Skip to main content

Recent Posts

1
Browsers & Technology / Re: Minimal Apps
Last post by ersi -
One day when trying to tweak Qpdfview to be more effective, I was surprised to discover there was no statusbar. Very weird.

Anyway, then I installed Zathura and found that it can be pretty amazing. It sports the same minimalist keyboard-driven interface as the minimalist browsers that I have advertised here. It even has a vi-like input field to make it do things. Zathura seems to open and load fairly fast and reliably even the worst pdf files I have. I expect it to be good for presentations.
2
DnD Central / Re: Everything Trump…
Last post by ersi -
It didn't happen and the exact opposite of an arms race followed. I must of missed your point.
You did not miss the point. You only miss the facts. In your world, SU collapsed by itself, instead of under the pressure of the nuclear arms race. In your world, the number of countries with nuclear weapons is going down, not up. I'll let you have your facts as you please.
3
DnD Central / Re: Everything Trump…
Last post by jax -
It was the modelling 0 to MAD. Mutually Assured Destruction was the desired state, because for any non-suicidal actor the destruction of their own side was not a winning strategy. As long as all parties were rational none would take the steps that led to MAD.

I say all instead of both, as China was a complication. China didn't and doesn't have a MAD-level arsenal, they have a nuclear deterrent. But according to a Chinese leak of unknown veracity the Soviet Union planned a nuclear attack on China, just a few years after MacArthur wanted the same during the Korean war. Now however the US blocked it, stating that a nuclear attack on China would be the same as one on the US, in effect escalating up to MAD.

MAD also made a third war in Europe unwinnable. Assuming the NATO defences were able to halt Warsaw Pact forces, it would be too tempting for the Soviet Union to use tactical weapons to penetrate and pass those defences. In that case it would be in US tactical interest to escalate as the resulting nuclear no man's land would halt that offensive. This system was unstable and would likely lead to MAD, thus not a venture to try.

The argument against Star Wars, anti-missile defences to shoot down approaching nuclear missiles, was that they too made MAD more likely. They might tempt the US to a first strike, hoping that the anti-missiles could reduce the retaliatory strike to something tolerable. There is some truth to that argument, if the US was put in a position to choose between a risky first strike or hold back and risk MAD.

But the real risk was, and still is, the ICBMs.  The other two parts of the nuclear triad, submarines and airborne, are not particularly vulnerable to first strike, but ICBMs are. If either side thought that a first strike was winnable, they might be tempted to do so rather than risk MAD. When both sides knew that the other side might attempt a first strike we had an unstable situation, either by a preemptive first strike, or by a preemptive retaliatory strike before those weapons were destroyed by the other side's first strike. With buggy detector systems on both sides, and a very short time frame from the weapons were fired to they reached their targets, the risks of accidental MAD were real. To some extent this was countered with a massive redundancy, but Star Wars could counter the counter.
4
Otter Browser Forum / Re: We haven't had a weekly build...
Last post by DaveH -
Let's hope we're there soon!
 :up:
5
DnD Central / Re: Everything Trump…
Last post by ensbb3 -
It didn't happen and the exact opposite of an arms race followed. I must of missed your point.
6
DnD Central / Re: Everything Trump…
Last post by ersi -
The Star Wars plan was an antinuclear program.
Of course that's what they said. Yet the idea was a straightforward nuclear arms race.
7
The Lounge / Re: What music are you listening to right now?
Last post by Luxor -
Sailor - The Old Nickelodeon Sound

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rErMXQVlaEM
8
DnD Central / Re: Everything Trump…
Last post by ensbb3 -
Somewhere in mid-80's I read about Reagan's Star Wars plan. It was quite literally called that, the plan to nuclearise the atmosphere as if it belonged to the USA.
The Star Wars plan was an antinuclear program. While both the Soviets and US had plans to put nukes in orbit the plan was to put a satellite laser system in orbit to shoot down Soviet missiles (I'm sure other uses were considered). Either way I believe a treaty between the concerned parties made the need obsolete.

Only problem with that, sooner or later the USA may run out of carrots.
Done right - they don't ever get the carrot.
9
Otter Browser Forum / Re: We haven't had a weekly build...
Last post by beastie -
@Emdek has been keeping builds to a minimum during the summer due to the hot weather. So since the last weekly build in June we've had only RCs so far, which makes sense since we're getting close to the 1.0 mark anyway.
10
Otter Browser Forum / Re: (Pre) RC 12 release (01.09.2018)
Last post by larry -
I see the commit from aurhat in the master branch:
* 9d727d5 2018-09-10 | Prevent duplicate entries, fixes #1536 [aurhat]
Thanks a lot for the quick fix!