Societal Collapse/ Extinction
Poll
 | 8 votes (36.36%) | ||
| | 10 votes (45.45%) | ||
| | 7 votes (31.81%) | ||
| | 3 votes (13.63%) | ||
| | 8 votes (36.36%) | ||
| | 4 votes (18.18%) | ||
| | 3 votes (13.63%) | ||
| | 5 votes (22.72%) | ||
| | 4 votes (18.18%) | ||
| | 3 votes (13.63%) |
22 members have voted
Quote: ChumpChangeI'm starting to come across movies made for the iPhone age where the populace gets warnings on their phones of incoming ballistic missiles just minutes before the flash bang. We're not gonna survive the radiation-sickness or the civilization disruption.
link to original post
The next nuclear weapon used in anger will not result in worldwide catastrophe. Most likely it will be a small tactical nuke and there will not be a nuclear response. Even today if Russia used a small nuke in Ukraine it would not generate other nations using a nuke. We would issue a strongly worded letter and add additional sanctions.
Quote: DRichQuote: ChumpChangeI'm starting to come across movies made for the iPhone age where the populace gets warnings on their phones of incoming ballistic missiles just minutes before the flash bang. We're not gonna survive the radiation-sickness or the civilization disruption.
link to original post
The next nuclear weapon used in anger will not result in worldwide catastrophe. Most likely it will be a small tactical nuke and there will not be a nuclear response. Even today if Russia used a small nuke in Ukraine it would not generate other nations using a nuke. We would issue a strongly worded letter and add additional sanctions.
link to original post
The biggest problem would be an ICBM(s) headed our way. Or their way. It’s like trying to stop a duel when the bullet from one gun has already been fired. So, little time, no good choices.
Quote: rxwineQuote: DRichQuote: ChumpChangeI'm starting to come across movies made for the iPhone age where the populace gets warnings on their phones of incoming ballistic missiles just minutes before the flash bang. We're not gonna survive the radiation-sickness or the civilization disruption.
link to original post
The next nuclear weapon used in anger will not result in worldwide catastrophe. Most likely it will be a small tactical nuke and there will not be a nuclear response. Even today if Russia used a small nuke in Ukraine it would not generate other nations using a nuke. We would issue a strongly worded letter and add additional sanctions.
link to original post
The biggest problem would be an ICBM(s) headed our way. Or their way. It’s like trying to stop a duel when the bullet from one gun has already been fired. So, little time, no good choices.
link to original post
It won't happen ,but I would be excited to see it play out. My belief is that so few Russian ICBM's would get through it wouldn't be anything like the doom and gloom that is predicted. Russia probably has less than around 400 ICBM's deployed. My guess is less than 50 would get orbital and 5 or less would hit their target.
If the subject interests you I recommend Annie Jacobson's book Nuclear War. It is a minute by minute scenario if North Korea launched a nuke at the U.S.
Quote: gordonm888Netflix has a new movie, by the director of Zero Dark Thirty, about a single ICBM with a nuclear warhead being launched on the U.S. It's called House of Dynamite and for the first 40 minutes you can't look away. Its excellent, I recommend it.
link to original post
First 40 min is OK, the rest is drek. Movie literally has no ending.
Quote: rxwineI just remembered it was suggested (elsewhere) that we could knock down quite a few nukes, but that doesn't take into account innumerable decoys.
link to original post
I am of the belief that we can not shoot down as many as people assume. Our interceptors seem to only have a 20% intercept rate which means we may need to shoot as many as five for every incoming. Our limited stockpiles will not last long at that rate. I doubt the Russians would send many decoys because their rockets are so unreliable and they have many warheads. I would expect almost zero bombers would get through so they are 100% reliant on the ICBM's.
Quote: DRichQuote: rxwineI just remembered it was suggested (elsewhere) that we could knock down quite a few nukes, but that doesn't take into account innumerable decoys.
link to original post
I am of the belief that we can not shoot down as many as people assume. Our interceptors seem to only have a 20% intercept rate which means we may need to shoot as many as five for every incoming. Our limited stockpiles will not last long at that rate. I doubt the Russians would send many decoys because their rockets are so unreliable and they have many warheads. I would expect almost zero bombers would get through so they are 100% reliant on the ICBM's.
link to original post
I’m not convinced they’re that unreliable. Right now, I’m assuming their current attacks on Ukraine are simply the most vulnerable areas since there is no concern over who they kill. No sense wasting too many on a Patriot missile bank when they can bomb low to nothing protected targets.
