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

U.S. to dismantle system tracking Atlantic currents that are at risk of collapse

e360.yale.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 540 posts

Re: U.S. to dismantle system tracking Atlantic currents that are at risk of collapse

#531

Post by smcin »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #460
smcin wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you mean Operation Spiderweb, the Ukrainian Osa drone only had a range of 5 miles/ 8km (one-way) and had to be launched from the roof of containers simultaneously transported unknowingly by Russian truckers and that was a covert operation that took 18 months to set up. So no that particular model couldn't attack even 10 miles away. Ukraine has other long-range strike drones but haven't heard of more than a thousan…

Details, details. The drones got the job done, didn't they? Getting a truck to within a few miles of the target is still pretty cheap compared to traditional weapons-delivery methodologies. Spiderweb was a modern-day Doolittle Raid. It didn't scale, at least not immediately, but it still changed the tenor of the war. It put the Russians on notice that they weren't safe. Not that the Russians care, but most countries…

The Doolittle Raiders actually flew B-25Bs 2600 miles, they didn't hitch a ride on a Japanese cargo ship, though. Spiderweb maybe more resembles the 2024 Lebanon pager attack than the Doolittle Raid.

Sure it was a huge shock to Russia but clearly was a once-off, and required undercover Ukrainian operatives to assemble the smuggled drone parts near the Ukrainian or Kazakh borders, and Russian truckers to unwittingly move containers. All of that operation was revealed and probably can not be repeated; the operatives were evacuated.

> It put the Russians on notice that they weren't safe. Not that the Russians care, but most countries would.

Well there was no GSM jamming near sensitive Russian sites but there is now, and that seems to be annoying Russian civilians intensely, along with internet blocking.

Re: U.S. to dismantle system tracking Atlantic currents that are at risk of collapse

#532

Post by amanaplanacanal »

xp84 wrote: post #526
amanaplanacanal wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

51 votes can get rid of the filibuster. You don't need 60.

Democrats don’t have 51 either, because they don’t believe in persuading voters anymore, just performing for their most dedicated fans.

It flips back and forth. We'll what happens in a few months. Could go either way.

Re: U.S. to dismantle system tracking Atlantic currents that are at risk of collapse

#533

Post by mindslight »

mothballed wrote: post #497
mindslight wrote: post #491

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So you're back to to "fallacy" of market efficiency, expecting private actors to advocate to foot taxes with an expected ROI from capturing the value delivered Or I'm pointing to the existence of arguments that fall outside of your paradigm of reasoning through direct economic self interest. I'd guess the flip flopping you're feeling here comes from trying to shoehorn my argument into your paradigm, and it not fitt…

>The resulting logical contradiction does not imply an error in my argument, but rather the inapplicability of the paradigm you're attempting to use. This is a diabolical level of gaslighting to present your logical contradiction as my fault. Perhaps the "shoehorning" you're finding is in fact a function of forcing your reasoning into the premise of appeal to economic value to which I responded while simultaneously d…

All you've seem to have done here is push your own favored framework, and then argue reflexively based on it. My initial point was that the assumptions of your framework would seem to be incorrect. You merely translated my point into your framework, and then blamed me for the resulting logical contradiction.

The specific problem here is imagining market participants as efficient actors. In reality, it's more like an NP-hard problem, and making logical appeals based around abstract models is exactly how we try to convince other market participants that something is in their interest (eg the comment you originally responded to).

In general, there was no need to come out swinging at me and accusing me of "gaslighting". Try more understanding, and less arguing. You'll get further.

Re: U.S. to dismantle system tracking Atlantic currents that are at risk of collapse

#534

Post by xp84 »

tombert wrote: post #494
xp84 wrote: post #489

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Case in point, the several proud Democrats I've offended, who can't refute any of this reality, the downvote being their only copium.

It's just the same old "blame everyone but the idiots that voted for Trump" excuse that was stupid in 2024, 2025, and 2026. I didn't downvote your comment (and couldn't even if I wanted to because it's a direct reply), but I did think the comment was pretty silly.

As long as you believe only "idiots" vote for the other party, you still don't get it.

Re: U.S. to dismantle system tracking Atlantic currents that are at risk of collapse

#535

Post by denismi »

fnordpiglet wrote: post #475
denismi wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He didn’t win a majority of the votes Donald Trump plus candidates who withdrew from the race and endorsed Donald Trump DID get a majority of votes though.

I apologize but I don’t understand this metric - you’re saying Trump would have gotten the majority if republicans who didn’t vote for him had voted for him ? That’s some serious squinting and if you do that I’ll just take everyone who voted for Biden in the primary and add it to Harris and now she won close to 70% of the votes? Maybe add in Obama’s last election results and every democrat that ever ran in any races…

Coming from Australia, which has a more sensible electoral system, I instinctively think about "preference flows" of the minority candidates when I look at these numbers.

Trump was 316,571 short of majority, Harris was 2,601,538.

Neither party gained an absolute majority because 2.9 million out of 155.2 million voters picked third-party candidates: 862,049 Green, 756,393 RFKJr, 650,126 Libertarian, 171,786 PSL, and 477,755 "other".

