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

EU to mobilize 200B Euros to invest in AI

euronews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 150 posts

Re: EU to mobilize 200B Euros to invest in AI

#131

Post by mopsi »

voidr wrote: post #130
spwa4 wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But where do you get this info? This is bullshit. There are no 200k desertions, not even half that, even in the worst estimates. And because of immigration numbers in Europe ALONE we know for sure there are 1m desertions in Russia, from just the Russians that register as refugees in Europe. There were 100+km traffic jams JUST FROM DESERTERS LEAVING RUSSIA. Let's assume at least double that are in other destinations.…

Emigration or fleeing is not desertion, if you leave a country before being part of the army, you have fled the country but you did not desert. You have to be part of a military unit to have the ability to desert. You can look at Ukrainian sources about the desertion problem, there are videos of actual Ukrainian soldiers and commanders talking about this, they made laws around this issue. > Russia's entire army is in…

> So are the maps that I'm looking at all fake(including the Ukrainian ones) or the Russian army that is in shambles is till beating the Ukrainian army?

In what sense is half a percent of territorial gain for 400 000 casualties "beating" anyone? It is textbook Pyrrhic victory.

Size of Russian age groups (male), for comparison:

  20–24 years: 3.85 million
  25–29 years: 3.75 million
  30–34 years: 5.02 million
  35–39 years: 6.29 million
  40–44 years: 5.68 million
Russian "success" consists of rapidly burning through its male population for miniscule and unmeaningful gains. And before anyone says that war is non-linear and massive gains are only a breakthrough away: Russia has no armour left to exploit breakthroughs. Armour is depleted, territorial gains have stalled, daily losses are larger than ever before, and there's no end in sight. For most military strategists, being stuck in unwinnable war like this is a nightmare scenario. The war started with Russian media boasting how they'll be in Kyiv in three days; now they celebrate each time they manage to exchange tens of thousands of lives for an abandoned village in rural Ukraine.

Re: EU to mobilize 200B Euros to invest in AI

#132

Post by bArray »

spwa4 wrote: post #125
bArray wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the same in the UK. Pensioners had their heating allowance removed to plug a £22 bn 'black hole', whilst tonnes of money is pledged to AI. I can imagine the EU is in a similar state.

Removing AI investments will not plug a 22 bn "black hole". This is 200 million europe wide, and the UK is at best 1/6th of Europe if we're very generous.

The point being made is not about removing AI investments. The OP's comment:

> I am urprised how much money suddenly is available where other future-critical projects are starved of funding while needing just a fraction of that amount, specifically nuclear fusion.

The point is that money is found easily for such projects, whilst other important projects go unfunded due to a supposed lack of money. There is the appearance of dishonesty regarding budget availability.

Re: EU to mobilize 200B Euros to invest in AI

#133

Post by bArray »

voidr wrote: post #83
bArray wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the same in the UK. Pensioners had their heating allowance removed to plug a £22 bn 'black hole', whilst tonnes of money is pledged to AI. I can imagine the EU is in a similar state.

The UK is also sending eye-watering amounts of money to Ukraine without a problem, while everyone else is pulling out of the project. There was also the plan go give the Chagos islands to a country that is ~2000km away and pay them billions for the privilege of using them. There is always money to chase newspaper headlines.

> The UK is also sending eye-watering amounts of money to Ukraine without a problem, while everyone else is pulling out of the project.

The UK government has never been more obviously out of step with the rest of the West. Like it or not, the global stage is currently being driven by signals from Trump.

> There was also the plan go give the Chagos islands to a country that is ~2000km away and pay them billions for the privilege of using them.

Don't get me started on this. There is quite likely an amount of corruption involved there too.

Re: EU to mobilize 200B Euros to invest in AI

#134

Post by bArray »

r00fus wrote: post #123
voidr wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK is also sending eye-watering amounts of money to Ukraine without a problem, while everyone else is pulling out of the project. There was also the plan go give the Chagos islands to a country that is ~2000km away and pay them billions for the privilege of using them. There is always money to chase newspaper headlines.