Apparently the Neanderthals had poor health relative to modern humans, and DNA analysis also suggests they did not have an incest taboo, which is common to most modern humans and particularly for immediate family incest. Poor health and incest, especially repeated over generations, go together. But how would a bunch of cavemen know that?
Here's a speculation of mine: Now what if... there were a few Neanderthals who had this weird hang-up about sex with their family and rejected it, seeking out only strangers for sexual relations. They would be considered the queers and perverts of their society and be outcast, and they wouldn't mind that at all. They would live far from their old tribe, joined by other outcasts from far-flung places and that would satisfy them, and they would mate.
And something would change- the next generation's health was improving! Their lifespans were longer, so that children could be raised and taught by grandparents if necessary, leading to a more complex society and division of labor. They were taller, and more intelligent in ways that would allow them to recognize and process hypotheticals and abstractions. They would need to form peaceful and productive relations with other distant tribes to continue to avoid incest, and thus organized trade and statecraft would develop, creating opportunities for those who are not physical brutes but intellectual giants to excel. Eventually these stranger-loving societies would grow to dominate the Old Ways people, who practice their evil daughtering and sistering and niecing, and drive them off into oblivion. This new kind of human would eventually be known as the Man of Intelligence, the Homo sapiens. And it all started with some weirdo kids who rejected the values (and something else... ugh...) of their parents!
Now what if my speculation is accurate, that rejecting incest is what made us what we are, and we stopped rejecting that and it gradually became normative? In parts of the world, the combination of polygyny and tribalism, where everybody who isn't part of your tribe is your enemy, has made consanguinity the rule rather than the exception. And they are already showing the effects of that: psychological problems, low intelligence, poor health. In the US, despite the dark humor about this being a problem in rural communities it's actually the inner city that is showing traces of it. This is an environment where most people have never met their father, and due to twisted economics the worst men become the "alpha males" and impregnate all the women (who are considered undesirable by men outside of that community) and young people who were born and raised there are attracted to one another but with no idea they have the same father. More psychological problems, low intelligence, and poor health.
How we fall: A combination of low birthrate among those with the traditional values and socioeconomic class where incest is rare to nonexistent, and the rise of populations in communities where due to their traditions inbreeding is bad and getting worse, reverting us to something like Neanderthals.
There’s an interesting documentary piece on YouTube - “The Whittakers” an incest family in Appalachia.
A family's getaway to a luxurious rental home takes an ominous turn when a cyberattack knocks out their devices, and two strangers appear at their door.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt12747748/
1) Sidewalk Showgirls are Super Aggressive for Tips. Usually you can glance at them and they may simply pitch you to take a photo. But now, they literally follow you down the strip and bleed you for information and then tip shame you when you refuse their "offer" of a photo. One of em even said "Can't you just tip me for my time???" I balked and walked away.
2) Hookers are pretty brazen just openly walking up to dudes and saying "Wanna date???" Even heard some talking to their Pimps on the phone about how "Yea, I got a John sitting down at ****RANDOM CASINO GAME**** I'm a get paid!"
3) Slot Vultures and Sour Rooters are still running rampant and seem to be working the Higher End casinos like Palazzo, Venetian, Bellagio and Mandalay Bay. You can now spot them by their disheveled appearance and sporting an overstuffed backpack.
Quote: 7NeverWinsJust got back from Vegas and just a few items to note.
1) Sidewalk Showgirls are Super Aggressive for Tips. Usually you can glance at them and they may simply pitch you to take a photo. But now, they literally follow you down the strip and bleed you for information and then tip shame you when you refuse their "offer" of a photo. One of em even said "Can't you just tip me for my time???" I balked and walked away.
2) Hookers are pretty brazen just openly walking up to dudes and saying "Wanna date???" Even heard some talking to their Pimps on the phone about how "Yea, I got a John sitting down at ****RANDOM CASINO GAME**** I'm a get paid!"
