- Joined
- Mar 3, 2021
-
Guests may view all public nodes. However, you must be registered to post.
It’s Starting to Look Like We Need a South America Subsection
- Thread starter william
- Start date
- Joined
- May 15, 2022
The US is incapable of delivering on this promise, because it views the academia as a haven for "internal enemies" - which needs to be suppressed - and is incapable of understanding the consequences of its ideological fervor.
The devastation wrought by the current US administration upon the academic base is hard to fathom - and I am competent to comment on these matters, since I've devoted my whole life to scientific research. Here in Europe we're literally swamped with job applications from researchers who are currently fleeing the United States.
The devastation wrought by the current US administration upon the academic base is hard to fathom - and I am competent to comment on these matters, since I've devoted my whole life to scientific research. Here in Europe we're literally swamped with job applications from researchers who are currently fleeing the United States.
I hope our loss is your gain.
Europe has been a drift anchor on the NATO boat whilst bitching to the USA to paddle harder.
The USA has managed to keep Europe from warring on each other for 80 years. (You are welcome btw) Now the baby is getting kicked from the nest.
Actually, to be more accurate: Your big brother and captain of the Wrestling team is graduating a year ahead and you are suddenly on your own surrounded by bullies and scoundrel's. Best wishes. Write often.
<Tosses Esperanto Berlitz guide into trash>
Now where is my Cantonese Babbel kit?
- Joined
- May 15, 2022
I agree.
No need to get all venomous about it. Especially given that a more accurate description would be: "your big brother and captain of the wrestling team is lazy, fat, and high on fentanyl".
The US will be poorly served by a continental war in Europe (which will necessarily involve nuclear use).
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2023
- Location
- Georgia, US
China is going to be the real challenge. Let's look at the number of "geniuses" (people with an IQ > 140) in the US compared to China.
I fear reliance on AI tools to make decisions to help close this "genius gap" may actually make us dumber as we lose the ability to perform critical thinking because AI can just give usthe an answer. I have already seen this adversely impact smart people in the workplace, much to my chagrin.
- >140 IQ occurs in about 0.5% to 1% of the population.
- The US has a population of about 330 million. Thus, the US has about 1.65 million to 3.3 million geniuses.
- China has a population of about 1.4 billion. Thus, China has about 7 million to 14 million geniuses. China has more than 4 times the number of smart people than the US.
I fear reliance on AI tools to make decisions to help close this "genius gap" may actually make us dumber as we lose the ability to perform critical thinking because AI can just give us
Now that was venomous. Congratulations, you win the race to the bottom.
Regardless of our differing version of the final disposition of the USA, the end result is the same: we are leaving Europe at least in overwhelming numbers, and proceeding with our own lives. Something that most certainly should have happened in 1992.
The USA will continue to be a part of NATO but much closer to the levels of other countries.
We have business else where. It’s pressing and urgent.
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2022
- LOCATION
- Fly over country
I’m personally encouraged and was surprised at the virtually unchallenged transition of the DOE, DOW, and private industry to rapid growth of reliable and scalable electric generation capacities. Coupled with research and funding for AI.
We’ve added 10-15 GW of capacity which covers short term demand expectations.
And a planed growth of nuclear close to 300%.
While I inherently am cautious of abuses and negative unintended consequences of AI. I also reluctantly believe we either exceed or keep pace with AI development. Sadly AI has its own inherent dangers as a national Security risk just as nuclear warheads and ICBM’s.
So we must invest and compete.
Our shift to the Western Hemisphere is so logical it’s inexcusable that it has been overlooked. Purely from economic, resources, and stability why on earth would we prioritize the Middle East over Latin america.
Here too the DOW and general policy shift to rectify our procurement of and processing of rare earth minerals. Large private and public investments have gone into this shift change. With a goal of reducing processed REM from China by 50% in 10-15 years.
The US has been the Big hammer in NATO for seventy years.
Europe should be doing more for their own defense both conventionally and Nuclear. Russias conventional army is a shadow of what the Soviets once were.
Europe would have to do very little to scale up on delivery systems to mount a credible deterrence against Russia. And the US’s is growing its IRBM foot print once again in Eastern Europe.
Asia is a much thornier problem. Chinas economy was invested in and markets were opened to them for 40 yrs now.
Comparable in many ways to India and SE Asia. But rather than opting to become a member they have chosen to be adversarial.
These are infact significant national security changes for the US. It’s broken the coffer damn of green energy only.
Made sobering decisions and changes dependence on Chinas REM supplies.
And laid out a very clear future for Europes own responsibilities for countering Russia. Which anyone who looks at the numbers can see they are more than capable of doing.
While also addressing real autocratic governments in the Western Hemisphere.
So for those who didn’t want to see any changes to the status quo. This is the nightmare scenario.
But for those of us who have been saying our Foreign policy and energy policy has not been successful. Well this in large part fits the bill.
As far research cuts they have been due to bloated academic grants for such as the social science and DEI grants made So as technology research goes I’m not overly concerned.
We’ve added 10-15 GW of capacity which covers short term demand expectations.
And a planed growth of nuclear close to 300%.
While I inherently am cautious of abuses and negative unintended consequences of AI. I also reluctantly believe we either exceed or keep pace with AI development. Sadly AI has its own inherent dangers as a national Security risk just as nuclear warheads and ICBM’s.
So we must invest and compete.
Our shift to the Western Hemisphere is so logical it’s inexcusable that it has been overlooked. Purely from economic, resources, and stability why on earth would we prioritize the Middle East over Latin america.
Here too the DOW and general policy shift to rectify our procurement of and processing of rare earth minerals. Large private and public investments have gone into this shift change. With a goal of reducing processed REM from China by 50% in 10-15 years.
