The population of Russia was widely disputed even before the war(With most estimates placing it at below 100M), and now it's basically a guessing game.
Israel's maybe, but not of Netanyahu and his government. He was cozying up to Putin already during the first Trump term [1] and is currently right at work doing the same again [2] to the point where they push the US to keep Russia in Syria rather than Turkey. [3] This despite Russia being closely allied with Iran.
An Israel-Russia alliance makes even less sense than an US-Russia one, yet both are currently happening.
I mean, are Zelensky or Syrskyi willing to share truthful information with you in private? If so - good for you, otherwise I'm not sure what "first hand" reports you can use. I'm relying mostly on data about obituaries collected on both sides as proxy for true figures.
If you use Russian recruitment and army size numbers, you get much more realistic figures https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ja6-espHVSE. Russia is up to ~700k to 800k casualties Russia has lost ~3-4x more people than Ukraine so far.
I think that's probably a good estimate for the Russian side, while 200k casualties total for Ukraine is a joke. Aren't even their official figures for wounded in the 400k range?
Ukraine didn't release casualty figures for a long time (though to be fair, Russia government doesn't exactly post daily casualty figures either, the Russian casualty figure is divined by infering what we can from Russian media), the Western press released a figure for the Ukrainian forces, which is probably quite low, and the figure hasn't increased in almost a year.
It's sort of like how Western press has been claiming for over a year that 20,000 people have perished in Gaza, and the figure never goes up.
This is the most recorded war in history and I know someone(History Legends)offering a good amount if you can show him videos of these Russian meat wave attacks .
sometimes yes, sometimes no. In both US iraq wars, the US had way fewer casualties than Iraq. Invading is harder than defending, but a country won't invade unless they think they are likely to succeed with acceptable losses.
first hand reports from friends who are fighting the war every day.
I'm sure the very lacking obituaries that Russia is actively fighting to suppress will give you a better picture.
1 GB should be way more than either should need. I run nginx, unbound, postfix, dovecot plus all the normal suff (ssh, systemd, etc) for a Linux system on a VPS w/ 500MB of RAM. Currently the system has ~270MB used. It actually has 1GB available due to a plan auto-upgrade but have never bothered as I just don't need it.
1GB for a VPC that runs an HTTP load balancer/reverse proxy and a handful of IPsec or Wireguard tunnels back to the app servers (origin) is overkill. You could successfully run that in 512MB, and probably even 256MB. (That's the scenario described).
What needs to run on this that's a memory hog making 512MB too small? By my (very rough) calculations youd need 50-100MB for kernel + systemd + sshd + nginx base needs + tunnels home. That leaves the rest for per-request processing.
Each request starts needing enough RAM to parse the https headers into a request object, open a connection back to the origin, and buffer a little bit of traffic that comes in while that request is being processed/origin connection opens. After that you only need to maintian 2 connections plus some buffer space - Generously 50KB initially and 10KB ongoing. There's enough space for a thousand concurrent requests in the ram not used by the system. Proxying is fairly cheap - the app servers (at the origin) may need much much more, but that's not the point of the VPS being discussed.
Also worth noting that the cheap VPS is not a per-project cost - that is the reverse proxy that handles all HTTP traffic into your homelab.
Thanks for the product! Glad to hear the (so called) "safety" is being walked back on, previously Claude has been feeling a little like it is treating me as a child, excited to try it out now.
Scaleway (and I say this with very deep sadness) is pretty bad in terms of reliability right now, there are at least a couple big outages every year over the course of last few years that I've been using them.
Admittedly they have a new CTO who according to our support agent is very focused on improving that, so here's hoping, because otherwise their tech offering is very convenient.
Nah, people noticed, and then they thought "Linux always has these kind of issues, I'm going back to [whatever other OS]" because 99.9% of users will never even TRY to report a bug.
reply