3) Slot Vultures and Sour Rooters are still running rampant and seem to be working the Higher End casinos like Palazzo, Venetian, Bellagio and Mandalay Bay. You can now spot them by their disheveled appearance and sporting an overstuffed backpack.
link to original post
Sounds like the drop in business is worse than it looks on paper.
Quote: AZDuffmanQuote: 7NeverWinsJust got back from Vegas and just a few items to note.
1) Sidewalk Showgirls are Super Aggressive for Tips. Usually you can glance at them and they may simply pitch you to take a photo. But now, they literally follow you down the strip and bleed you for information and then tip shame you when you refuse their "offer" of a photo. One of em even said "Can't you just tip me for my time???" I balked and walked away.
2) Hookers are pretty brazen just openly walking up to dudes and saying "Wanna date???" Even heard some talking to their Pimps on the phone about how "Yea, I got a John sitting down at ****RANDOM CASINO GAME**** I'm a get paid!"
3) Slot Vultures and Sour Rooters are still running rampant and seem to be working the Higher End casinos like Palazzo, Venetian, Bellagio and Mandalay Bay. You can now spot them by their disheveled appearance and sporting an overstuffed backpack.
link to original post
Sounds like the drop in business is worse than it looks on paper.
link to original post
I keep seeing video after video on YouTube that Vegas is in serious trouble but I don't pay much attention because I'll never go to Vegas again. Why would I.
Quote: EvenBobQuote: AZDuffmanQuote: 7NeverWinsJust got back from Vegas and just a few items to note.
1) Sidewalk Showgirls are Super Aggressive for Tips. Usually you can glance at them and they may simply pitch you to take a photo. But now, they literally follow you down the strip and bleed you for information and then tip shame you when you refuse their "offer" of a photo. One of em even said "Can't you just tip me for my time???" I balked and walked away.
2) Hookers are pretty brazen just openly walking up to dudes and saying "Wanna date???" Even heard some talking to their Pimps on the phone about how "Yea, I got a John sitting down at ****RANDOM CASINO GAME**** I'm a get paid!"
3) Slot Vultures and Sour Rooters are still running rampant and seem to be working the Higher End casinos like Palazzo, Venetian, Bellagio and Mandalay Bay. You can now spot them by their disheveled appearance and sporting an overstuffed backpack.
link to original post
Sounds like the drop in business is worse than it looks on paper.
link to original post
I keep seeing video after video on YouTube that Vegas is in serious trouble but I don't pay much attention because I'll never go to Vegas again. Why would I.
link to original post
I will only go if I play in WSOP or for some or if something extraordinary happens, say a buddy is dying of cancer and wants a last hurrah. In the later I will still push for Reno instead. But that does not mean I am not keeping an eye on it. Mainly because some things I just watch, business-wise. I like looking at the mistakes being made and how the decline happens. I guess we all are interested in some things that we should not care about.
Quote: EvenBobYou cannot compare current Society and it's collapse to anything that's ever happened in the past because we have advantages they never had. First and foremost we have superior communication all of the entire planet. We have advanced transportation, we have modern medicine. Human knowledge is doubling every 12 months now and will continue to double even faster. Everything about where we are in the present is totally different than where we were during the failures of the past. Nobody has any idea where this is going but one thing I'm sure about, it's not going to copy anything that's happened before.
link to original post
We can't say "knowledge is doubling every 12 months" because that is impossible to measure.
The current situation is not like the past because Total Fertility has never been below replacement except for very short periods. That is where the difference is. So we start having 1/3 to 1/2 fewer people in each next generation then extinction will eventually happen. It will happen because this is not a half-life of a radioactive element were there are theoretically still a few atoms left. At some point there will be too few people to sustain humanity.
History does say that there will be some sort of tragedy to amp this up. Either a real pandemic or a global natural disaster, most likely a volcano.
The TFR decline will mean 80% or more fewer humans on the planet in 2200 than today. That is like taking a power punch to the gut that you need to recover from. In the 2200s humanity will either recover or stagger off to extinction.
Quote: AZDuffmanQuote: EvenBobYou cannot compare current Society and it's collapse to anything that's ever happened in the past because we have advantages they never had. First and foremost we have superior communication all of the entire planet. We have advanced transportation, we have modern medicine. Human knowledge is doubling every 12 months now and will continue to double even faster. Everything about where we are in the present is totally different than where we were during the failures of the past. Nobody has any idea where this is going but one thing I'm sure about, it's not going to copy anything that's happened before.
link to original post
We can't say "knowledge is doubling every 12 months" because that is impossible to measure.