It makes more sense when you realize that all the money being thrown into Ukraine is likely being funneled out as tax-exempt gains by one billionaire or another who gives kickbacks to the politicians who enable this grift. It's a giant grift, Ukraine has always unfortunately been a very corrupt country that enables such.

> It makes more sense when you realize that all the money being thrown into Ukraine is likely being funneled out as tax-exempt gains by one billionaire or another who gives kickbacks to the politicians who enable this grift.

The Western governments give Ukraine money, the money gets spent on weapons, the weapons are being bought from the West, Western government officials are stakeholders in weapons company growth & success.

Some government officials have a strange habit of multiplying their net work several times whilst in influential positions whilst on a relatively lower salary than would allow such gains.

Re: EU to mobilize 200B Euros to invest in AI

#135

Post by voidr »

mopsi wrote: post #131
voidr wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Emigration or fleeing is not desertion, if you leave a country before being part of the army, you have fled the country but you did not desert. You have to be part of a military unit to have the ability to desert. You can look at Ukrainian sources about the desertion problem, there are videos of actual Ukrainian soldiers and commanders talking about this, they made laws around this issue. > Russia's entire army is in…

> So are the maps that I'm looking at all fake(including the Ukrainian ones) or the Russian army that is in shambles is till beating the Ukrainian army? In what sense is half a percent of territorial gain for 400 000 casualties "beating" anyone? It is textbook Pyrrhic victory. Size of Russian age groups (male), for comparison: 20–24 years: 3.85 million 25–29 years: 3.75 million 30–34 years: 5.02 million 35–39 years:…

> In what sense is half a percent of territorial gain for 400 000 casualties "beating" anyone? It is textbook Pyrrhic victory.

Maybe gaining territory was not really the objective, maybe not all territory is considered equal.

Also they gained 20% of Ukraine along with some of it's population, if they gained more than 400 000(or whatever the actual number is) people, then the exchange was profitable.

It would have been interesting to see how many people would the US have been willing to sacrifice had the Cuban Missile Crisis would not have been averted.

> Russia has no armour left to exploit breakthroughs

They might be fighting with clubs, slingshots and shovels, but they are still gaining ground, so either this is not true, or the Russians are so good that they don't need armour. Since I have seen Ukrainian videos with recent dates that show columns of Russian armour, I would say that it's probably not true.

> territorial gains have stalled

They have actually accelerated, remember how long Bakhmut lasted? Now they are speedrunning it, they capture something militarily important almost every month.

> no end in sight

There is: Ukraine wants to recruit 18 year olds, clearly they are at the end of their rope.

> being stuck in unwinnable war like this is a nightmare scenario

They can freeze the conflict whenever they want, the Russians don't want to because they feel that they have the initiative, that's why it's so difficult to negotiate with them.

> abandoned village in rural Ukraine

In military context small villages can have significant importance. Landfills can be incredibly important as well even though they don't have much intrinsic value.

> exchange tens of thousands of lives

Maybe that's a win for them, maybe they just want to erase military power and even if their exchanges are less efficient it might still be worth it for them because they can absorb the higher cost in lives due to their larger population. I do believe that because the Russians are more numerous and have their own military industry, it's the Ukrainians that suffer more casualties, however it doesn't matter because if it meets their objective, it's a victory.

