The cost per round is a lot more than just power generation when talking about lasers.
The wear on tear on lasers is a lot different than other systems and when the case is being made for their cost effectiveness they need to be factored in, instead of the highly misleading figures that only prices out electricity.
There is no doubt that lasers will play a bigger and bigger role in combat systems, especially in a layered air defense networks.
But it’s dishonest how these articles only cite the cost of electricity. It would be like citing the cost of a single shell of artillery to imply that is the only expenditure when the system is used.
Just like a Howitzer, the parts on lasers experience wear and tear, but to replace them cost a hell of a lot more than a new barrel.
Yes, in the long-term lasers will be more cost-effective than ground to air missile interceptors*, but any reporting that is clearly trying to make an argument for cost savings, should have the integrity to get figures that factor in battlefield maintenance of those systems.
*When applicable. Lasers will not remove the need for any existing systems, but will provide a cost savings by providing additional options for the air defense system’s operators.
This copium is off the charts ridiculous.
I don’t want Trump to win, which is why I think it’s incredibly unhelpful to spread the delusion that current polling is favorable to a Biden victory.
That wasn’t even true before the debate, but at least there were enough polls within the margin of error that it was possible.
Biden’s polling has only gone down since then, while Trump’s have trended upwards. Not by the same margins, but still, opposite directions.
This article is actually arguing about changes in polls that are less than 0.5%, seriously, it’s a joke…
Here is an aggregated page that links out to over 50 different polls for Georgia, one of the states mentioned in the article where Trump it’s supposedly hurting, according to that article:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/us/elections/polls-president-georgia.html
Here’s that same aggregated polling information for the other two states mentioned in the article:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/us/elections/polls-president-michigan.html
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/us/elections/polls-president-north-carolina.html
Take a look and tell me if that article, much less it’s headline, have any bearing on reality.
Wake me when a hemorrhagic fever crosses the Rockies.
Probably a lot less than even the last time they tried this, back in 2022. But if it lasts longer than a month, then they will have made progress.
I hope they call it CNN Plus Two
Yes, but that was before everyone saw a sundowning POTUS on that debate stage.
Attitudes have changed amongst the DNC establishment, at least according to the reporting.
Anecdotally, I’ve heard similar feelings echoed in far left/socialist circles.
I will say I haven’t seen any new polling that take recent events into account. I assume those figures exist, I just haven’t seen you come across my feeds yet.
ISO certification does require a bit more effort than just the bare minimum necessary to legally advertise specific claims about a product.
That doesn’t mean all M-Disc manufacturing is immune to shitty business practices of a manufacturer, but they do have to meet certain manufacturing specifications.
Yes, they can choose to either NOT be a professional artist, or to work with Live Nation and Ticket Master.
It’s one, or the other.
Monopolies are the opposite of choice.
You’re delusional.
You went out of your way to find one of the very few polls showing positive news for Biden in Michigan and then posted links to their company website where they write blog entries based on the results of their market research.
Additionally, you’re badmouthing anyone who points out that Morning Consult’s latest Michigan polls are outliers.
Maybe they actually have the best current methodology, but unless you want to write up a white paper on why that is, stop speaking ill of anyone who points out that their poll is an outlier, or that your link isn’t to a news article, but to a market research company’s blog.
Especially when those commenters come with sources, such as the link to aggregated page of 65 polls that I posted. Which by the way, includes Morning Consult’s figures as well.
I wasn’t kidding, it is actually the blog of that market research/polling firm.
It’s dressed up a bit to make it seem like it’s delivering news, but it’s primarily just writing up their own market research and polling data in the form of articles, or more accurately, blog posts.
This poll is a notable outlier… The article is basically just a blog post from the polling outfit itself…
Here’s results on 65 different polls for Michigan:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/us/elections/polls-president-michigan.html
The vast majority of polls have Trump leading Michigan, but a lot of those are also within the margin of error and otherwise very close.
What is with Lemmy’s insistence on pretending that the debate either didn’t hurt Biden, or actually helped him?
It’s like a lot of people here actually believe that by pretending nothing is wrong, that means nothing is wrong.
FYI that New York Times link is simply an easy aggregated URL that shows the results for, and then directly links to 65 different polls for Michigan.
This poll is a notable outlier… The article is basically just a blog post from the polling outfit itself…
Here’s results on 65 different polls for Michigan:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/us/elections/polls-president-michigan.html
The vast majority of polls have Trump leading Michigan, but a lot of those are also within the margin of error and otherwise very close.
What is with Lemmy’s insistence on pretending that the debate either didn’t hurt Biden, or actually helped him?
It’s like a lot of people here actually believe that by pretending nothing is wrong, that means nothing is wrong.
It’s just complete ignorance of the Iranian political system and at some level, a buy-in on the media’s relentless anti-Iranian propaganda.
Far be it from me to defend a theocracy, or Mullahs, but…wait, I won’t they’re horrible.
However, Iran’s theocracy is far less insidious than the Gulf Monarchies, so I guess it’s better by default?
Oh, and no candidate is allowed to run unless they are signed off on by the Ayatollah, so there’s that caveat as well.
You aren’t thinking this through and all the wonderful possibilities.
Just imagine if we let private prisons “loan” out low risk prisoners to local businesses.
BAM! Now you get to spread the cost savings of prison labor to the wider economy.
And that’s just me spitballing. I got so many good ideas on what we can do with our newly enslaved poors, err… I mean criminally homeless deviants.
Interesting that they allowed these two issues within the same piece of propaganda, considering these are the same class of people who enabled the elite to entirely remove any politics relating to the improvement of material economic conditions for working class people from public debate, or elections, and replace it entirely with the politics of culture war.
This is public record due to their financial reporting obligations as public company, but their password sharing crackdown resulted in not insignificant amounts of new subscribers.
Or at least, there was meaningful growth that occurred in time periods that aligned with those policies going into effect.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/09/business/netflix-password-sharing-results/index.html
I can’t believe you would blame the CIA for problems in Kenya.
I’m pretty sure notable CIA alumni even tried to promote Kenyan tourism.
This isn’t a court of law, or the privatized forced mandatory arbitration that has mostly replaced it.
Out of curiosity, in your view, what has Google done to deserve the benefit of the doubt?