The current situation is not like the past because Total Fertility has never been below replacement except for very short periods. That is where the difference is. So we start having 1/3 to 1/2 fewer people in each next generation then extinction will eventually happen. It will happen because this is not a half-life of a radioactive element were there are theoretically still a few atoms left. At some point there will be too few people to sustain humanity.
History does say that there will be some sort of tragedy to amp this up. Either a real pandemic or a global natural disaster, most likely a volcano.
The TFR decline will mean 80% or more fewer humans on the planet in 2200 than today. That is like taking a power punch to the gut that you need to recover from. In the 2200s humanity will either recover or stagger off to extinction.
link to original post
It will recover and continue to do so because we now understand the mechanics of it which we never did in the past. History shows that all we did is mostly blunder along aimlessly so of course we kept repeating the same mistakes. We were always headed towards where we are now, and things will continue to improve at a gigantic rate. And yes, nobody can say exactly how quickly human knowledge is doubling but it's very very quickly compared to the past. Once AI is in place it will go at breakneck speed. Whenever somebody predicts nothing but bleakness for the future what I say now is look at Bill Gates. 30 years ago he started screaming at us that global warming was going to kill us and now he's saying oops, never mind. Nobody knows what's coming ain't nobody can accurately predict it.
Quote: EvenBobQuote: AZDuffmanQuote: EvenBobYou cannot compare current Society and it's collapse to anything that's ever happened in the past because we have advantages they never had. First and foremost we have superior communication all of the entire planet. We have advanced transportation, we have modern medicine. Human knowledge is doubling every 12 months now and will continue to double even faster. Everything about where we are in the present is totally different than where we were during the failures of the past. Nobody has any idea where this is going but one thing I'm sure about, it's not going to copy anything that's happened before.
link to original post
We can't say "knowledge is doubling every 12 months" because that is impossible to measure.
The current situation is not like the past because Total Fertility has never been below replacement except for very short periods. That is where the difference is. So we start having 1/3 to 1/2 fewer people in each next generation then extinction will eventually happen. It will happen because this is not a half-life of a radioactive element were there are theoretically still a few atoms left. At some point there will be too few people to sustain humanity.
History does say that there will be some sort of tragedy to amp this up. Either a real pandemic or a global natural disaster, most likely a volcano.
The TFR decline will mean 80% or more fewer humans on the planet in 2200 than today. That is like taking a power punch to the gut that you need to recover from. In the 2200s humanity will either recover or stagger off to extinction.
link to original post
It will recover and continue to do so because we now understand the mechanics of it which we never did in the past. History shows that all we did is mostly blunder along aimlessly so of course we kept repeating the same mistakes. We were always headed towards where we are now, and things will continue to improve at a gigantic rate. And yes, nobody can say exactly how quickly human knowledge is doubling but it's very very quickly compared to the past. Once AI is in place it will go at breakneck speed. Whenever somebody predicts nothing but bleakness for the future what I say now is look at Bill Gates. 30 years ago he started screaming at us that global warming was going to kill us and now he's saying oops, never mind. Nobody knows what's coming ain't nobody can accurately predict it.
link to original post
But we all still try! Your post contains 4 predictions.
The desire to predict the future and the desire to bet are really the same thing, aren't they?
If the future is uncertain (which it demonstrably is) why not the past as well? The only way we have to know the past is its relics in the present. But there are an indefinite number of alternate pasts that would leave us with the same relics. Who are we to say one is "real" and the rest are not?
Consider two chessplayers in a tournament, they are playing a game and it is nearing the end. There are recorders recording the moves they make. But there are also many different ways they could have gotten to the position they are in now, which is all that matters to them now. Any importance attached to their prior moves is imaginary. So let's say two different recorders give completely different transcripts of the game, that both leave them in the same position. What difference would it make, and barring any other testimony, who would know which one is real?The players themselves might not even remember, or have different recollections.