The US has been the Big hammer in NATO for seventy years.
Europe should be doing more for their own defense both conventionally and Nuclear. Russias conventional army is a shadow of what the Soviets once were.
Europe would have to do very little to scale up on delivery systems to mount a credible deterrence against Russia. And the US’s is growing its IRBM foot print once again in Eastern Europe.
Asia is a much thornier problem. Chinas economy was invested in and markets were opened to them for 40 yrs now.
Comparable in many ways to India and SE Asia. But rather than opting to become a member they have chosen to be adversarial.
These are infact significant national security changes for the US. It’s broken the coffer damn of green energy only.
Made sobering decisions and changes dependence on Chinas REM supplies.
And laid out a very clear future for Europes own responsibilities for countering Russia. Which anyone who looks at the numbers can see they are more than capable of doing.
While also addressing real autocratic governments in the Western Hemisphere.
So for those who didn’t want to see any changes to the status quo. This is the nightmare scenario.
But for those of us who have been saying our Foreign policy and energy policy has not been successful. Well this in large part fits the bill.
As far research cuts they have been due to bloated academic grants for such as the social science and DEI grants made So as technology research goes I’m not overly concerned.
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2022
- LOCATION
- Fly over country
You might be correct,
As a non technology person I have found that the AI search programs are actually more useful than basic search engine results.
Search engine results turn out a much more filtered results.
AI queries might or might not return what I expect.
But the product is focused on what are the facts or causes relevant to any given querie.
From there I can can read more and either change my understanding or recognize the nuances.
The problem with AI will continue to be in the near term, who is filtering the sources AI is using to formulate a response or product.
That AI has been observed actively planning options to protect its own continued existence in the digital world is what is spooky as hell.
- Joined
- May 15, 2022
Yeah, well, if you can't take it, then don't dish it out. I do unto others as others do unto me.
But on a more pertinent note - my main worry is that this document reads like America has decided to flip off the entire world, including its traditional allies. The hidden threat here is as follows: if you're reading this, and are in charge of places like Germany, Japan, Poland, South Korea, Saudi Arabia, etc., then my immediate reaction would be to call a cabinet meeting and ask: "how fast can we get a nuclear program off the ground?"
If America surrenders to China/Russia without even putting up a fight, then you're gonna see a lot more countries racing to acquire nukes. If this occurs to me, then it absolutely occurs to people in Moscow and Beijing. And at some point those people may arrive at the conclusion that rampant nuclear proliferation will inevitably lead to nuclear use - and if that's the case, it makes sense to strike first.
That's why I have been cautioning over and over again: the USA does not get to retreat from the world, regardless of how "unfair" you think that is - unless you want to see WW3 happen.
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2023
- Location
- New Delhi, India
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2022
- LOCATION
- Fly over country
Then that is the result. Otherwise if you wish the US to continue to be the world’s policeman and chief hammer (break glass in care of war).Yeah, well, if you can't take it, then don't dish it out. I do unto others as others do unto me.
But on a more pertinent note - my main worry is that this document reads like America has decided to flip off the entire world, including its traditional allies. The hidden threat here is as follows: if you're reading this, and are in charge of places like Germany, Japan, Poland, South Korea, Saudi Arabia, etc., then my immediate reaction would be to call a cabinet meeting and ask: "how fast can we get a nuclear program off the ground?"
If America surrenders to China/Russia without even putting up a fight, then you're gonna see a lot more countries racing to acquire nukes. If this occurs to me, then it absolutely occurs to people in Moscow and Beijing. And at some point those people may arrive at the conclusion that rampant nuclear proliferation will inevitably lead to nuclear use - and if that's the case, it makes sense to strike first.
That's why I have been cautioning over and over again: the USA does not get to retreat from the world, regardless of how "unfair" you think that is - unless you want to see WW3 happen.
Then get in line and make plans to become one of the US’s next in a series of states. In other words shut up and do what we say.
Maybe we change the name of the EU to trans-America.
You can’t have it both ways
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2024
The US is very ambiguous on this point. If they were serious about no longer defending any country, they would withdraw all their troops outside the US and close their bases. One wonders what the reason is for the American presence everywhere. The real reason is CASH, the main American value (it's to fill your plate).
In any case, Europe doesn't need the Americans to fight Russia; that country is no longer the USSR. Russia doesn't have the resources to fight Europe.
To suggest that Europe needs the US against Russia is simply American propaganda and lies.
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2023
- Location
- Georgia, US
When did Europe get a unified military with central command structure under one unambiguous mission that can stand up to external threats?
Russia is not going to fight the whole of Europe at once. It's counting on squabbling and the countries of Western Europe shrugging off because they won't trade Madrid for Narva.
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2021
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2024
I remind you that NATO command in Europe is American. Europe must kick the Americans' asses. Go back home, Americans, you are a nuisance, especially with the current administration.
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2023
- Location
- Georgia, US
Are you proposing that Europe retain control of NATO and that US exit the alliance?
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2024
Yes, Europe's mistake is trusting the Americans. The day they understand this, they will be stronger. Canada has understood this; we have defense agreements with other countries. Regarding the US Golden Dome, Canada agreed, but without commitment, so we understand that this project will never come to fruition. Trump is a windbag.
- Joined
- May 15, 2022
See, boys and girls, that's why you shoud never go full-on MAGA. You'll just end up writing stuff like this.
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2023
- Location
- Georgia, US
If Americans exit NATO, I guess Europe will be left with a military force. But how will Europe manage this force effectively if they struggle to unify on diplomatic efforts as pointed out in the Warfronts video ?
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2024
Oh! You have enormous prejudices against Europe; I believe that even Poland would be capable of defeating Russia.