I'm writing this comment from Russia, St. Petersburg, and yes, you can be against the Ukraine war in Russia.

Always hiliarious when westerners think they know how life works in Russia, China, etc because they heard from it on TV.

Of course it’s all propaganda, comrade, you can openly protest against the ~~war~~ SMO. Don’t forget your Z insignia, though.

Proving me right I see.

Educate me then. The mental image I have from researching the topic seems contrary to what you’re saying.

Safe and socially acceptable: "war is bad and I wish it will end sooner". "We should be friends with Ukraine and/or West". "Putin was not right to start a war". "I want that Putin resigns and/or voted out"

Safe for regular person, but socially risky: "We should surrender and pay reparations" "This war is totally Putin'a fault" "Putin is corrupt dictator" "Zelensky is a good guy"

Could in theory lead to a fine and/or losing job, but mostly safe: "I support Navalny", donation to ACF or some kind of western-affiliated NGO.

Could lead to a fine and/or prison time, when it done in social media or on the square: "Slava Ukraine", Butcha fakes, Let's willingly donate to Ukraine war effort, etc

Thank you. This is helpful.

> Taiwan has and always will be a province of china

You know that's official position of 99% countries in the world, including all superpowers and every NATO member?

Only officially, because it's a requirement to retain trade relationships with China and China makes everything.

Everyone, including 99% of the world's politicians that don't have their heads up their asses, including the ones who wrote the official positions that Taiwan is not a country, knows Taiwan is a country.

No it's not and if you do believe that, you are taking an overly reductionist viewpoint.

99% countries, as they say, "acknowledge China's viewpoint".

~120 countries fully endorse One China Policy. ~60 acknowledge. ~10 recognize ROC.

Yes, comports with my numbers.

>A majority of countries (119 or 62 per cent of UN member states) have endorsed Beijing’s one-China principle, which entails that Taiwan is an inalienable part of the People’s Republic of China.

I was being generous bucketing 20 mixed signallers with 40 status quoist. 120 agree TW inalienable part of China, as in TW can never be independent from one China construct (PRC's position). 20 agree it's part of China but not necessarily inalienable, i.e. TW/ROC should have pathway to independence but until they formalize, still part of China. AKA 75% is in recognize tier.

Ironically, a lot of countries with metric system calling half inch pipe a "1/2" :-)

Much more economically feasible than battery powered ones.

Prove it.

There are operating nuclear powered ocean vessels for decades.

The parent poster means to say prove it is more economical, not that it is doable.

It is hard to compute the economics of small nuclear reactors that use highly enriched fuel. A lot of it is funded by defense needs.

Mixed use is largely to keep defense manufacturing active not because they are economically effective.

If nuclear civilian ships were cheaper, there would be efforts to make a lot of them (In Russia and China if not other countries etc)

Russia is operating nuclear civil vessels (icebreakers) since 1957

Actually, both. Perimeter dead hand system algorithm: 1. If perimeter have been activated 2. AND there is nuclear explosion at russian territory 3. AND there is no connection to commander-in-chief

THAN release launch codes to every local military commander.

I worked at middle-sized company that instituted a pay cuts, cutting all bonuses and stopping raises. After year, company lost almost every person in tech managenent and most of team leaders, their clients actively executing forking rights and no one believes in company future now.

I once heard wise words from some CEO. In harsh times, clients do not want cheaper and worse services from us. They want less services. So we are moving out headcount down, while keeping pay and even execute raises for those who stay.

Can you explain why this is wise? I'd say most execs leaving is usually a net positive. You are framing it as a tragedy and I am just not seeing it.

From where I am standing, leeches that are only there for fat bonuses left. Where's the loss?

And the measure you described also doesn't follow. Bad times always end and then you have a worse product. Will the execs pick up the new tech work?

Except usual time to upgrade to next version of .net is less than man day.

Intresting that this problem (IO-bound threads should have priority over CPU-bound threads) already solved at OS level (most OSes will give priority boost to thread that was unblocked because of end of IO operation in hope that thread will soon block with another operation).