Quote: EvenBobQuote: AZDuffmanQuote: EvenBobYou cannot compare current Society and it's collapse to anything that's ever happened in the past because we have advantages they never had. First and foremost we have superior communication all of the entire planet. We have advanced transportation, we have modern medicine. Human knowledge is doubling every 12 months now and will continue to double even faster. Everything about where we are in the present is totally different than where we were during the failures of the past. Nobody has any idea where this is going but one thing I'm sure about, it's not going to copy anything that's happened before.
link to original post
We can't say "knowledge is doubling every 12 months" because that is impossible to measure.
The current situation is not like the past because Total Fertility has never been below replacement except for very short periods. That is where the difference is. So we start having 1/3 to 1/2 fewer people in each next generation then extinction will eventually happen. It will happen because this is not a half-life of a radioactive element were there are theoretically still a few atoms left. At some point there will be too few people to sustain humanity.
History does say that there will be some sort of tragedy to amp this up. Either a real pandemic or a global natural disaster, most likely a volcano.
The TFR decline will mean 80% or more fewer humans on the planet in 2200 than today. That is like taking a power punch to the gut that you need to recover from. In the 2200s humanity will either recover or stagger off to extinction.
link to original post
It will recover and continue to do so because we now understand the mechanics of it which we never did in the past. History shows that all we did is mostly blunder along aimlessly so of course we kept repeating the same mistakes. We were always headed towards where we are now, and things will continue to improve at a gigantic rate. And yes, nobody can say exactly how quickly human knowledge is doubling but it's very very quickly compared to the past. Once AI is in place it will go at breakneck speed. Whenever somebody predicts nothing but bleakness for the future what I say now is look at Bill Gates. 30 years ago he started screaming at us that global warming was going to kill us and now he's saying oops, never mind. Nobody knows what's coming ain't nobody can accurately predict it.
link to original post
"Knowledge" will not stop depopulation if the TFR continues its slide towards 1.0 per woman. Tech won't solve it. All the "knowledge" you need is that if two people only reproduce one person then the size of the next generation will be half the current generation.
If it is research papers, I would question the claim because many research papers -particularly from 3rd world countries - are highly unoriginal and just report, say, trends in local situations, flora, etc.
I mean, every day that passes, we learn what the weather was in thousands of weather stations in the world on that day, we gain knowledge of who died that day, how every player in every professional sport did, about every traffic accident that occurred on that day. So, lots of knowledge getted inevitably recorded every day but meh.
Quote: gordonm888Does anyone know the source of the statements about how fast human knowledge is doubling?
If it is research papers, I would question the claim because many research papers -particularly from 3rd world countries - are highly unoriginal and just report, say, trends in local situations, flora, etc.
I mean, every day that passes, we learn what the weather was in thousands of weather stations in the world on that day, we gain knowledge of who died that day, how every player in every professional sport did, about every traffic accident that occurred on that day. So, lots of knowledge getted inevitably recorded every day but meh.
link to original post
I don't know about research papers Gordini however the Idea/concept of the knowledge doubling curve is credited to Buckminster Fuller I believe. I don't know much else.
Quote: gordonm888Does anyone know the source of the statements about how fast human knowledge is doubling?
If it is research papers, I would question the claim because many research papers -particularly from 3rd world countries - are highly unoriginal and just report, say, trends in local situations, flora, etc.
I mean, every day that passes, we learn what the weather was in thousands of weather stations in the world on that day, we gain knowledge of who died that day, how every player in every professional sport did, about every traffic accident that occurred on that day. So, lots of knowledge getted inevitably recorded every day but meh.
link to original post
The source of any statement can generally by found by using google or chat gpt, in literally seconds. In this case there is no scientific basis for the assertion, it is simply something people started misquoting IBM as saying but no specific quote from that organization actually exists.
As rainman points out Buckminster Fuller is generally credited as the originator of the phrase, but there is no pretense of any kind of evidential justification for that assertion in any of his work. In short it is something someone made up that is often disseminated as fact online.
The term "third world" is an anachronism. It refers to countries which are not aligned to either NATO or the Soviet Union. Since the Soviet Union has not existed for some time few people use the term now. The notion that research into flora is of no value is peculiar to say the least: I am quite glad people are researching potential cancer, malaria or other malady drugs. Whether they are in a developing country or not.