Re: EU to mobilize 200B Euros to invest in AI

#136

Post by mopsi »

voidr wrote: post #135
mopsi wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So are the maps that I'm looking at all fake(including the Ukrainian ones) or the Russian army that is in shambles is till beating the Ukrainian army? In what sense is half a percent of territorial gain for 400 000 casualties "beating" anyone? It is textbook Pyrrhic victory. Size of Russian age groups (male), for comparison: 20–24 years: 3.85 million 25–29 years: 3.75 million 30–34 years: 5.02 million 35–39 years:…

> In what sense is half a percent of territorial gain for 400 000 casualties "beating" anyone? It is textbook Pyrrhic victory. Maybe gaining territory was not really the objective, maybe not all territory is considered equal. Also they gained 20% of Ukraine along with some of it's population, if they gained more than 400 000(or whatever the actual number is) people, then the exchange was profitable. It would have bee…

> They have actually accelerated

They have not. In the first 30 days of the war, Russia captured some 22% of Ukraine. Successful Ukrainian counteroffensives in 2022 reduced this to 17-18%. In 2023 and 2024, Russia failed to regain its foothold and still occupies less than at the end of the first month of the war. All while monthly casualties have risen to the highest they've ever been.

The figures I mentioned - half a percent of territory, 400 000+ casualties - are for 2024 alone. All Russians have to show for such insane losses are militarily super-duper-important landfills, as you put it.

For a country with an aging society and already one of the lowest birth rates in the world, this is pure suicide. They will literally run out of young men before reaching Kyiv. The most cynical people in Washington must be real pleased with the way the war is going. Russia is losing people and permanently crippling itself, while the US population has grown by almost 100 million in the last 30 years.

Re: EU to mobilize 200B Euros to invest in AI

#137

Post by sgt101 »

tmnvdb wrote: post #116
ivewonyoung wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

UK and France(along with the US) have nukes, so it's a much different scenario than WW2.

France and the UK have nukes precisely because they did not believe that a country would be willing to risk total destruction to protect another country.

in every contingency - this is correct I think.

It's been very important to the Nato stance to have multiple nuclear armed states, it made Soviet calculations extremely difficult. With the USA leaving the alliance I think that either a joint Euro bomb needs to be developed or Germany needs to acquire one. Perhaps a polite fiction (continuing the current one by the USA) of France providing nukes for German, Dutch, Danish and Polish war planes could be used.

Re: EU to mobilize 200B Euros to invest in AI

#138

Post by voidr »

mopsi wrote: post #136
voidr wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In what sense is half a percent of territorial gain for 400 000 casualties "beating" anyone? It is textbook Pyrrhic victory. Maybe gaining territory was not really the objective, maybe not all territory is considered equal. Also they gained 20% of Ukraine along with some of it's population, if they gained more than 400 000(or whatever the actual number is) people, then the exchange was profitable. It would have bee…

> They have actually accelerated They have not. In the first 30 days of the war, Russia captured some 22% of Ukraine. Successful Ukrainian counteroffensives in 2022 reduced this to 17-18%. In 2023 and 2024, Russia failed to regain its foothold and still occupies less than at the end of the first month of the war. All while monthly casualties have risen to the highest they've ever been. The figures I mentioned - half…

> They have not.

> Russia captured some 22% of Ukraine

> Ukrainian counteroffensives in 2022 reduced this to 17-18%

Percentage of territory in terms of a war is not a good indicator of progress, especially taking into account the objective and the context here, if the Russians would capture Kharkiv that wouldn't be a big territorial gain, but it would be game over for Ukraine.

The Russians have captured Avdiivka(which was probably the most important victory), Vuhledar, Chasiv Yar, Toretsk, Niu-York, Kurakhove and many others, they have also rolled back all of the small gains made by the 2023 Ukrainian counteroffensive. Just remember that before it took like around 11 months to capture just Bakhmut and now I can't even count how many comparable victories they are having.

> militarily super-duper-important landfills, as you put it

I did mean actual waste heap, it might be funny to us, but for military purposes a waste heap can be important because it gives elevation same way as worthless fields on hills.

> For a country with an aging society and already one of the lowest birth rates in the world, this is pure suicide.

The Russians probably think that allowing Ukraine to become a NATO military power is even worse, if you look at it from that perspective it makes a bit more sense.

> They will literally run out of young men before reaching Kyiv.

Progress and casualties is not linear.

> The most cynical people in Washington must be real pleased with the way the war is going.

