What makes you say teetering on the edge of world war? Is there some recent news I've missed?
Predicting the severity of events in advance is difficult. I wouldn't listen to what historians predict today. Every catastrophe is different, but despite this people like to pretend (after the fact) all the signs were there and were obvious.
For all we know Ukraine will stay confined and China will just keep being belligerent but take no action.
China vs Taiwan standoff. China recently built a Taipei city center mock up in the desert. Taiwan controls 90%+ of global microchip production.
Recent Armenia vs Azerbaijan (supported by Turkey) war. More tension on border.
Israel levelled Gaza and killed 30,000 Palestinian civilians, and is striking Lebanon and Syria. Iran posturing back.
Posturing in Africa by Russia, France, and China.
North Korea being noisy as usual.
This is literally just the tip of the iceberg.
I completely missed the Armenia/Azerbaijan conflict, but from what I can tell, tensions there don't seem likely to pull many other countries into it. Curious if you have thoughts on that.
> Posturing in Africa by Russia, France, and China.
Can you explain why this would lead to a potential world war? Most of what I can find about this is foreign countries vying for economic influence, which seems unlikely to burst into conflict, especially one that would become a world war.
Africa is too much to summarize - basically look into what Wagner and US PMCs were doing there. It's just more proxy conflict.
Missiles and radar powered by Intel/Altera chips will do the job just fine until more domestic fab capacity can be spun up. Most defense products are running on processes from two decades or more ago and are already legally forced to consider adversarial supply chain issues.
2. "the things you're using these advanced chips for will no longer be relevant", "Missiles and radar powered by Intel/Altera chips will do the job just fine until more domestic fab capacity can be spun up." Hard-disagree. US advantage is in high resolution AESA sensors, thermals, and fast advanced processing and comms. We aren't talking Tomahawks and PESA radars when it comes to competitive advantage.
Finally, there is a reason why domestic fab capacity is ramping up slowly in the US and Russia doesn't have such capability to speak of - it's hard and the major powers are behind.
Which adversary would these chips yield an advantage against in a nuclear war?
Domestic fab capacity is ramping up slowly because these facilities are multi-billion-dollar, multi-decade endeavors. Intel's existing domestic fabs can make everything a war-fighting nation could need, capacity and capability-wise.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_winter#Criticism_and...
Just like magic... if enough people stop believing in nuclear winter, then it becomes a nuclear free for all.
On the other hand, do you really think any nuclear power, be it Russia, USA, China, would allow being defeated in an existential war and just dissolve without bringing down the whole world?
Fear gets clicks and views.
FTFY.
The USA should not involve itself in the affairs of others. Period. It’s just a modern form of colonialism where the UsA views itself as superior and a possessor of all knowledge and goodness and therefore the rest of the globe needs its help. This is not the case.
Yes. There's no source, no nuance, no justification, no explanation, no analysis, no hope, no details, it's as pure a jolt of dense negative emotion in one sentence as you can manage. You're choosing emotionally charged words like 'slaughter'. You're speculating that something halfway around the world will involve the reader's home country, because that makes it feel closer and more scary. It's absolutely fearmongering.
There were many people on HN, like you, the Russian government, and Snowden literally saying people were "fear mongering" because they were warning about the fact of the Russian invasion.
https://twitter.com/DAlperovitch/status/1770800449777549672
Do you have any evidence or track record to support your position? Any Russian invasion predictions you called successfully? If not, I'd leave dismissals of current US Gov. understanding of the situation to the full time geo-pol pro's who do successfully predict things.
> "told Ukrainians in 2021 that they were going to be invaded by Russia, which would mean 100,000+ of them killed and maimed, would you also say they were "fear mongering"
Maybe, this depends if they were commenting with good evidence because they were trying to get Ukranians to fight or escape, or if they were commenting because they wanted to make Ukranians afraid. The Ukrainian government saying "imminent invasion, 100,000+ of us will die, here's what we need to be doing" might not be fearmongering, Russia saying "we're imminently invading, 100,000+ of you will die" might be fearmongering. Americans telling each other "Russia will invade Ukraine, 100,000+ people will die, the world is ending, mass slaughter!, NATO will fall, Europe is history! Russia will move onto Georgia and then Poland!" absolutely would be fearmongering.
> "Do you have any evidence or track record to support your position?"
My position is that your comment is fearmongering. My evidence is your comment.
> "If not, I'd leave dismissals of current US Gov. understanding of the situation to the full time geo-pol pro's who do successfully predict things."
I'm not dismissing US Gov understanding of the situation, I'm criticising your fearmongering echoing of things. Do you have any track record of helping stop China invading Taiwan? If not, stop spreading fear for upvotes and leave the warfare preparations to the pros.
Ah, then your position falls apart. The more people would've been aware of Russia's plans for Ukraine, the earlier and better a formidable defense could've been. Same in as in Taiwan. That requires people understanding what the future possibly holds and how to deter the worst case.
Do you have any evidence or track record to support your position?