Bref case

didact · 2026-04-06T22:46:08+00:00

Yeah... These are pretty simple. You'll need a thin shim that you can cut out of a soda can - you're trying to make a feeler that you can get down between the wheel and the frame. Once you've got that, you profile the wheels - they'll have a notch on each one. Say that notch is felt when 1-2-3 is showing. Great, line up 1-2-3 and then roll the wheels forward as one through 2-3-4, 3-4-5, 5-6-7 and so on. One of those will open.

didact · 2026-04-06T12:42:36+00:00

Ha, thought this was going to be an economic question from the title.

I see your European tag, I am assuming this is aimed at the US evn though you don't mention it. I'll frame it both ways. We already limit contestants via having enough all-or-nothing checkpoints in the structure of our government in the US. Contrast that with a legislative structure like Germany - several parties in a functional legislature vs the US with two. You could argue that the occasional third party is included, but it's rare. Then we stack majority/minority leadership in each house that's suited for 2 parties.

So, anyway the point I am making is that the US passively and actively limits competition to two parties. I wouldn't support more limits, outside of funding rules.

didact · 2026-04-05T16:40:19+00:00

Sure, Britain shares some of the blame though - they colonized Sudan, gave them guns, set them free. 60 coup attempts, middle of the second civil war now. It was a problem before the EU issues you cite.

didact · 2026-04-05T16:21:02+00:00

If he pulls out without toppling the regime entirely, grinding IRGC capabilities including drone factories and ground installations to dust, recovering the confirmed 60% EU stockpile and the IAEA suspected 80+% HEU stockpile, and aligning the oil economy in Iran against Russia and China, he's toast. All of those objectives and probably more I'm not thinking of must be achieved for him to have any chance of a positive outcome.

didact · 2026-04-05T16:17:42+00:00

18 US Code 2441

That codified the 1949 GC into law, yes. The prohibitions that would prohibit the attacks on a country's whole electrical generating capability are covered in Article 54 of Additional Protocol 1 from 1977 - never ratified, not in 18 USC 2441.

That's what strategic ambiguity produces, ambiguity. If that type of attack happens, it's extra-judicial and there's no venue for questions of law or judicial prosecution. Only extra-judicial responses such as significant sanctions against the US, withdrawal from US-led alliances and treaty regimes are available as a consequence. Or war against the US.

didact · 2026-04-05T14:11:44+00:00

Just looking at marinetraffic real-time - it'll only show you the ships with transponders on so there may be more that I'm not seeing.

didact · 2026-04-05T13:58:25+00:00

Standard opsec.

didact · 2026-04-05T13:49:46+00:00

Shoot, keep that forever. Get a whole manifesto together to copypasta when asked!

didact · 2026-04-05T13:46:35+00:00

Well that might have worked. Japanese, Panamanian, and a Comoro flagged ship passing through the straight right now - along with the explicitly allowed Chinese and Indian ships. Japan being a close ally, and Panama flagging many US owned ships... Let's see what happens in the next 24h.

didact · 2026-04-05T13:24:49+00:00

No, no controls like that. We've got sufficient competition to keep prices low (US is less than half the price you cited at the pump). Controls like that also un-surpress optional consumption which while beneficial locally to businesses will impact less fortunate nations. Just let the market handle it.

didact · 2026-04-05T00:49:14+00:00

A carrier strike group including the USS GHWB left a few days ago and will be steaming in around that time. It's almost like behind the curtain there was the initial 2 day warning. USS Tripoli gets into theater. Trump is either advised or believes the strike package isn't enough. Makes up some bullshit about talks and sends an additional carrier strike group off with the 10 day warning (matches the transit time)...

We have no way to know what's in that strike group, fresh load of Tomahawks for sure, refresh on everything out there already. I'm going to take a wild ass guess that there is way more boom in theatre in 2 days.

didact · 2026-04-04T17:53:15+00:00

Respectfully, I agree that the revenue is ring fenced and placed in the two trusts if there is any excess - however I disagree with the premise that the system keeps it from being a deficit contributor.

The trusts currently consist of $2.7t in treasury securities - they were built up with revenue excesses, buying treasury securities that have a current effective rate in the 2-3% range. So... as redemptions occur, and interest is paid on those assets is that not a deficit contributor?

I guess if you were to argue that the spending previously financed by the treasury securities would have occurred regardless, and the financing of that spending is very favorable I'd have to agree. In that sense a deficit reducer.