They were, until it started affecting them as well and when they realised what it's like to fight an opponent that has a military industry and all the natural resources it can ever need.

It was also an embarrassment for NATO.

> Russia is losing people and permanently crippling itself, while the US population has grown by almost 100 million in the last 30 years.

The US can grow 200 million this year if it wants to, that's not a good indicator of progress. Russia has also gained people from the territories it has annexed so far.

-------

For easy consumption I highly recommend the Military Summary Channel[1], they make daily videos and cite all their sources, you don't have to agree with their interpretation, you can check their sources instead. History Legends[2] is also good if you don't want the level of detail you can get from the Military Summary Channel.

For a different interpretation of what is the Russian perspective I highly recommend looking at John Mearsheimer, you can check out talks he gave before the war even started and see how well it holds up today[3].

Reason I believe my sources are better than the mainstream media, is because they managed to stay consistent all these years, whereas the mainstream media fumbled and flip-flopped on things that were easily verifiable.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/@militarysummary [2] https://www.youtube.com/@historylegends [3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4

Re: EU to mobilize 200B Euros to invest in AI

#139

Post by spwa4 »

voidr wrote: post #138
mopsi wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They have actually accelerated They have not. In the first 30 days of the war, Russia captured some 22% of Ukraine. Successful Ukrainian counteroffensives in 2022 reduced this to 17-18%. In 2023 and 2024, Russia failed to regain its foothold and still occupies less than at the end of the first month of the war. All while monthly casualties have risen to the highest they've ever been. The figures I mentioned - half…

> They have not. > Russia captured some 22% of Ukraine > Ukrainian counteroffensives in 2022 reduced this to 17-18% Percentage of territory in terms of a war is not a good indicator of progress, especially taking into account the objective and the context here, if the Russians would capture Kharkiv that wouldn't be a big territorial gain, but it would be game over for Ukraine. The Russians have captured Avdiivka(whic…

All of these channels are blatant Russian propaganda. They're also full of blatant lies. All 3 of them.

And as for the second channel ... sorry man WTF. An attack on Chernobyl's protection is NOT A FUCKING SUCCESS. That is a dumb failure on 10 different levels. It's not a military target, it was probably a stupid mistake, it's a waste of what looks like an expensive drone, it could cause yet another Russian nuclear disaster, ... the list goes on.

If this is how they prove how well the Russian army is doing, I'm going to have to start saying that even Trump is smarter than the Russians.

Re: EU to mobilize 200B Euros to invest in AI

#140

Post by mopsi »

voidr wrote: post #138
mopsi wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They have actually accelerated They have not. In the first 30 days of the war, Russia captured some 22% of Ukraine. Successful Ukrainian counteroffensives in 2022 reduced this to 17-18%. In 2023 and 2024, Russia failed to regain its foothold and still occupies less than at the end of the first month of the war. All while monthly casualties have risen to the highest they've ever been. The figures I mentioned - half…

> They have not. > Russia captured some 22% of Ukraine > Ukrainian counteroffensives in 2022 reduced this to 17-18% Percentage of territory in terms of a war is not a good indicator of progress, especially taking into account the objective and the context here, if the Russians would capture Kharkiv that wouldn't be a big territorial gain, but it would be game over for Ukraine. The Russians have captured Avdiivka(whic…

I don't see how the captured settlements indicate any better progress.

Avdiivka, the "greatest success" of 2024, was a small town with pre-invasion population of 32 000, less than 5 miles of the frontline on day 1 of the invasion in 2022. Avdiivka was literally visible from the windows of high-rise apartment buildings in Russian-occupied Donetsk. It took three years to get there.

All other listed are even smaller: Vuhledar 14 000, Kurakhove 5000. By now they are heaps of rubble where no-one lives. Compared to the capture of Crimea, which did not cost any lives and left Crimea intact, how is losing 400 000+ a year for such places not a total disaster?

Post reply on HN