In other words, betting on wind (or sun) where there is little wind (and sun) is not an optimal choice. But folks on HN were telling otherwise. Who might’ve known…
And it is more than likely. US and Iran probably can’t defeat each other militarily (us obviously can, but it requires full scale ground invasion which is not even contemplated at the moment). And both can’t back out of the conflict. So the likely outcome is that the conflict escalates until one of the regimes snaps and it becomes to somehow politically possible to back out.
Collapse of the regime in Iran seems unlikely at the moment because it’s hard and zealous dictatorship with unlimited power and will for violence within the country. In the US OTOH the elections are coming. An administration that started a stupid and absolutely preventable war and then effectively lost faces quite a challenge there despite everything else. This seems like a perfect moment for Iran to create a deterrent for US: attacking us ends your presidency.
If the newest batch of 10,000 is approved, we're up to 17,000 combat troops deployed for this. (Marines there as of Mar 27, another 3,500 in about two weeks, and then at least 1 battalion of the 82nd Airborne, plus another 10,000 requested)
I have heard other units getting pre-mobilization / warnings.
(This would not nearly be enough troops for large scale ground conflict, but it might be enough to go into the island tunnels looking for drones and ballistic missiles while the US tries to hold open the straight by force for... However long that takes)
This is all fine and well, but misses one little detail: drones. In the past conflicts US troops were more or less unreachable for the enemy unless they were advancing on the ground in a challenging terrain like dense jungles or mountains, where an enemy could ambush them. Other then that, US had air superiority, overwhelming firepower and excellent reconnaissance.
After the war in Ukraine things are very different. US troops are not safe as long as they are reachable by an FPV done, i.e., the enemy has to only make it ~20km to US positions. Given the area and terrain in Iran this will be happening all the time. So any troops positioned on Iran's territory will be under constant attacks by FPV drones. This means heavy casualties.
But even if the US forces will manage to clear the FPVs, this is still not enough, because there are dozens of other types of winged long range drones, the most famous being of course Shahed. They are less precise and not so deadly for the troops. They are also much easier to intercept. But that means that you effectively can't set up a safe stationary base, because it will be attacked by hundreds of drones from hundreds of miles away 24x7. There is not enough interceptors to stop that.
This means that a new approach will have to be used by US armed forces which they never tried before. This guarantees heavy losses on the initial stage which will raise a real political shitstorm back home. It looks like the current administration doesn't particularly care about that, but chances are they will not be able to contain the consequences.
> This is all fine and well, but misses one little detail: drones.
That's why A-10s are patrolling the 6 mile wide straight for 2 hours a flight. They can take out the larger Iranian drones much cheaper than any other platform we have. The small dones can't get very far and the US is exceptional at electronic warfare. But that doesn't really change anything, it just maintains the status quo of the straight being too risky for oil tanker insurers.
Ultimately, even if the US goes into the island tunnels after the ballistic missiles and larger drones, it would take huge sums of money to try and keep it open militarily for... who knows how long.
Yes, in principle, this (limited ground invasion to protect the straight) can be done. The cost - both in lives, money and political capital - will be enormous.
One comment though.
> The small dones can't get very far and the US is exceptional at electronic warfare.
There is currently one county in the world which is exceptional in electronic warfare against drones - Ukraine. Then there is Russia. Everybody else is leagues behind, including US. Without real combat experience and proven technologies ready for deployment all your money and fancy equipment are worth nothing. THAADs have the most advanced radars, did it help them in UAE recently?
In Ukraine they basically had to build a network of mini-factories with 3d printers and ad-hoc repurpose of old weapons right behind the front lines. This is to be able to counter Russian drones by enabling fast iteration on EW. US has nothing like that in current doctrine and it’s not clear if this can even be deployed in an expeditionary corps model.
I’m not saying of course that it’s impossible for US to open the straight by military means or to defeat IRGC otherwise, it’s just that it’s a very hard task which got even harder after advancement in drones.
It's completely dominated by China in terms of volume, cost, and battery supply chain. They have the maturity, and are still pulling away.
Unprotected, western EV manufacturers die on the spot. Which is fine by me, until the Chinese don't have to compete on cost anymore, and can dictate the price.
To claim that what they need to succeed is less protectionism is a misunderstanding.
