Might complicate reducing radar signature.

Also, it seems like kind of a specialized tool. You want it to have a low stall speed but also high maximum speed. The F-14 was a naval interceptor – intended to take off from and land on carriers at low speed, buy also dash out quickly enough to intercept incoming strikes against that carrier.

I don’t know if there are many situations that have that combination of characteristics.

It was the only search result relevant to my query.

Paste it into archive.org’s Wayback Machine. Good odds that they’ve stored a copy. I’d do it for you and just link to the page, but you don’t list the URL…

https://web.archive.org/

Click the headphones button.

Ah, gotcha. Hmm.

I’ve no familiarity with it, but it looks like this runs on iOS, might also be an option:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collabora

Collabora’s department Collabora Productivity is the main developer of LibreOffice.[3][4][5][6]

https://apps.apple.com/us/app/collabora-office/id1440482071

Collabora Office

It looks to be open-source and on GitHub.

https://github.com/CollaboraOnline/online

Just run LibreOffice locally?

https://www.libreoffice.org/

One thing I would keep in mind is that the Win64 API does change from release-to-release and that my guess is that if very few people using a software package are still using a version of Windows, application software developers may stop intentionally avoiding newer API calls and features, and will just have their new release require a newer version of Windows.

That may be okay for some use cases, like if you just want to keep an existing system working. But I think that it’s worth keeping in mind that you may increasingly not be able to use:

• New software packages.

• Newer releases of existing packages.

• Software packages that make use of cloud-based services that drop support.

They’re probably going to take into account the percentage of people using the thing in setting their compatibility targets for developers and their testing.

Windows 11 is the most secure Windows ever built, with comprehensive end-to-end security

Does “end-to-end security” actually mean anything in this context, or is it just intended to evoke “end-to-end encryption”?

I suppose that more automated testing could help catch some of these before releases.

Hmm. Do they accept an HTTP Range-Request?

That’s a common problem with these local models that lack company-provided guardrails. They could expose people to any manner of things.

Generated locally with ComfyUI:

So, during the Cold War, the US had some very direct interests in European security. The US did not want Moscow conquering Europe, then exploiting European capability and resources against the US.

That’s probably not any kind of a near-term risk in the post-Cold-War era. Even the people who are very concerned about Russia and feel that it could do very real harm in Europe don’t see Russia overrunning all of Europe in the near future. Too big for Russia’s mouth to take in one bite.

And Europe has a lot of potential, much larger economy than does Russia. I remember seeing a statistic somewhere that today, Russia is spending more on defense than all of Europe.

kagis

https://breakingdefense.com/2025/02/russia-overtakes-all-of-europe-on-defense-spending-in-key-metric-iiss-military-balance/

Russia overtakes all of Europe on defense spending in key metric: IISS military balance

The spending figures included in the think tank’s newly published Military Balance report also show that in real-terms, Russia’s military expenditure increased by over 40 percent in 2024.

But…Europe’s still got that much larger economy. So even if Europe is not ready and may not want to spend more on defense, it can if it has the political will to do so, and one can probably assume that Europe would, if push came to shove, spend more rather than simply watching as Russia slowly clomped across Europe.

But…I’m not sure that I’d say that the US doesn’t have some substantial interests in Atlanticism. For one, China is going to be trying to expand its influence and control in the world. China may not primarily be trying to expand its influence through hard power, even though it is certainly building out its military and power projection capabilities. It may aim to use economic and political pressures. Europe’s a more-important player there. It does have economic clout comparable to the US.

One of the points I’ve brought up before is that one of the critical capabilities feeding into both economic and probably military capabilities in the US-China situation is chipmaking. The US government paid to bring extreme ultraviolet lithography to the prototype phase…but then they dropped it. It was the Dutch who took it from there to a commercial state. The US is going to care a lot about China not having access to that technology, and the US continuing to have access to it.

