My god the tone in this article is flippant for talking about the scariest part of our “eliminate all human life” deterrence system.
And stupidly jingoistic in how it scaremongers that the five chinese subs could hit the USA while being smug about how the USA deploys five times as many of them.
I thought the article was pretty level headed. Here’s the status, here’s the future, here’s what AUKUS is doing, here’s what China is doing and is capable of doing. What smugness or jingoism were you referring to?
I actually found it refreshing to not have a “journalists’” opinions and world-view slathered all over the article. I’m smart enough to form my own opinions about things, thanks.
Not all submarines are about eliminating all human life. Some are of course, but the majority are about more conventional war where you want to eliminate the enemies willingness to fight on, but you expect to survive and be okay after the war is over. (not as good as if there was no war of course, but you don't get to choose when there is war)
What did you want, more trembling and hand wringing? This was a discussion of stealth capabilities, the problem of nukes is adjacent but not the focus.
And I believe the article said the US has 167 subs, you made up "thousands"
> The People’s Liberation Army Navy is the largest navy in the world, but it currently operates only 12 nuclear-powered submarines, a rather small number compared to the 67 attack subs and ballistic-missile subs of the U.S. Navy.
Is this the paragraph you are both referring to? So 12 and 67, not 5 and (5 * 5) = 25 ... or 167 and thousands?
I’m one of the people that did not renew BlueCruise and the reason is kind of weird
BlueCruise vehicles were updated with the most sophisticated driver attention system ive ever seen. It will complain in less time than it takes me to change a radio station.
Before that update, I was enjoying the automated driving a little bit too much, and using it to take liberties with my attention in the car. That was awesome as a user experience.
After the update, I am paying more attention to the road than I did when I was driving a manual. There is no benefit to being able to take my hands off the steering wheel. That’s a good thing for safety, but it means that “level 2.5” driving (or whatever) adds zero marginal utility.
Ford brags that BlueCruise gets top marks from Consumer Reports but I think it's mostly because of because of this driver monitoring, rather than actual driving performance.
> Starting with 2024 model-year vehicles, we will deduct points if an [active driving assistance] system doesn’t have adequate [direct driver monitoring systems]. Right now, only Ford and GM’s systems meet our criteria for earning additional points, but others could be available soon. ...
> Ford’s BlueCruise sets a high standard among [active driving assistance] systems, aided by an infrared camera that monitors the driver’s eyes to determine whether they are looking at the road. If the driver glances away from the road for more than about 5 second... the system will give the driver a visual warning and an audible chime.
There are much finer versions of it, and if you’re in Chicago Binnies carries one by Letherbee “Bësk” and if you like that bitter grapefruit/wormwood flavor, it is mana from heaven
