A minimum wage job, 1 minimum wage job, paid for a family in 1950. Bought a house, a cheap car, doctors, dentists, optometrists, other professional services people can’t do themselves, even able to go out to eat for a burger.

Yes, in 1950, damn right. Now do 1930.

by the 1980’s it was undeniably true that wages no longer paid for what they did

Still better than 1930.

but there is no future going further up, come straight back and join us in the sunshine brother!

I dunno, there might not be any sunshine stored for me, but it’s still not 1930.

There are some very old contracts still not terminated around. From Netherlands before William of Orange, or from England before Cromwell. Those of nation-states (WWII lend-lease of the famous ones).

working people don’t have the money to live a dignified life for the first time since the great depression in the US,

The US is not even close to that. Your comment be proof of that, you don’t even understand how life was there and then, despite that being history of your country portrayed well enough in many movies and books.

That said, there are, of course, complications to be expected.

It’s better to use what you can use.

We’re constantly psychologically manipulated.

Yes, so about that - these things are actual power applied holding us on the necessary (for their owners) trajectory. There are already plenty of actual broken people. Nobody will stop them without a power solution. That is, a cure. A counter-manipulation technology, that manages to stay under the radar for its carriers to become strong enough before actually engaging in countering this.

I don’t see that future counterweight, perhaps that’s because, as said previously, it stays under the radar.

I’m not a Muslim.

It’s a reference to how in Judaism it’s considered impolite to write “God” on disposable sheets and such. Nothing to do with cowardice.

the fact that russia can’t design and build a tank that doesn’t play turret toss when it gets hit with a shell or break down in the middle of a parade DOES have a lot in common with this - it’s called brain drain.

Older Soviet tanks play turret toss, you know why? Their automatic loading system is optimized for fire rates, but not safety. You know why that and what that achieves? That achieves a whole lot of tanks built during Soviet times for mass ground warfare in the WWIII as it was imagined then. When it’s one safer NATO tank against 5 worse but comparable (and fast-firing) Soviet tanks for the same expense, the choice (with Soviet doctrine) is obvious.

There was no brain drain then, these were all conscious design decisions making a difference of the scale of hundreds of tanks built.

Literally all of the smartest young people left Russia because the pay was bad and the prospects for living were better I’m the west.

Unfortunately no.

You say thag everyone of consequence involved in designing military equipment in russia has better knowledge than Germany? Due to what experience, getting their World War 2 era tanks pulled out of the mud by Ukrainian tractors?

You are a few years late even in talking about tanks.

That’s also something most Russians have passively understood by now about modern warfare, it’s all about information, planning, coordination done by many small drones, with humans reduced to techs and operators and, of course, small assault groups. Tanks have no place in that.

You’re wanting to claim a country that experienced that amount of brain drain is can do cutting edge brain surgery??

Brain drain is something that was happening when plenty of Soviet-educated engineers and scientists simply had no place in ex-Soviet countries, or by any measure the offers they could get were far better in the West. Right now there’s no coordinated incentive for said brain drain from the western governments. Which was a thing then.

Right now - yes, I think oil money that buys western components for weapons can buy expertise in areas of interest.

Cowardice in general has become way too socially acceptable. Actually the norm. If you G-d forbid act so that you can be unambiguously determined as not a coward, then G-d help you.

And cowards understand each other very well. You can even expose them all as cowards, they’ll accept the shame and admit you’re right and all such, and then they’ll still feel victorious, because in a society of cowards cowardice always wins in all ways but one.

Living like “Hagakure” for real is perhaps the only way to preserve your humanity in some life situations, but that won’t lead to happiness. And the author of “Hagakure” refused to commit seppuku when his suzerain died, because “times have changed”.

And meeting people who live by those principles, you damn hard wish they hid or cowered or stepped back that one time that led them to pain for their remaining lives from those not worth their breath.

I’m thinking of a woman, by the way. Men of that quality are far more rare.

Yes. They should perhaps dispose of that server when returned, or thoroughly examine all the firmware and such for changes. A hostile party has touched it.

Not cower in fear, but throwing a brittle hard item (that is, made of glass) at them may be legally stretched far enough. Perhaps if you are fine with dealing damage, do a proper Molotov cocktail.

Militaries have always known how to work with and around bad equipment.

Yes, and in that light one can think that defense corruption traditions have an evolutionary reason - they maintain this ability. It doesn’t really matter if something stupid is mandated for purely honest, just misguided, reason, or for a corrupt one, but corruption requires the ability to avoid the outcomes.

Honestly X11 keystroke and modifier management is not that good. Because were it better, you could map any sequence to a different kind of action, possibly intercepting them. Instead you have keystrokes with modifiers, sometimes the keystroke is the modifier key alone. One can work around some things of this with, say, WM menus in FVWM called by one keystroke with modifier and then keybindings for menu items to have something like Emacs UX.

But yeah, not the best and brightest, that’s certainly a possibility.

No it’s not, there’s always someone from among the b&b on the evil’s side. Malicious compliance - yes, likely.

Oh no, without a warrant. How could they. How impolite. No, our security is only intended for jurisdictions with law-abiding police.

Object recognition and classification is more narrowly AI, and from the description this thing might have it.

I’m not sure it’d be a good thing, of course - it’s very unlikely it can reliably classify everything , which will create a contrast between what the combatant uses their senses for and what they are hinted on screen. That’s a very ergonomically debilitating effect. Like night lighting makes you blind for everything outside the illuminated area. Or try playing an airplane simulator game with realistic interactive cockpit and an arcade HUD with less information above it, it’s guaranteed you’ll mostly ignore the former and the information it gives you.

1. It might, 2) they might think they are being attacked seriously and use live rounds, 3) they might identify you later and put you into jail.

Be careful with glass ones, though.

I’ve heard of the particular people behind that particular company achieving similar things 12 years ago with, eh, humans. That’s of the “bloody regime horror stories” genre. There will be no proof.

Also honestly

would put the company decades beyond any tech I have seen

why not? They have plenty of money and expertise. Something you don’t want to believe? Too bad, neither do I.

You do, of course, understand that this has nothing in common with building a tank?

You do also understand that (just guessing) if you’re from a German instance, then probably everyone of consequence involved in designing military hardware in Russia has better knowledge of their domain area than people analogous to them from German MIC and military? Simply due to experience gained. That does apply to tanks.

Anyway. I don’t know if it’s real, but you just go and read whose company it is. It might be.

I’m fine with the idea of a coop for a business. There are people whom I’d want to associate with. There’s a little catch - we all do different things in different areas. And those who do the same things in the same areas as me whom I know - those I wouldn’t want a coop with. I mean, OK, possibly I would.