When the US was pushing hard to get people not to use Huawei 5G infrastructure, they were promoting Sweden’s Ericsson or Finland’s Nokia. I don’t know how the situation has developed subsequent to that, but the reason they were doing so was because the US doesn’t have a domestic company that fills that role – we had the Senate talking about buying one of those two companies if Europe wasn’t willing to support them, because it was a strategic weakness the US had vis-a-vis China.

There are probably a bunch of others, but those are specific technologies that come to my mind.

Point is, there are capabilities that Europe has that the US does care about as regards China and wants onside. I think that it’s probably true that the US is inevitably going to focus more on China over time, and less on happenings in Europe’s neighborhood than in the past. But I’m skeptical that it’s in US interests to outright end Atlanticism. And one of the things that the US can bring to the table that does have value to Europe is a considerable amount of hard power.

Are Asia-Pacific allies next?

I would guess not. The Project 2025 stuff is full of material concerned about China. I don’t think that the US is backing out of the Pacific at all. I’d expect the opposite.

Honestly, the “Pivot to Asia” has been kind of getting talked about since…what, at least Obama? But then there’s always been something happening since then, most notably Russia hitting Ukraine. Some degree of realignment was inevitably going to happen, even if not as abruptly or impolitely as with Trump.

kagis

Looks like the phrase was associated with the Obama administration.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pivot_to_asia

U.S. President Barack Obama’s East Asia Strategy (2009–2017), also known as the Pivot to Asia, represented a significant shift in the foreign policy of the United States since the 2010s. It shifted the country’s focus away from the Middle Eastern and European sphere and allowed it to invest heavily and build relationships in East Asian and Southeast Asian countries, especially countries which are in close proximity to the People’s Republic of China (PRC) either economically, geographically or politically to counter its rise as a rival potential superpower.[1]

Additional focus was placed on the region with the Obama administration’s 2012 “Pivot to East Asia” regional strategy,[2] whose key areas of actions are: “strengthening bilateral security alliances; deepening our working relationships with emerging powers, including with China; engaging with regional multilateral institutions; expanding trade and investment; forging a broad-based military presence; and advancing democracy and human rights.”[3] A report by the Brookings Institution states that reactions to the strategy were mixed, as “different Asian states responded to American rebalancing in different ways.”[2]

Since 2017, the United States has readjusted its policy toward China through FOIP, replacing the concept of the “Pivot to Asia” or “Asia-Pacific” with the “Indo-Pacific strategy”.[4][5]

I wouldn’t be surprised if it was discussed under the Bush administration, though, even if it didn’t rise to the level of a formally-named thing.

If Google wants to do so, they can do the same with YouTube.

There are other email providers out there, but there’s only really one service like YouTube.

EDIT: Also, there are a lot of documents out there in Google Docs. I mean, if they start requiring a Google account with personal information to view those, they control access to a lot of stuff. And while hosting documents (dunno about editable documents) probably isn’t as hard as hosting video, you can’t just yourself migrate out of that the way you can with email. Need all the people sticking information on Google Docs to also do so.

Yeah — if you don’t like laws in a democracy, you have a solution — elect legislators that will create laws that you want. If they can’t get support for it, then you don’t have adequate support in society for rules that work the way you want.

The answer definitely isn’t a police force that acts as an independent arm of government that disregards the law and decides what laws it wants to enforce. You wind up in a situation like that and you definitely will have corruption…from that police force.

The direct effects on the world of a nuclear war between the US and Russia isn’t going to include killing 90% of the world’s population.

https://www.navalgazing.net/Nuclear-Winter

Even using the most conservative numbers here, an all-out exchange between the US and Russia would produce a nuclear winter that would at most resemble the one that Robock and Toon predict for a regional nuclear conflict, although it would likely end much sooner given empirical data about stratospheric soot lifetimes. Some of the errors are long-running, most notably assumptions about the amount of soot that will persist in the atmosphere, while others seem to have crept in more recently, contributing to a strange stability of their soot estimates in the face of cuts to the nuclear arsenal. All of this suggests that their work is driven more by an anti-nuclear agenda than the highest standards of science. While a large nuclear war would undoubtedly have some climatic impact, all available data suggests it would be dwarfed by the direct (and very bad) impacts of the nuclear war itself.

