Zoraptor

The Swiss list includes the Council of Europe, European Commission, the European Council* and the European Parliament. Technically of course that's only the EU three times over, plus each individual country, but it's lol time anyway since the Swiss claimed they were- direct quote- "countries" who supported the communiqué. Of course population wise the combined 70 are dwarfed by those who turned up but didn't sign, let alone those who didn't turn up at all. They couldn't even get the Vatican to sign it. *yes, there is a Council of Europe (this is the one not quite the same as the EU, eg it has Norway, UK and others) and European Council for anyone wondering.

The core gameplay loop of Stardew Valley's first year is just about perfect for me. There's always something to do, and often slightly too much to do per day. Then it rains, and you spend the day catching fish or 'clearing' mine levels instead. There's always something that needs upgrading and you feel like you're making progress every few days. The trouble is by the 2nd year it starts to feel like make-work instead, or becomes trivial because you've automated everything, and you've done most of the tasks in the community centre. I've never even made it to Ginger Island or whatever it's called, I always stall out sometime in spring year 2. Still one of my favourites though since getting to that point is, well, great.

I particularly like how the list of "countries" supporting the proposal includes the EU, 4 times. Probably the only theoretically Russia leaning country to turn up that supported it was Serbia, the others (Brazil, KSA, India etc) did not. Almost exactly as expected in every respect really, though Ukraine's energy infrastructure must be in a real mess if item #1 is them getting the ZNPP back.

More like indentured servant/ serf than welfare recipient. An awful lot of western 'aid' is in the form of loans after all, not actual aid. Just talking about peace doesn't really do anything if the talk isn't realistic- and the talk was a lot more realistic 2 years ago from both sides, before Boris Johnson got involved. They spent 20 years talking peace in Afghanistan or Vietnam and in the end victory was made by facts on the ground and that despite actually having peace agreements there; and well, Palestine has had the odd talk about peace over the years. For as much as people think drop feeding military aid/'aid' to Ukraine is about boiling frogging Russia it's also very much about doing the same to Ukraine. Just one more wunderwaffe and you'll be at the doors of Moscow, keep fighting; they're out of [equipment type] now, keep fighting etc...

It's not exactly surprising. If you go from importing 90% of your cars to making 90% of them yourself (specific figures made up) it's theoretically great for your economy which is why 'bringing the jobs home' is an attractive election slogan. Making lots of weapons is great for your economy too, hence why everyone is so keen to make and sell them. Russia has a lot of specific advantages that mean it cannot be smothered economically around producing almost all the raw materials it needs itself; sanctions encourage them and in some cases require them not to export as much and to make more value added stuff at home. They also have the advantage of having had obvious western enmity for years and learning from the like of Iran in how to cope. End of the day sanctions don't really do anything apart from being an annoyance, if they worked North Korea and Cuba would be obedient US clients and they aren't. (Nominal gdp figures are rubbish anyway. If Britain made and sold Big Macs at a million dollars a pop and sold precisely two of them it would be better for its GDP than Russia selling 1.8 million at a dollar each, and it would look like Britain was doing even better if they stuck prices up 25% and still sold the same two big macs. Practically the 1.8 million Russians are doing better though; hence the use of Purchase Price Parity GDP where Russia is ahead of the UK and 4th overall per the new data (currently 6th on wikipedia's list). Of course, for most actual people the relevant measure is GDP PPP per capita...)

Hmm. I Haven't played BG3 either, but on the evidence of OS/2 I'd have to hand the award for more memorable companions to Dragon Age as well. I played both Original Sin games more recently than any DA game, yet can remember nothing about the OS1 companions and very little about those in 2 (lizard man had a girlfriend, skellington was written by Chris Avellone, dark passenger in one of the girls?). There are also a lot less of them, so they ought to be easier to remember even if they were less the focus in Larian's games. I didn't like Inquisition much as a game- if it were a colour, it'd be beige- but I can remember more of its companions, and not only that Sara's (?) face was melted into an eldritch horror. I haven't played Origins for ages and can still remember almost all the companions there, if not all by name ('old lady mage'). Of course being Bioware there's a fair bit of cringe that the memories hang on like Leliana singing or Morrigan's granny undies or Sara's face, but then the worst sin in writing is not being bad per se, it's being boring/ forgettable.

We've been hearing about the imminent implosion of the Russian economy for 10 years, and the Chinese for 20. It's the geopolitical equivalent of fusion energy; always imminent, will probably happen at some point, but has never actually arrived. Looks like the Russians may have lost a Su-57 to a drone strike which would be hilariously incompetent. It's at least damaged according to Fighterbomber, and since he has to be a bit careful with his wording it seems likely it's going to be irrecoverable. Either way, still moronic.

Supposedly one of the reasons Dreadwolf Veilguard took so long was that it was redesigned to a primarily live service/ GaaS model at one point, then redesigned back again once it became clear GaaS was an invitation to flop more than a Uruguayan striker in a world cup semi final (ie post Anthem). There are likely some terminology hold overs and the like, and it wouldn't be EA if there wasn't some nickel and diming at least.