The issue with car industry at least in Europe is not price. This is the last branch that is more or less alive, employs a lot of people and generates added value domestically. If it’s ceded to China, that means that you are at the next stage of deindustrialisation. From where we stand, it looks like that would mean economy collapse and crisis that we haven’t seen since… ever? If this is the way, we’ll have to figure how to live without relying on jobs as the way to survive (ubi, resource-based economy, etc). Since this is not even on the horizon, keep the tariffs for now, thank you.
Really? Cost of extraction in Russia is about $30/barrel, sanctions introduced discount of about $20/barrel in 2025 which means 70% profit drop at market price of $60. Sounds pretty game changing to me.
Russia can still produce tens of thousands of drones, missiles, and push up endless meatwaves of conscripts even if their oil sector declines (oil is 15% of their GDP). This war hasn't been that sophisticated for a while. Drones are cheap and China will keep selling them parts while buying their oil.
Not necessarily:
Money isn’t everything. Russia cannot produce electronics on its own, so only because American companies sell to shell companies that sell to Russia is Russia able to launch missiles and similar high tech weapons on Ukraine and, no, Russia has no chance in hell of winning in Ukraine with the so called (sadly but truly deeply dehumanising) “meat wave” attacks sending in soldiers with little training and just a riffle… So really oil revenues are a way to hurt Russia but not a way to cause them to lose the war, but depriving them of American technology that they need to develop the kinds of weapons that they use to attack Ukrainian cities and power stations and infrastructure probably would
No, Lviv the Molotov city. Like, yes, if you've already carved up Ukraine in your head, it's obviously losing. By that metric China has been losing to the Mongolians its whole history.
Look, ukraine's economy is destroyed, the men are either dead, disabled, or have fled, and the ones who haven't are being kidnapped off the street to be pressed into service, the grid has been set back by decades, they're deep deep in debt, and everyone knows they aren't getting the mineral-rich east back. It's beginning to look doubtful if they can even keep their black sea port. They have under half the population now than they did when the soviet republic collapsed (granted, mostly due to circumstances unrelated to the war—notably, outmigration.)
So perhaps I was being a bit of a dick by calling Lviv polish, but it will probably take ukraine decades, maybe a century or more, to recover from this devastation, even if against all odds they manage to enforce their absurd demands that russia withdraw. It does matter to a nation to keep its historic lands, and ukraine has already lost about half of all traditionally ukrainian land + crimea. Far western ukraine, including Lviv, has only been considered "ukraine" for a little over a hundred years.
Be serious. I don't care about any of europe; the rest of the west is doing just fine caring about it incessantly at the top of their voices regardless of who asked. My heart belongs in east africa.
I'll try to be more sensitive with what I capitalize—but I don't really give a damn about either ukraine or russia—both seem like far-right corrupt states that don't take care of their citizens well—though I do feel very sad for the humans caught between them.
> Even if everyone has been 10x’ed, the math still strongly favours not making mistakes in the first place
The math depends on importance of the software. A mistake in a typical CRUD enterprise app with 100 users has zero impact on anything. You will fix it when you have time, the important thing is that the app was delivered in a week a year ago and was solving some problem ever since. It has already made enormous profit if you compare it with today’s (yesterday’s ?) manual development that would take half a year and cost millions.
A mistake in a nuclear reactor control code would be a total different thing. Whatever time savings you made on coding are irrelevant if it allowed for a critical bug to slip through.
Between the two extremes you thus have a whole spectrum of tasks that either benefit or lose from applying coding with LLMs. And there are also more axes than this low to high failure cost, which also affect the math. For example, even non-important but large app will likely soon degrade into unmanageable state if developed with too little human intervention and you will be forced to start from scratch loosing a lot of time.
Oh yeah. Bug 12309 was reported now what, 20 years ago? It’s fair to say that at this point arrival of GNU Mach will happen sooner than Linux will be able to properly work under memory pressure.
In countries with functional democracy it actually is happening. In Sweden anti-immigration sentiments allowed for right party to gain significant share in the parliament and now immigration rules are changing and immigration rates are lowering. One may argue that this is 20 years too late, but in the past the majority of the population public actually didn’t actively oppose the policies. They do now, the situation is changing. No swexit required.
V 1.02: Everybody knows you didn't win, and everybody knows the sentiment is universal... But everyone maintains the same outward facade that you won, because they believe that the others believe that you have enough power to crush the dissent. The moment this belief fades, you fall.
Robot vacuum with a mop, washing machine, tumble dryer and dishwasher reduce housework to like an hour per week, ie 30 min/person/week. This can be higher if you live in a big house, but if your marriage can’t tolerate 30 mins of house work a robot will not solve it.