One of the many failings of the US electoral system is that it effectively ignores these 2,918,109 million voters. But, if forced to state a preference between the two majority candidates, how do you genuinely think they would've gone?

I don't think there's any question that, even just among the 756,393 people who voted for a guy actively campaigning for Trump, there are 316,571 people who would prefer a Trump presidency over a Harris presidency.

That in itself - if 100% of Greens and 100% of Libertarians, and 100% of PSL, and 100% of "other", and the other 58.14% of RFKJr voters ALL prefer Harris - is enough to grant an absolute majority to Trump.

If you plug more realistic guesstimates into preference distributions for the minor candidates, I don't think there is a plausible run-off result below 50.5-49.5 Trump out of those numbers.

Re: U.S. to dismantle system tracking Atlantic currents that are at risk of collapse

#536

Post by cmxch »

sofixa wrote: post #359
dotancohen wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US military deterrence has been a paper tiger ever since Biden told Iran "don't" [1], and Iran did, and Biden did not respond. Now whoever the sitting US president would be - Trump or anybody else - must restore that deterrence. There is no nice or easy way to do that. The last time the US had to do that was during WW2 and the enemies were not floating heavy, extended media campaigns and funding US universities at th…

The reason why Iran was even back in the nuclear game was because a moron pulled out of the JCPOA that was giving them concrete steps and carrots to get them to stop.

For the benefit of those who missed it the first time:

The Just Cash Pallets Over Americans agreement, where Iran was rewarded for all the wrong things and the public kept in the dark.

Re: U.S. to dismantle system tracking Atlantic currents that are at risk of collapse

#537

Post by jazzypants »

tekknik wrote: post #496
runako wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I will remember from now on that you can compare war to Lebron playing in a championship game but not to him playing in a pickup game. The stakes of a given situation matter to the disposition of the participants. Is this not obvious? I'm really confused as to what your larger point is. Nobody disagrees that the US military can kill untold numbers of people and cause untold damage in Iran and the wider region. Was…

[flagged]

Literally, every single person I know is against the Iran War except for two. They're also the only Trump supporters left in my social circle. The cult of personality is getting pretty sad.

Re: U.S. to dismantle system tracking Atlantic currents that are at risk of collapse

#538

Post by dotancohen »

sofixa wrote: post #484
dotancohen wrote: post #479

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are talking about reforming Iran. You used the word yourself. > people like Ahmadinejad Oh, this guy: - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad_and_Israel - https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-23538717 Let's look at some of his policies: - Holocaust denial - Calling for the destruction of the state of Israel - Provided funding, training and arms to Hezbollah and Hamas - Condemned by the UK, Germa…

Look, in geopolitics it's good to be realistic. Is Iran, ran by hateful men, but open to trade, integration, reform , inspections and having a lot to lose perfect? Of course it fucking isn't. But realistically it's the best we could have had. Instead we have Iran ruled by even more hateful men. Men that saw their families blown up in front of them, and have nothing to lose. The economy is already shit, and they don't…

  > open to trade, integration, reform, inspections
I've never seen an Iranian source claim that Iran is open to integration or reform. Why would Iran change their policies, culture, or government to be like The Great Satan - that's how they refer to the US.

The Iranians are as interested in reforming their society into American ideals, as Americans are interested in reforming American society into Iranian ideals.

Re: U.S. to dismantle system tracking Atlantic currents that are at risk of collapse

#539

Post by dotancohen »

nixon_why69 wrote: post #507
dotancohen wrote: post #469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, living under constant rocket threat does affect one's perspective. I personally was injured in an Iranian rocket attack on Israel. My children have had their camp counselors kidnapped and murdered. And their teachers. And thier friends. My daughter attended the funeral of a close friend who was murdered in his home, along with his sister and brother and both parents. I could go on. I know two women whose babies…

You were injured by a rocket counterattack . It's a distinction that reasonable people would give some thought and reflection.

No, Israel did not attack Iran previous to the Iranian attack on Israel. I don't know where you get your news from, but I suspect they are distorting facts to push a narrative.

I suggest reading Arab, Persian, and Israeli sources. Telegram makes this easy with built-in translation - and Hamas has an official Telegram channel.

Re: U.S. to dismantle system tracking Atlantic currents that are at risk of collapse

#540

Post by Domenic_S »

dclowd9901 wrote: post #456
Domenic_S wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 1) it's not hard to do your own research. If you're here, I assume you know how. What an awful take. The point of news shouldn't be "assume I'm right and the readership takes my word for it". It should help the reader come to a conclusion, because it's news and not opinion . If you have to go do your own research not to dig deeper but because the article failed to even cover the basic arguments, it has utterly and…

There is no such thing as a complete piece of information and it is unreasonable to expect every published piece of every bit of information to contain all required context to understand it. I'm not defending the Yale article's basic miss on the information, but rather your laziness on looking for more information when something came across your purview. If someone said to you "hey, I heard they're pulling back on me…

You're full of awful takes, aren't you.

Yale's E360 Digest is not a buddy mentioning a topic in passing.

Have some standards.

Post reply on HN