No special thanks required, I have to admit I watched S5E1 out of curiousity last evening as well, so I have been appropriately rewarded. At least it was weirdly entertaining I guess, probably due to the complete lack of any positive expectations meaning I could just laugh at everything. Funnily enough I too thought of podracing during that one scene. Overall, an episode written like an AI learning from all the worst clichés of the last twenty odd years.

Phantom Menace is a pretty good analogue for Discovery. Lots of flashy set pieces that don't make much sense if you think about them for more than a second and ultimately not so much actively bad as just disappointing- both could have been a lot better- and RotS was decent while Discovery got a lot more time to improve and never did. The main difference is TPM being shorter. (Really it was the disappointment that got me. They had some actual interesting ideas, but they seldom (only once that I can remember, and that in S1) went anywhere interesting with them. It had more than hint of the horrible 'modern screenwriting style' about it where you suspect they wrote down cool scenes they wanted to put in and wrote the plot around them, even if it made no sense. The only thing that was genuinely bad was the Direction. Now, I'd suspect that they'd generated a lot of the actors with CGI as that would explain why they looked like aliens that had been explained human emotions (with a couple of exceptions, like Captain Malfoy. Much like, though to a greater extent, Ian McDiarmid made a load of Palpatine's theoretically dumb sounding lines great). And the action scenes... they'd work better as a parody of JJ Abrams' style in a Flying High! Airplane! like spoof Best sum up: you got more characterisation of the bridge crew in Strange New Worlds in a few episodes than for Discovery in 3 seasons. And that really counts if you want to make a big deal about killing one of them off. One works emotionally; the other, complete indifference)

So, when do we get the review of Star Trek Discovery S5 then? (Prime was absolutely desperate for me to watch Invincible when I subbed for Fallout last month. Ended up watching The Expanse s3+ again instead- no regrets, and the later seasons were much better on a rewatch. Now TVNZ+ is absolutely desperate for me to watch Discovery, the algorithm cannot understand how someone who'd watch just about anything vaguely science fiction keeps ignoring it)

Dunno, France had more direct blood trying to hold onto its empire as in Algeria or Vietnam, Britain had more indirect blood from incompetent? malevolent? map making and the like. Wouldn't exonerate them just because it wasn't British troops doing the slaughter and religious cleansing in India or Biafra.

That would be a completely rubbish definition of imperialism and definitely would support the claim of conclusion shopping. If you do imperialism tied to a specific leader Rome wasn't an imperial power, and they literally gave us the term. Funnily enough I read that almost immediately after making the comment. Russia embiggening the videos, yeah. It's in their interest to. And there is certainly reasonable questions to be asked about whether someone claiming to be Ukrainian actually is when the source is (mostly) telegram. Same skepticism has to be applied both ways though, including, say, a video of a purported Russian claiming his unit has been almost entirely wiped out. Mostly though the problem with the Ukrainian claims about the TCC's conduct is how many are able to be geolocated. If Russia is able to shoot propaganda videos of people getting beaten up and chucked in vans by recruiters actually and identifiably in Odessa/ Kiev/ Lviv etc... well they wouldn't be using infiltration like that to shoot shakey cam videos of women swearing at them.

Not the USSR? Or the UK? Or any of the pan Arabists? Or France (ok, maybe they haven't quite given up their imperial ambitions) Some selective choices and almost certain conclusion shopping going on if the author thought the last two were Germany and Japan. Ironically the Ukrainian TCC (ie recruiters) are probably the closest. Kind of telling that despite all the media blackout laws in Ukraine we get vastly more videos of their citizens getting obviously press ganged than Russians.

Easy to sum up what was actually wrong with JA3 in one phrase: it just has no Buzz.

David Axe is a bit weird like that. He was also theoretically skeptical about all those Su-34s being shot down in February, but then proceeded to write an entire article on the imminent collapse of the Russian air force as if they were confirmed. Then literally literally* two weeks later... "Russia's Air Force is Back" by David Axe for the torygraph. You can't really write nuanced and well balanced stuff for Forbes Sites anyway since concern #1 is attracting clicks/ad revenue. Of course nowadays you can't do nuanced and well balanced for the Telegraph either most of the time. *ok it was actually 15 days, so literally figuratively literally, but close.

Is there any evidence the Russians didn't always think GoK was a load of old bollocks? Ukrainian propaganda is not very sophisticated at all, it just has the massive advantage- in the west- of just about everyone in the media wanting it to be true and reporting it as such even when it's highly implausible. Babushka with pickle jar isn't exactly credible, nor are their casualty estimates and they've been regularly caught gilding the lily to make more appealing stories ("Snake Island defenders fought to the last man"). Russian propaganda aimed at the west is pretty rubbish. Too much smorgasbording if anything bad happens ("don't like this scenario? OK, here's a dozen more which aren't at all compatible with each other pick the one you like!") and most of the people taken in by it are already anti their government in some way. The only stuff that is actually effective tends to be self inflicted by the west- not being able to trust the (western) media works as a narrative because you cannot trust the (western) media, not because it's good propaganda.