"So, lots of knowledge getted inevitably recorded every day but meh" I am not sure what this means.
Quote: DougGanderQuote: gordonm888Does anyone know the source of the statements about how fast human knowledge is doubling?
If it is research papers, I would question the claim because many research papers -particularly from 3rd world countries - are highly unoriginal and just report, say, trends in local situations, flora, etc.
I mean, every day that passes, we learn what the weather was in thousands of weather stations in the world on that day, we gain knowledge of who died that day, how every player in every professional sport did, about every traffic accident that occurred on that day. So, lots of knowledge getted inevitably recorded every day but meh.
link to original post
The source of any statement can generally by found by using google or chat gpt, in literally seconds. In this case there is no scientific basis for the assertion, it is simply something people started misquoting IBM as saying but no specific quote from that organization actually exists.
As rainman points out Buckminster Fuller is generally credited as the originator of the phrase, but there is no pretense of any kind of evidential justification for that assertion in any of his work. In short it is something someone made up that is often disseminated as fact online.
The term "third world" is an anachronism. It refers to countries which are not aligned to either NATO or the Soviet Union. Since the Soviet Union has not existed for some time few people use the term now. The notion that research into flora is of no value is peculiar to say the least: I am quite glad people are researching potential cancer, malaria or other malady drugs. Whether they are in a developing country or not.
"So, lots of knowledge getted inevitably recorded every day but meh" I am not sure what this means.
link to original post
To sum up what I was trying to say: not all knowledge is of equal value to humanity.
Today I have no knowledge of what my bowel movements will look like during the next week, nor what my dog's poops will look like during the next week. One week later, that knowledge will exist. Is humanity enriched by that information? Not as much as medical research results on cancer, presumably.
Quote: gordonm888
To sum up what I was trying to say: not all knowledge is of equal value to humanity....
link to original post
Maybe it's just making us heavier. In the conjecture of Verlinde et al., information itself may have mass, and what we perceive as "dark matter" increasing the mass of a galaxy is actually the information resulting from the relationships between all the things in the galaxy, making it much more massive than the sum of its parts. Made me think it would be fun to rewrite general relativity in terms of information only, where it is only information that distorts spacetime and matter and energy do it only by virtue of the information they contain. Like an intact nucleus having more mass than its constituent quarks. They call the difference binding energy, but there are a myriad of interactions between everything going on in a baryon and a nucleus, lots of information in there, and it might end up being the same thing no matter what you call it.
A long time ago people did experiments where the dying were placed on a scale to see if there was a weight change when they die. As I recall the measurements showed something, an ounce or so lost. The athe... excuse me... skeptical response to that was it was due to exhalation when you die but I know it can't be that, because the air in the lungs does not have any significant temperature or pressure difference from the ambient and you displace less air when you exhale too, making the net weight change very tiny, much less than the mass of the liter of air you are exhaling. So I think we should repeat that experiment- weigh the dying! It could be due to the enormous amount of information stored in a living human brain going somewhere else upon death.
That's a crazy idea, but apparently there are people weighing hard drives now to see if they weigh more full or empty. Bad approach in my opinion, too much dead weight, they should be using microSD cards. As circuit densities increase with better manufacturing tech we might be able to get so much information onto a little chip that this will be measurable, or at least falsifiable.
The Ultimate Collapse: some wiseguy tries to store all the information that would be in a black hole in a computer, and the computer becomes one.
All the coronavirus at its peak collectively, would be about the size of a baseball.
New scholarship suggests that humans migrated out of Africa much earlier than previously thought, but in waves rather than a continuous exodus. Each successive wave
Introduced human DNA into the European and eventually humans replaced them. The average human appears to have around 4% Neanderthal DNA.
The article says that because of interbreeding, certain areas of Europe are much more prone to having above-average.
I had a rugby teammate who was about 5-5, had the wingspan of a man a foot taller, and shaved twice a day.
Quote: billryan<snip>I had a rugby teammate who was about 5-5, had the wingspan of a man a foot taller, and shaved twice a day.
link to original post
billryan,
But was she any good at rugby? 😆
Dog Hand
.... The one distinct possibility that is missing from the list is a pole shift
The Poll software in this forum allows a maximum of ten entries, so those two items didn't make my original list.
