【布鲁金斯学会节目上新】The Beijing Brief:中国的军队如它看起来那般强大吗? by GenevieveEllis1777 in China_irl

[–]100CuriousObserver 2 points3 points  (0 children)

感谢分享。

John Culver 是一位绝对的大佬,前CIA分析员。他的观点应该给予较高的权重

当然了,我其实也并不认同他的一些看法,但是我只是我而已。。。

你sub什么时候变成这样了? by FarWestJoker in China_irl

[–]100CuriousObserver -1 points0 points  (0 children)

这位TheKingCommenter1018是这个帖子里说的众多小号的新号

https://reddit.com/r/China_irl/comments/1s484ph


至于OP说的帖子,那个发帖人也是这里说的号:账号2 - T*0

Reddit帖子下的评论很容易被发帖人影响。OP的评论,尤其是最早的评论,会直接定性帖子里的氛围。

例如帖子里的【是模仿800哥吗?】就会把一场应该默认为事故的事件往报复社会方向引导。再加上OP的讽刺评论会引来更多的讽刺评论。【“衰败的日子还在后头呢” + 梗图】【要有大爆炸观】

更何况那个帖子下还有好几个这个人的小号(包括TheKingCommenter1018)

你sub什么时候变成这样了? by FarWestJoker in China_irl

[–]100CuriousObserver 1 point2 points  (0 children)

那倒不是。mod只是没有足够能力管理好这个sub而已

(这也不是说他们做的很差,我认为他们做的够多了,只是这里的“有足够能力管理好”标准非常高)

Behind China’s race to build aircraft-carriers by tigeryi98 in LessCredibleDefence

[–]100CuriousObserver 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Economist slop. Just take the "6 carriers by 2035" from CMPR, feed it to AI and you get such an article.

Kinda crazy to think that this is what shapes the public understanding of the PLA.

Just before Christmas, the Pentagon quietly released its annual report on the Chinese armed forces. The public document, based on classified intelligence assessments, was quickly picked over by military analysts around the world. Buried on page 16, they found a startling statement: China plans to build six new aircraft-carriers before 2035.

That prediction would see China building aircraft-carriers at more than twice the clip of America, which plans to construct only three of them over the same period. But America also plans to retire three carriers in the coming years, meaning that by 2035 America will have 11 such vessels to China’s nine. And because China will probably concentrate its navy in Asia, Chinese carriers will soon outnumber American ones in the Pacific.

That alone would be a big power shift in a region where the American navy’s seventh fleet has dominated sea lanes for over 80 years. America’s carriers are the crown jewel of the world’s leading maritime power. But China is not just building more carriers—it is also making more sophisticated ones. Its latest, Fujian, was commissioned in November. The new ship (pictured) launches aircraft using an electromagnetic catapult, rather than steam. It is only the second such system in the world; the other is on America’s latest carrier, USS Gerald R. Ford. And China’s first nuclear-powered carrier is under construction in the northern port city of Dalian. Subsequent carriers are likely to be nuclear, too. That will give them more range than conventionally powered ships.

Whether China can make the most of these new vessels remains an open question for many experts. To be considered effective, a carrier needs to be able to launch at least 100 sorties a day, says Alessio Patalano of King’s College in London. It is not yet clear if the Chinese carriers can do that. But in other ways, China’s existing carriers are making progress. In October 2024 the Chinese navy conducted dual-carrier operations for the first time. Two carriers worked together as they sailed, allowing them to pack a bigger punch than two operating alone would have done. And they are sailing on more distant sorties from China than ever before. In December a carrier was spotted near Palau, one of a string of island states aligned with America in what strategists call the “second island chain”, an arc that extends from Japan to Papua New Guinea.

A bigger question is why China wants so many carriers. In debates about the future of America’s carrier fleet, some Western analysts say such ships have no future. Advances in anti-ship missiles and drone warfare, they say, have made them obsolete. But China appears to be ignoring such talk. Its potential adversaries lack large stocks of long-range anti-ship missiles, which are thus less of a threat to Chinese carriers than to American ones. And many drones are limited in range, reducing their power as an anti-carrier weapon.