Russia can’t defeat the US in conventional warfare, but is much-more-comparable from a nuclear aspect. So Russia has a significant incentive to use nuclear weapons.

I’d guess that the US probably has a shot at actually getting a first strike off versus Russia. So the US has a significant incentive to use nuclear weapons.

Anyone intending to make serious use of nuclear weapons has very little reason to hold back if they expect a high likelihood of the other side responding massively. So they’ve got a significant incentive to go all-in.

I think that there’s a pretty good probability that a major war between Russia and the US of the “only one of us is walking away from this” sort goes very nuclear very quickly.

I never moved to the new UI. I assume that users using the new UI is a combination of:

• Many, probably most of the existing userbase came in after the redesign – Reddit kept growing. Probably not even aware of it.

• A lot of users – especially today, though not back when the site was created – are browsing the site using a smartphone, and the old UI, while usable, is not designed around a small smartphone screen. (That’s a two-edged sword; to some extent, I think that the new UI is poorly suited to a personal computer.) That being said, Reddit, like many Web-based services, pushes hard to get mobile users on the official app – more access to a user’s phone and data-harvesting potential, I suppose – and I’d guess that a lot of smartphone users use the official app these days, rather than the mobile Web UI. I think that Reddit mostly sees the mobile Web UI as a way to help lower the bar to feed new users in, but that’s not where they want mobile users long-term.

• Reddit added inline images to the new UI, but not the old.

• There is a small amount of incompatibility…I’d have to go back and look it up, but IIRC backslash-URL-escaping for URLs has slightly different edge cases, so you can get a link that works in the old UI but not the new and vice versa.

• You really need a browser extension to fix up links to redirect to the old UI, since otherwise links that users on the new UI use will just direct old users to the new UI.

  We actually kind of have a similar problem on the Threadiverse too – while we can use !community@instance syntax to link to a community and have the user stay on their home instance, today we have no way to link to a comment or post and do so – if I paste a link to it, it’ll take a user off their home instance. There’s a Firefox addon, Instance Assistant for Lemmy & Kbin, which sticks a button in the sidebar of webpages to view a given post through your own home instance, which is kind of a half-solution.

On the other side of the balance sheet, I haven’t played with the new UI enough to know what didn’t make it over, but I don’t know if the subreddit wikis – each subreddit came bundled with a wiki – ever made it over. They weren’t accessible from the new UI when it came out.

Uniform/Camouflage

I think there’s some room for potential iteration here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsarouchi

The Presidential Guard (Greek: Προεδρική Φρουρά, romanized: Proedrikí Frourá) is a ceremonial infantry unit that guards the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier and the Presidential Mansion in Athens, Greece.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yeomen_of_the_Guard

The King’s Body Guard of the Yeomen of the Guard is a bodyguard of the British monarch. The oldest British military corps still in existence, it was created by King Henry VII in 1485 after the Battle of Bosworth Field.

Issue one of those as battle dress.

Originally I misremembered and thought that San Marino’s Crossbow Corps were Luxembourg’s. San Marino isn’t in NATO, so unfortunately, I think that crossbows are out as primary issue weapon:

EDIT: Oh, yes. There’s no land mine covered. Let’s do the chicken-warmed nuclear landmine. I’m fairly sure that the potential for a complete mess here is pretty good.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Peacock

Blue Peacock, renamed from Blue Bunny and originally Brown Bunny, was a British tactical nuclear weapon project in the 1950s.

The project’s goal was to store a number of ten-kiloton nuclear land mines in Germany.

Chicken-powered nuclear bomb

A technical problem is that during winter, the temperature of buried devices can drop quickly, creating a possibility that the mechanisms of the mine will cease working due to low temperatures in the winter.[5] Various methods were studied to solve this problem, such as wrapping the bombs in insulating blankets.

One proposal suggested that live chickens would be sealed inside the casing, with a supply of food and water.[6] They would remain alive for approximately a week. Their body heat would apparently have been sufficient to keep the mine’s components at a working temperature.