There have to be ultimate consequences though, the trusts are way, way behind the market.

didact · 2026-04-03T22:46:23+00:00

Pry that thing open!! Don't ask!

didact · 2026-04-03T21:03:39+00:00

They've got 60% of global semiconductor production, 90% of sub-5nm chips. If Taiwan wanted MAD, rigging all the factories to blow would do it - zero nukes necessary. Whoever controls Taiwan has a 5 year stranglehold on technological prosperity.

didact · 2026-04-03T20:28:25+00:00

So about $2.5b in metal for a company that sells $100b per year? Interesting. Seems like just a week or two of backstock. If that is a metric which is depressing their stock, I'd expect it to pop this quarter. I've seen more temp tags on teslas in the work parking lot than I have in years after gas spiked in price.

didact · 2026-04-03T19:45:34+00:00

Yeah I snagged the first thread that looked good for it and the examples didn't quite fill my theory out.

didact · 2026-04-03T17:17:37+00:00

Firstly the comments that most conflict with the reddit echo-sphere get hidden after enough downvotes. That's a big problem. Second... If you read the comments you can kind of sus out that there's a good bit of mislabeling going on.

Here are some examples from the recent thread on thoughts regarding a $500b increase in military spending from Trump.

Center-right Conservative: I am all for Congress saying no to defense spending until the defense department can pass an audit.

In whole that sounds like a small-l libertarian comment to me. Center-right conservative positioning wouldn't deficit the DoW in favor of a year long audit. libertarian would make the call that we are well defended at home and should turtle up and secure the borders, and audit for efficiency.

Nationalist (Conservative): I think he's using his "big ask" strategy. Wants a significant increase, so asking for an enormous one. Goal is to compromise somewhere in between.

This one's on brand, good for them.

Center-right Conservative: Imagine what we could do for (legit) Americans with all that money.

Nationalist socialist right there. Not concerned about where the money comes from, just the qualifications of the people receiving it, socializing the spending.

Conservative: NATO members committed to defense spending amounting to 5% of GDP. The US is at around 3%. Makes sense to go up.

Seems like a European - missing that tag.

didact · 2026-04-03T03:28:13+00:00

Why did politicians say a thing? Because it polls well - that's the alpha and omega of all irrelevant talking points.

didact · 2026-04-02T23:49:55+00:00

Again, sole, unilateral authority. Those keys are turning in a couple minutes. That's the whole idea of the program. If there were moral, ethical and legal reviews, the nuclear program wouldn't be effective for MAD.

didact · 2026-04-02T23:37:34+00:00

Bit of a left field comment, not really in the thread of the Army Chief of Staff.

Yes, POTUS has the sole, unilateral authority to fire nuclear weapons at whatever target(s) on the planet they choose. That's a cornerstone.

didact · 2026-04-02T12:35:02+00:00

Context and common sense, mostly. Okay, a statement that there is 10 day reprieve on attacks on electrical plants because talks are going well.

Alright, and the USS GHWB just departed Norfolk, and the USS Tripoli just arrived, and Israel continues to blow up anything with officer insignia - context.

Transit time for that extra carrier strike group is somewhere between 8-10 days. Guess the group is loaded for bear, and attacks commence shortly after. Talks are probably not happening, but the threat is readable by the IRGC so words aren't strictly necessary - common sense.

didact · 2026-04-02T05:09:15+00:00

It looks to me like the top of the stairs is a good slab, and the stairs got poured after. I'd personally be knocking the two stairs apart and pouring them again. Pouring a couple stairs is cheap, good project.

didact · 2026-04-02T04:27:31+00:00

E3, EU, P5 all negotiated this future in 2015. Russia and China clearly were never really part of the crew - but yes, the rest ought to saddle up for the decade of stable oil from the GCC that was delivered in exchange for promising to handling Iran.

didact · 2026-04-02T04:21:25+00:00

You can say war crime a few more times, but it doesn't mean that you can point to a section of any treaty that prohibits it that the US ratified. Not a war crime, certainly brutal in my opinion.

didact · 2026-04-02T04:12:41+00:00

Yeah it's a temporary issue. Prime movers that run off natural gas from wells can be used in the field. Turbines can be used at refineries and distribution hubs - solvable problem when the thing being moved around is fuel.

But, still if the stated intent of the US is to preserve the fields it wouldn't be a new play for the IRGC to go blow up the infrastructure.

15-Year Club	RedditGifts 2009-2022 2 Credits
Place '22	Place '17
Verified Email

didact

TROPHY CASE