Article 70 (d) (e) oh, ok, if you insist. Of course Mr Graham would hypothetically be fine so long as he stayed in the US and away from anywhere with ICC jurisdiction. (You can think of the rationale for him actually being charged despite the US not being a Party this way: if he fired a Tomahawk at Karim Khan and hit him in Britain he could be charged at the ICC, since Britain is a signatory: same way Netanyahu can be charged despite Israel not being a State Party. If he merely threatened to do the same thing, well, Karim Khan is still in Britain and thus the ICC is still able to charge him for the threat since it's 'received' in Britain)

Nothing really surprising though. Have to admit, I'd laugh if the ICC brought charges against US senators for making threats against them.

The tweet is a bit more of a sensationalised version of the statement made on the subject on Syrski's telegram. There's no 'soon' or other suggestion of a timetable from Syrski, all he's done is sign the paperwork so they can come. Rational and accurate takes don't always get the retweets, likes and upvotes so much as telling people what they want to hear though.

It's probably the uncommitted troops on the northern border giving them conniptions rather than the relatively few actually committed. That was always going to be the problem with the RDK and pals' raids, not like all those Russian troops could be relied upon to just sit there twiddling their thumbs waiting for a new incursion. And since the strategic initiative seems to have shifted to Russia in at least the medium term they get to decide where and when to attack. There being NATO member countries' military personnel in Ukraine already was more or less confirmed by Germany last year (?) as their justification for not sending Taurus was not wanting to send any personnel themselves. Even if France sent people it'd be no actual change, if they're just instructors and not the Foreign Legion or whoever. Plus, the obligatory Soon™ for when they'd get there, (albeit that seems to be editorial and not from Syrski from what I've seen).

Ukraine captured the first T-90M on May 4th. May 4th 2022 though. At least a couple more during their Kharkov offensive too, iirc, so not a new development. Technically the 5/7 isn't FB's ('blogger' Fighterbomber, not facebook for anyone confused) claim but the Russian MoDs (?) "There were officially 7 missiles, 5 of them were shot down, 1 worked". Personally I think he sounds skeptical of that claim but mileage will certainly vary there given it's translated and FB is a bit, uh, idiomatic and restricted (for those not familiar with him he criticises the 'Laotian' military rather a lot. Coincidentally Vientienne makes exactly the same mistakes Moscow does)

Her stand is rather weird on the face of it. She actually dissented against more of the original provisions than the Israeli judge did. While she is of course entitled to her views she has been in a minority- sometimes the lone dissenter- on nearly everything about the case. (At the time of the initial preliminary release it seemed like it might be some sort of fundamental stand against provisional measures or on limiting the right of self defence. Doesn't seem to be either though from her opinion yesterday since she now seems to be supporting the original measures)

ICJ rules against Israel and orders a stop to its Rafah operation. As always, a certain amount of grim humour to be had watching Hasbara scramble for a coherent response in real time. I particularly liked that apparently ICJ judges don't know or understand international law- unlike the random redditor/ twitter/ facebook user saying it, with their lifetime's worth of relevant experience. (All block 13-2 votes, with the Israeli and Ugandan judges dissenting. Perhaps most interesting there is the Ugandan judge's reasoning, since this time there is a formal dissenting opinion of her "firm belief that the provisional measures previously indicated and reaffirmed by the Court adequately address the current situation in the Gaza Strip, including Rafah". For anyone who has forgotten- which would be pretty shocking as it's surely a critical event in most peoples' lives- she actually voted against those measures almost entirely...)

It... isn't. Specifically the headline's phrasing is inaccurate, and while it implies it's an urgent, new, and significant change of policy it, well, isn't. Not a new development? NYT Dec 2023 "Putin Quietly Signals He's Open to a Cease Fire in Ukraine". Or back even further than that: October 2022. And of course the negotiations that actually happened in Turkey. Inaccurate phrasing? Every previous statement has them being 'open to negotiations' or similar, see Peskov's quotes from both the articles above. That's a far cry from 'wanting' a 'ceasefire', all the urgency has been added by the editor into the title. Indeed, the body text of the Reuters article itself says much the same and actually says that Putin wants negotiations, at best interpretation and for a fairly broad definition of 'want'. Peskov's official statements on the matter are also specifically that Russia is open to negotiation. Note that the Reuters paraphrase of Peskov's response to the question they put to him- presumably deliberately- leaves out the 'open to negotiations' part of it, but it is included on other articles on their article. Compare: "Putin's spokesman Dmitry Peskov, in response to a request for comment, said the country did not want “eternal war.”" from Reuters with "Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov told Reuters Russia was open to talks and that Putin did not want "eternal war."" from the Newsweek article. Pretty obvious Reuters left the first bit out so they could keep the headline and get the hits.