JasonADrury

> considering Iran is building drones for Russia

Not a meaningful supplier anymore, Russia just took the designs and onshored the manufacturing.

If you ask people in Palestine living under brutal Israeli aggression for decades, you will find that most of them share that emotion of genocidal bloodlust.

If you ask people in Israel about Palestinians, you'll find that a huge chunk of them share that emotion of genocidal bloodlust.

It's an extremely human reaction. Something hurts you, doesn't really matter what it is. You'll want to get rid of it.

Pretty sure Trump would be more than glad to deliver you to the promised land of Florida, or something. It's probably enough to just write the US embassy and ask them to arrange Aliyah to Palm Beach.

People who were actively told that they wouldn't be deployed ended up being deployed in very recent history, they could be sitting at home reasonably worried about that.

Perhaps they're a national guardsman, for example?

At this point a good solution for de-escalation would be the voluntary relocation of Israeli citizens, as has been proposed by the Israeli government for citizens of other nations.

Given that Israelis are by far the least liked group in the region, why shouldn't they be the ones relocating? Instead of say, the Palestinians?

Excuse it? No, I'll excuse people wishing it. Certainly any attack on Israeli civilians is despicable and generally counterproductive.

He might be a member of the US military?

> The big finding: Claude Code builds, not buys

At some point we'll have to start summarily executing people for doing this.

I for one will go full Kaczynski before I submit to being constantly surrounded by horrible AI generated writing.

The important thing to remember is that this is the banks problem.

Where does the liquidity come from? You'd get rid of HFTs but you would still need market makers

Pretty sure I just suffered permanent brain damage thanks to your link.

You can't live in a vacuum, and you'll struggle to find a career in "pure finance".

> The mistake that the west is making is assuming moving piles of money from one place to another is the actual work.

Nobody assumes that.

Modern financial system is the single greatest invention in the history of man for pushing resources towards things like "crop harvesting efficiency, new medicines, etc"

Did I suggest otherwise?

> not really any better than the old hollow tennis ball trick and more trackable as well.

Depends on the size of the prison and it's perimeter, but in many cases yeah.

Lets be realistic, at best it actually means:

"We have thousands of possible detections of an unknown number of possible drones that are possibly being used by cartels to surveil the border in order to smuggle"

You need market makers like Jane Street to have well functioning markets.

The markets have shown themselves to be an excellent way of applying human potential to things like crop harvesting efficiency, new medicines.

High frequency quants almost certainly don't directly provide a massive social good, but they're one of the many facilitators enabling the smooth functioning of markets that do.

But FWIW, the comment I was replying didn't seem to be specifically critical of high frequency quants. Dismissing the entire field as something that doesn't contribute to society is beyond absurd.

>Can you imagine human potential if it was somehow applied to crop harvesting efficiency, new medicines, etc?

How is finance not exactly that?

In 1968 Marvin Minsky defined “artificial intelligence” as “the science of making machines do things that would require intelligence if done by men”

I suspect Alan Turing would also have disagreed with you, but to my knowledge he didn't actually use the precise words "artificial intelligence" so maybe we can disregard him.

But hey, your definition is much better established, right?

What you're proposing is in fact a brand new definition of AI. There are terms in use to describe what you want, AGI and ASI for example are more in that direction.

A lot of escorts have OF profiles.

Why? Why should we suddenly subscribe to your brand new definition of "AI"?

>- Headlin eexaggeration. "point blank range" reads like the whole event was muzzle-close. In the report it’s basically "8 shots from between vehicles" + one inferred 1–4m shot. That’s not killed point blank.

I'm sure all those distances are well below the point blank range of the weapons used by the IDF soldiers.

Possible, but we don't really have any genuinely convincing reason to believe that there are any particularly damning (in terms of criminal conduct) files there.

I suggest you look up the concept of CEP, circular error probable. It's a very important measure when discussing weapons like these.

Modern western rocket artillery will strike your target from tens of kilometers away within a circle of a couple of meters.

Your typical Grad will have CEP in excess of 1.5% of range. So at 10KM you'll have only half of your rockets land within 150 meters of your target.

These are weapons where your target selection amounts to "fuck someone in that general direction". Not "better shoot at that guy before he shoots at us". Fundamentally useless for fighting wars.

The Grads can be vaguely useful, but Hamas doesn't have the launch platforms to field them as an area denial weapon as originally intended.

EDIT: and you can probably stop reading right here, I'm mostly just repeating myself after this point.

> They've killed multiple people, including kids

I never thought I'd laugh at the idea of kids being killed, but in this context it comes across as pretty hilarious. This is not a good feature in a weapon of war! In war you typically want to kill enemy soldiers, not kids.

You can point a Gazan artillery rocket towards an urban center, maybe hit someone and kill a kid. It is not feasible to hit a target more specific than that using these weapons.

You can't fire one at a smallish enemy position.

>The reality is that Hamas also had dozens if not hundreds of R-160 / M-302 medium range rockets (up to 200km) and long range Ayyash 250 rocekts (travel more than 200km).

Hamas having dozens if not hundreds of M-302s is certainly a claim I'd love to see evidence for, but even if it were true this isn't very impressive at all. These are terribly inaccurate unguided artillery rockets! Western militaries don't really have much in terms of equivalents because they're practically useless.

>People like to pretend Hamas was a tiny force. The reality is what I said: it was larger than many European militaries, with an arsenal to match.

This is a straight up lie. Hamas had a plenty of manpower, but certainly has never had an arsenal to match. Artillery rockets you can realistically only use to indiscriminately strike civilian areas are absolutely useless when fighting a war.

>This admin has so far acted like a kleptocracy and, like, because of the Epstein files if they lose power many will go to jail, so there's a huge incentive to remain in power.

This is a bold claim that requires some evidence to accompany it.

So far there's been very little in the Epstein files to implicate anyone of consequence in any criminal activities.

When the rare documents that actually did offer evidence of potentially criminal behavior surfaced, Andrew and Mandelson were swiftly arrested. We can see that the evidence is being acted upon, it's just not very exciting.

Stronger in munitions? One western artillery shell is worth countless Qassam rockets. The Qassam rockets are largely useless from a military perspective because you aren't going to hit anything with them.

This is an apples and oranges type comparison, except Hamas is stuck with crabapples.

>No, my claim is much stronger. I mean Hamas's army was comparable to countries like Denmark (20k active soldiers), Finland, the Czech republic (27k active) and maybe even the Netherlands (40k active). Estimates of the size of Hamas's army pre October 7 range from 20k to 40k active combatants, with US intelligence estimates converging on 30k. This is looking just at fighters and excludes Hamas's political wing.

Hamas, who don't even own a single Howitzer. Much less a plane.

Do star trek and boston legal really fall outside of stereotypical HN interests?

>What do you mean forcing? They are organized crime, this is what they choose to do. The right thing for them to do is turn themselves in.

Self preservation. Turning themselves in would be antithetical to that. To expect anyone to sacrifice themselves would be absurd.

The only reason the government is only occasionally assassinating individual leaders instead of fighting open war against the cartels is that the cartels are willing and able to impose unacceptable costs in retaliation. It would be suicidal to not retaliate.

>How do you expect the cartel to subside and eventually dissolve? Policies that encourage them to play nicely?

Policies that eliminate their sources of revenue.