BalderSion

joined 5 months ago
[–] BalderSion@real.lemmy.fan 1 points 2 months ago

Have you seen Dmge ? It's web based, but it has fog of war and a few other nice tricks, if you've got the maps.

[–] BalderSion@real.lemmy.fan 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

The number of warheads each nation maintains is agreed on in the START treaties, and those levels are determined by stockpile effectiveness. The US is recognized to have superior targeting and guidance systems, so they need fewer warheads to maintain parity with Russia's stockpile.

The best possible outcome is for SDI and it's descendants to be a complete waste of taxpayer money. If some clever chap comes up with a practical missile defense system, Russia would immediately generate enough warheads to overwhelm such a system and maintain parity.

Each missile represents a potential fault path to WWIII. We've been lucky with at least a couple near misses in our history. I don't look forward to a future with more.

[–] BalderSion@real.lemmy.fan 53 points 3 months ago (2 children)

The scientific method is more about falsification than problem solving.

"If you ever succeed, devise and implement a test to see if it was a fluke."

[–] BalderSion@real.lemmy.fan 45 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

I too grew up in an era of action movies, where the good guy decisively self-defenses the bad guy to death, saves the world, goes home and has marital relations with the prom queen. It's a powerful story, but ultimately it's just a story.

Peaceful resistance does work, but there isn't a single event that achieves change. It has to be an accumulation.

Rosa Park's arrest didn't achieve anything "in terms of change".

Ghandi's protest fasts didn't achieve anything "in terms of change".

When the Baltics had their singing revolutions, there wasn't a single performance that achieved anything "in terms of change".

All these were parts of larger efforts of peaceful resistance that culminated in change.

What did Cory Booker's speech achieve? It's too early to say. It's possible it will be part of an accumulation that culminates in measurable results. On the other hand, it's possible cynicism will poison the resistance and it will achieve nothing. We'll only know once the history is written.

[–] BalderSion@real.lemmy.fan 9 points 3 months ago

For comparison, the Betacel boasted 25 microwatts per cubic centimeter, and this Betavolt battery appears to have 88 microwatts per cubic centimeter. This will also have a longer lifetime also.

The Betacel was successfully used to power pacemakers. I suspect there will be more applications for power sources in this range today.

[–] BalderSion@real.lemmy.fan 8 points 3 months ago

We've literally been told money is speech, but just as soon as people start organizing to vote with our dollar, we're sabotaging everything.

[–] BalderSion@real.lemmy.fan 6 points 3 months ago

Ok, so sure, a reasonably large chunk of all states education budget is going away, but for the states that do well, the hole will both be a smaller portion of the overall budget, and easier to make up.

No child left behind testing goes away, so the testing and standards all go away. You can bet the bottom 25 states in education ranking will quietly stop testing and claim they're doing just great!

It's the special Ed programs that are really going to catch hell. No dept. of Ed. no enforcement of standards. It will be the easiest portion to cut to save money, and the families left in the lurch will get nothing but thoughts and prayers to fill the gap.

[–] BalderSion@real.lemmy.fan -2 points 3 months ago (2 children)

This is the sort of thing that makes me feel more sympathy for the Democratic party. The party simply can't win with the left.

The party leadership worked against Sanders candidacy because they are convinced a liberal can't win in America. I don't agree, but recognize with Nixon and Reagan dominating over leftist candidates, Carter ekeing out a win as a centrist, Clinton winning convincingly as a centrist, and Obama winning as a rather vague candidate, recent history has given limited reason think a leftist national candidate is a safe bet.

But if voters are supporting Cuomo and the party doesn't intervene the party is the wrong for not ignoring the will of the voters and tanking his candidacy.

I mean I get it. The left wants their candidates to win, but the lack of consistency is grating. It makes the centrist seem more sensible.

[–] BalderSion@real.lemmy.fan 12 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Without a purity test how can I tell which members of the tribe are loyal and which might betray me?

[–] BalderSion@real.lemmy.fan 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

From age 6 until 18, and age 33 to 45 I've line dried clothes, three seasons a year. I can recall one time a bird pooped on a bed sheet.

Do you live below a pigeon roost or something?

[–] BalderSion@real.lemmy.fan 5 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

I grew up line drying my clothes, and when I bought I house the first improvement we made was installing a clothes line.

If you find clothes and towels stiff after line drying, but there are options to address that issue.

[–] BalderSion@real.lemmy.fan 1 points 4 months ago

The reason is apparent in history. Party leadership lived through Nixon and Reagan's punishing wins over a liberal leaning Democratic party. Labor support went lukewarm, and their funding stream dwindled. The left absolutely utterly to fill the gap. Clinton ran and won as a centrist, and just as important his cohort had a plan to fund the party. The ranks of party leadership were filled with this cohort, and the left hasn't done the work to take back party control.

I quite like Sanders, but his vision of a groundswell of public support fails to account for the importance of campaign spending in election outcomes. It's not enough for a few charismatic candidates to win, a party needs to win to effect change, particularly in a federal system. That reality, in my opinion, is why the left is still shut out of party control.

All this too say, the party should stand as an anti-oligarchy party, but the party needs a cohesive vision of what what that means.

view more: ‹ prev next ›