'magnometers' are not a thing, and magnetometers…