sorted by: new top controversial old
[-] Womble@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

Theres also the Russian option: level the entire urban area to rubble with artillary.

[-] Womble@lemmy.world -1 points 1 week ago

Yep, its definitely not possible that nice small businesses like universal and sony would sue without an actual case in order to try and crush competitors with costs.

[-] Womble@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Estimates for chatgpt usage per query are on the order of 20-50 Wh, which is about the same as playing a demanding game on a gaming pc for a few minutes. Local models are significantly less.

[-] Womble@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

You seem very insistent on interpreting millenia of history through the lense of an early 20th century political movement.

Yes there has likely always been an element of theatre and leaders exagerating their role in battles, but to claim that nobility/monarchs never came from warrior castes that were active in fighting flies in the face of huge amounts of scholarship. It hasnt been true in industrialised societies since the 18th century at least but that doesnt mean it never was.

[-] Womble@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

There are, the authors estimate, 150 Russian remote nuclear launch sites and 70 in China, approximately 2,500km (1,550 miles) from the nearest border, all of which could be reached by US air-launched JASSM and Tomahawk cruise missiles in a little more than two hours in an initial attack designed to prevent nuclear weapons being launched.

Emphasis mine, I'm pretty sure even Russia can notice hundreds of cruise missiles are heading directly at their silos and figure out that this looks like an attack on their strategic nuclear arsenal in two whole hours, given that ICBMs take around a quarter of that from launch to impact.

[-] Womble@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

Ask your calculator what 1-(1-1e-99) is and see if it never halucinates (confidently gives an incorrect answer) still.

[-] Womble@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

You didnt address my point at all. I was saying that the outcome of Dave's credibility method does not match up with the stated inputs to his method, showing that the whole thing is far more subjective than he wants to appear. Whether or not that subjective interpretation is reasonable in this case or not doesnt really interest me.

[-] Womble@lemmy.world 43 points 2 weeks ago

In a lot of cases I would agree with you, but laying fiber optic cable through the Amazon in order to connect remote settlements is not feasible, starlink really does have a good use case there.

[-] Womble@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Even taking all of this screed as true with no qualifications, does that in itself not show that the whole idea of pulling together a few sources about "credibility" and using an objective method to come up with an answer on how trustworthy something is as impossible? By the inputs MBFC list it should be a reasonable if not stellar source, yet they give it the lowest possible rating. Maybe that rating is justified maybe it isnt (I've never read anything of theirs) but given the inputs they have it is clear that the majority of the rating is based on the owner's opinion not on the inputs they have.

Edit, on actually reading through what you wrote, it seems that the negatives are entirely about being critical of Isreal, is this by itself enough to make something not credible?

30
submitted 1 year ago by Womble@lemmy.world to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml
view more: ‹ prev next ›

Womble

joined 1 year ago