Keyoxide: aspe:keyoxide.org:WJM4GTY2JVYHB7F7MEAJIZF4XA

  • 1 Post
  • 71 Comments
Joined 9 months ago
cake
Cake day: September 27th, 2023

help-circle


  • The issue in that whole proposition lies within this one single sentence

    Business software is written for windows

    Nowadays, practically all companies are moving towards either SaaS, or in house web services. The pandemic has killed native enterprise apps, for better or for worse.

    Windows only has decent presence because it’s reasonably easy to integrated Windows machines into corporate structures. The moment Apple taps into that market, it’s all over. We’ve seen that with Google basically ruining the school market for Microsoft by doing that, and it will happen again.










  • because meat is mostly fat and protein and is thus calorically dense and filling, and has a bunch of nutrients that are really hard to come by in plants (eg cobalamin)

    if you exclude meat (as well as eggs and dairy) from your diet, you’ll absolutely need to take supplements to cover those nutrients… and they’re usually made from animal byproducts anyway

    like, humans are omnivores. you’re supposed to eat plants and meat alike. cutting meat out might be a good choice morally (after all, what’s the point of eating at all if it brings you mental anguish?) but it’s not like you’re physiologically a different kind after that

    upd. not gonna spam replies but i wasn’t talking about whether or not calorie density is good nowadays, i was just talking about why humans eat meat at all







  • is widely understood to be the option that results in the fewest casualties

    Western economists thought that sanctioning Russia was the best option to instantly win the war. If you still think that, you’re on some heavy copium. Or you directly benefit from the money spent on directing the whatever-the-fuck-th sanctions package.

    Your scenarios of doom presume that one sub could destroy the west. You assume that we would not be able to defend against their attempted launch when we’ve spent decades investing in top secret defense systems for this exact scenario.

    And what if you were wrong? You’re not playing around with fucking rocks, a few warheads of the thousands is enough to wipe the life from this rock.

    You assume Putin’s delivery systems will function after decades of maintenance by notorious black market scalpers. You assume Russian soldiers would be willing to erase their families for Putin’s attack order.

    Some won’t function, some will. It’s not like it’s 6000 something nukes that are gonna get stuck in silos lmao. Also, soldiers are nothing if not good at making idiotic decisions when asked to do so.

    A conventional first strike means very few, if any, of Russia’s delivery systems would launch. It is extremely unlikely that any of them (if any were to actually launch, given all of the roadblocks I’ve mentioned) would make it to a target.

    Instead of half the world being instantly turned to glass, it’s only gonna be some random unfortunate places. How sweet. Can’t wait till a nuke drops on Ohio and the serious generals residing in bunkers shrug and tell everyone that it could’ve been worse.

    Additionally, every soldier and leader in a warhead firing position knows an attempted launch of any nukes would result in nuclear annihilation of Moscow, St. Petersburg and other cities. They also know that not launching means saving the lives of their families.

    Back to the point above, soldiers are fucking dumb. You don’t join the military because you’re the brightest person around, you join the military because you’re not needed anywhere else.

    If we strike first (conventionally), it is extremely likely that we will suffer no casualties at all and it will also limit the casualties suffered by Russia.

    “Extremely likely” means “we don’t really care if someone in the middle of nowhere gets glassed, we just need to prove our mighty military might.”