Quote: rxwineIt occurs to me, that if Ai lives up to the hype eventually, China doesn’t give (as much a crap) about their people losing jobs. They will gladly outpace us regardless of what we do.
link to original post
I have been saying for 50 years that there is no doubt in my mind that China will someday rule the world. They are extremely intelligent, and extremely patient and those two things are unbeatable. For instance the United States is not particularly all that intelligent, and we certainly have no patience. China is not being torn apart internally by civil chaos like we are because they know how to handle stuff like that. Them ruling the planet is inevitable and welcome. The way we run things we're never going to get anywhere as far as the future of humanity goes.
Quote: EvenBobQuote: rxwineIt occurs to me, that if Ai lives up to the hype eventually, China doesn’t give (as much a crap) about their people losing jobs. They will gladly outpace us regardless of what we do.
link to original post
I have been saying for 50 years that there is no doubt in my mind that China will someday rule the world. They are extremely intelligent, and extremely patient and those two things are unbeatable. For instance the United States is not particularly all that intelligent, and we certainly have no patience. China is not being torn apart internally by civil chaos like we are because they know how to handle stuff like that. Them ruling the planet is inevitable and welcome. The way we run things we're never going to get anywhere as far as the future of humanity goes.
link to original post
Ah yes. Just like Ozymandias.
That which depends on forcing people to do the things they don't want to do, or depriving them of the things they do want to do, is doomed. It's like swimming upstream. I don't know how strong the current is or how good the swimmer is, but I know how his story ends.
This is why modern despotism relies more on social control and propaganda than overt force. But that's been shown to not work very well either. People will pretend to go along and pretend to believe, until they don't.
He answered a user who queried: "You people who wanna survive the apocalypse: what is it you wanna survive for? What life is it that you expect to have?"
with the answer: "Plus I just checked your name against the system and you perish in the First Wave in 2032. Mosquito Drone with a 2gram 💥 charge.. straight to your forehead at over 90mph."
DC was first, followed by NYC and LA. San Francisco is surprisingly high on the list. Las Vegas was the fourteenth and last on the list.
Quote: billryanYahoo News today listed which cities would disappear in a nuclear exchange, and happily, I don't live near any of them—one less thing to worry about.
DC was first, followed by NYC and LA. San Francisco is surprisingly high on the list. Las Vegas was the fourteenth and last on the list.
link to original post
I saw that. Among the worst clickbait articles I've ever read.
I don't know, do you think a nuclear war enemy might have some interest in taking out Minot ND before the CNN building in Atlanta? Or all the Navy assets in San Diego before Hollywood? If they don't hit the counterattack capability first there will be nothing left of them after we launch our assets. Even DC isn't that big of a priority because our guys already know what to do and they don't need anything from DC to respond to a nuclear attack. And we don't keep any nukes there. The only thing worth striking in Vegas would be Nellis AFB and being that's mostly for training and research that's a low priority too, definitely not worth a nuke in an initial exchange.
Quote: billryanThe article was about which cities will be hit. Minot is hardly a city. It's a slow news feed day.
link to original post
Right. I'd think Box Elder is higher on the list than Minot, but I don't know nothin'.
RT: It's a great idea....with the exception of Skynet.
Hong Kong has entered a three-day mourning period following its deadliest fire in nearly 80 years, which resulted in at least 128 fatalities and hundreds still unaccounted for. The blaze, which swept through the Wang Fuk Court tower blocks, has raised significant public outrage over reported negligence regarding fire safety and renovation practices, leading to the arrest of eight individuals on corruption charges. An investigation is underway to determine the cause of the fire, exacerbated by materials like polystyrene and protective netting that facilitated its rapid spread.
Over 2,000 firefighters were involved in fighting the fire for two days.
Reportedly, a second separate investigation has been opened to find out who the hell named the apartment building "Wang Fuk".
kQuote: AutomaticMonkeyQuote: billryanYahoo News today listed which cities would disappear in a nuclear exchange, and happily, I don't live near any of them—one less thing to worry about.
DC was first, followed by NYC and LA. San Francisco is surprisingly high on the list. Las Vegas was the fourteenth and last on the list.
link to original post
I saw that. Among the worst clickbait articles I've ever read.
