41–50 of 436 posts
My first thought was actually that this was concerning EMP or radiological issues if Putin goes nuclear.
If Europe's power systems are anything like those in the US, Russia hopefully wouldn't risk a cascade failure going all the way to Russia with an EMP.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can surely argue that it's not worth the cost in good faith, but there's no way you can describe an invasion and demands of territorial annexation as "reasonable" and still be taken seriously.
I believe the parent was referring to Russia’s demand that the west agree to deny Ukraine membership to NATO and/or EU now and in the future. I’m not an expert on this though, that was just the impression I got. I don’t think anyone could say what’s happened since Feb is “reasonable”.
Mobile networks should of course be classified as critical infrastructure, and thus be exempt from any rolling blackouts.
They already are. The article is just sensationalist. And from all providers, they picked Deutsche Telekom, which is like the provider with the worst reputation in terms of reliability and service. Of course the german internet is in shambles if you ask DTAG... because theirs is.
Every other provider would like a word with you. I don’t even think there’s a good one outside tiny ones.
A typical cell tower uses 4kW to 5kW, sometimes less (at least in the states). That's reasonably close to a standard home's central air conditioner, or a home's electric stove/oven/range. I'd be highly surprised if, of all possible things, this is where they want to cut to lower electricity usage.
I think it's more about the cell towers being cut at the same time as their local area. Where it's easy to anticipate that hospitals/police stations/fire birgades will need a special connection to the grid, it probably was harder 20 years ago to realise the numerous new cell towers also needed to be put on a separate connection. So they'll get cut at the same time as the companies and the houses in the local area.
So they should have some kind of ability to target at least a kind of user. I don't know if cell towers qualify as industry or their own, separate kind.
There's also the fact that there has been a massive rollout of connected meters, so, at least in theory, they could target individual homes for the blackouts (I'm not saying that would be useful in any way).
I don't know if other kinds of endpoints have similar kinds of meters, but they could.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not as far, I know here in Europe. Why should they. For sure, they have batterys for one hour or so. But there is no second electric connection, to a diffrent electric grid. Something like that does not really exist, because our electric grid was not planed in mind for a such situation.
Most main base stations have diesel generators, not second power grid.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I believe the parent was referring to Russia’s demand that the west agree to deny Ukraine membership to NATO and/or EU now and in the future. I’m not an expert on this though, that was just the impression I got. I don’t think anyone could say what’s happened since Feb is “reasonable”.
How is that request in any way reasonable? It's an independent, sovereign state. Would Russia listen to any such requests or deem them reasonable?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I believe the parent was referring to Russia’s demand that the west agree to deny Ukraine membership to NATO and/or EU now and in the future. I’m not an expert on this though, that was just the impression I got. I don’t think anyone could say what’s happened since Feb is “reasonable”.
How is that request in any way reasonable? It's an independent, sovereign state. Would Russia listen to any such requests or deem them reasonable?
And, of course Russia would likely not acquiesce if such a demand were placed on them.
I think whether that demand is reasonable or not depends on one's perception. If one is a NATO ally or dependent, then anything that limits or reduces NATO power is a bad thing. If one is not, then demanding a buffer state between the sides seems like a middle-ground compromise from their point of view.
I'm only replying to these comments here to illustrate the importance of looking at a scenario from your opponent's point of view. Using the word "reasonable" requires context and perception. No matter how much one might disagree with the opponent, and how morally-right your side is, it's still important to do. It helps one understand their opponent's motivations and anticipated outcomes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I believe the parent was referring to Russia’s demand that the west agree to deny Ukraine membership to NATO and/or EU now and in the future. I’m not an expert on this though, that was just the impression I got. I don’t think anyone could say what’s happened since Feb is “reasonable”.
"Now" is actually reasonable. "In the future", not.