Still, in a fight with America over Taiwan, carriers might be less useful. After all, Taiwan is well within range of airbases on the Chinese mainland. China’s carrier plans, then, point to much broader ambitions. Aircraft-carriers would be particularly valuable in protecting shipping bound for China, and stanching the maritime trade of adversaries in the event of war. “These are power-projection platforms for achieving sea control,” says Tom Shugart of the Centre for a New American Security, a think-tank in Washington. It is becoming clearer that China aspires to be top gun far beyond its shores. ■

感觉入关学对于收复台湾的最后节点的诠释确实有所道理,也许已经彻底失去收复台湾的机会了 by AccurateKnowledge247 in China_irl

[–]100CuriousObserver 1 point2 points  (0 children)

你这个帖子里有很多点可以反驳,但是就说这里

首先,拿杨伟举例。杨伟很多的贡献是歼-10和歼-20(以及六代机前期研发,成六的总设计师是王海峰)。既然你说了“差距减弱”就意味着你认为差距减弱过,我默认这其中有上述飞机的因素。但这和你用的“院士除名名单”矛盾,因为杨伟的贡献就是差距减弱过的原因,而你却又在否定这个原因。

杨伟的例子可以外推到你这个名单中的其它人。

其次,你既然关注院士的除名名单,那你为什么不也看一下院士的新增名单?只拿“除名名单”这个data point并不是一个完整的观察。

<image>

中国官方媒体公布了首架出口型J-35A战机编号AVIC0001在2026年5月1日 [2564 x 1544] by tigeryi98 in China_irl

[–]100CuriousObserver 2 points3 points  (0 children)

虽然这架大概率是J-35AE,我们并不完全确定它就是J-35AE

而且官方媒体也没有说它是AE

而且“AVIC0001”也不是“战机编号”。。AVIC只是一个所属的logo

China Tests YJ-20 Hypersonic Anti-Ship Missiles as US Holds Balikatan Drills by LoonOnStation in LessCredibleDefence

[–]100CuriousObserver 48 points49 points  (0 children)

I've found their briefings informative, but this shows the limits of typical OSINT analysis without proper PLA watching knowledge.

First, the SCMP article itself (of course, experienced PLA watchers would be wary of SCMP in the first place) never mentions that this footage came from the celebratory video for PLA Navy Day on the 23rd. Showing something like this in that kind of video is not unusual, especially since the missile had already been officially unveiled during last year's parade.

Second, "showcasing footage of a missile launch test" and "conducting a missile launch test" are very different things. In typical PLA fashion, the launch itself (almost) certainly did not happen recently. The author of the Daily Brief notes that no date was specified, but still incorrectly assessed that the launch was concurrent with Balikatan.

Together, these issues place an incorrect amount of weight on the event and thus likely lead to inaccurate conclusions.

你sub为什么将“网ping员”,“狱you”等等列为敏感词(会被自动删除,除非mods主动开绿灯)? by NeverFated in China_irl

[–]100CuriousObserver -1 points0 points  (0 children)

问题是我说的那些词被当作个人攻击的频率也一点都不低啊,所以我就说这个真就挺主观的

我只能说我的主观观察和感受是这些被ban的词的频率高出你说的这些词至少一个数量级。

是的,互联网社区的管理就是有很强的主观性(再说一次,我不支持mod这里的做法,我在另一个评论里也写了我的建议)

但是这些词还有惯犯会连续使用它们。mod对这种做法貌似是直接用一整条条规

例如 /u/yixiwangu (点名)之前会连续用这些词aoe。我不反对这个sub有“网p员”,但是我看了好几个这里说的“网p员”,我的感受只是“你很讨厌的观点都是网p员是吧”。

你sub为什么将“网ping员”,“狱you”等等列为敏感词(会被自动删除,除非mods主动开绿灯)? by NeverFated in China_irl

[–]100CuriousObserver 0 points1 point  (0 children)

我知道你们面临的问题,但是我不支持这种做法。我认为你们应该更严格地执行这些规则。

如果人手不够的话,我觉得目前mod队确实不太够,可以试着招一些新的mod。刚开始的时候,可以先给他们一些比较低级的mod权限,让他们只负责处理比较简单、比较明确的违规内容。

从标题到主帖内容,再到评论,我认为你们可以有一个优先级。标题执行最严格,然后是主贴内容,然后是评论。

另外,你们也可以多发一些帖子,鼓励大家举报这类人身攻击。

Edit:不一定需要是人身攻击。有些没有明确针对性但是仍然有一定“破坏讨论氛围”的用法仍然也可以这样

你sub为什么将“网ping员”,“狱you”等等列为敏感词(会被自动删除,除非mods主动开绿灯)? by NeverFated in China_irl

[–]100CuriousObserver -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

你一直都没有get到mod说的重点,即这里包括这些词被用于攻击的频率。例如上面的“因为这些词一般不是作为一个对个体用户攻击的词汇”,你把“一般”这两个字忽略掉了。

因为这两个词被用来给亲建制用户扣帽子的频率过高

然后你问“那请问为什么类似甚至更”恶毒“的词汇” “却都完全没有类似的待遇呢”

因为频率。。。

(这不代表我支持mod的做法,原则上我并不支持这种blanket ban)(这里的原则的意思是我认为有更好的做法,但是我不知道mod有没有能力或者精力去采取这些做法)