I don't know, do you think a nuclear war enemy might have some interest in taking out Minot ND before the CNN building in Atlanta? Or all the Navy assets in San Diego before Hollywood? If they don't hit the counterattack capability first there will be nothing left of them after we launch our assets. Even DC isn't that big of a priority because our guys already know what to do and they don't need anything from DC to respond to a nuclear attack. And we don't keep any nukes there. The only thing worth striking in Vegas would be Nellis AFB and being that's mostly for training and research that's a low priority too, definitely not worth a nuke in an initial exchange.
link to original post
The article did state that the cities were considered necessary or US society/government to function, such as banking/financial sectors, manufacturing, military/civilian research centers etc. Not all targets have to be military bases. Take out population centers the enemy can't raise an army. Take out oil and NG fields in the middle of nowhere and he can't make fuel for his planes or surface ships or mechanized vehicles. Take out out his data centers and he can't send data communications. Take out his railway hubs and he can't move wounded out and medical supplies or troop reinforcements in.
Quote:Even DC isn't that big of a priority because our guys already know what to do and they don't need anything from DC to respond to a nuclear attack.
There is no dead man switch on our nuclear button. There is no letter of last resort. There is no WORP computer like in Wargames. If the Ruskys or China nukes us, and we're caught flat footed and the National Command Authority goes bye-bye, then our nukes stay in their silos and our bombers stay on the ground. A nuclear first strike or counter strike requires a direct Presidential order in real time. Period. There is no standing order to launch if the Prez gets taken out.
Quote: AutomaticMonkey
That's a crazy idea, but apparently there are people weighing hard drives now to see if they weigh more full or empty. Bad approach in my opinion, too much dead weight, they should be using microSD cards. As circuit densities increase with better manufacturing tech we might be able to get so much information onto a little chip that this will be measurable, or at least falsifiable.
link to original post
I view it somewhat like Scrabble. The letters organized on the little holder weigh the same whether they are meaningful words or not. A bigger holder would be just like a bigger hard drive.
Quote: GenoDRPhkQuote: AutomaticMonkeyQuote: billryanYahoo News today listed which cities would disappear in a nuclear exchange, and happily, I don't live near any of them—one less thing to worry about.
DC was first, followed by NYC and LA. San Francisco is surprisingly high on the list. Las Vegas was the fourteenth and last on the list.
link to original post
I saw that. Among the worst clickbait articles I've ever read.
I don't know, do you think a nuclear war enemy might have some interest in taking out Minot ND before the CNN building in Atlanta? Or all the Navy assets in San Diego before Hollywood? If they don't hit the counterattack capability first there will be nothing left of them after we launch our assets. Even DC isn't that big of a priority because our guys already know what to do and they don't need anything from DC to respond to a nuclear attack. And we don't keep any nukes there. The only thing worth striking in Vegas would be Nellis AFB and being that's mostly for training and research that's a low priority too, definitely not worth a nuke in an initial exchange.
link to original post
The article did state that the cities were considered necessary or US society/government to function, such as banking/financial sectors, manufacturing, military/civilian research centers etc. Not all targets have to be military bases. Take out population centers the enemy can't raise an army. Take out oil and NG fields in the middle of nowhere and he can't make fuel for his planes or surface ships or mechanized vehicles. Take out out his data centers and he can't send data communications. Take out his railway hubs and he can't move wounded out and medical supplies or troop reinforcements in.Quote:Even DC isn't that big of a priority because our guys already know what to do and they don't need anything from DC to respond to a nuclear attack.
There is no dead man switch on our nuclear button. There is no letter of last resort. There is no WORP computer like in Wargames. If the Ruskys or China nukes us, and we're caught flat footed and the National Command Authority goes bye-bye, then our nukes stay in their silos and our bombers stay on the ground. A nuclear first strike or counter strike requires a direct Presidential order in real time. Period. There is no standing order to launch if the Prez gets taken out.
link to original post
I think we had multiple submarines whose standing order in the event of a war is to go deep and do nothing. Unless they receive new orders, they will launch ICBMs a day or a week after the attack begins. They are,in effect, the dead man's switch.
The Soviets claimed that if their nukes lost communication for a specific period, all of their nuclear missiles would launch in one all-out attack. Most westerners don't believe they have such a capacity, but they have such a program.
