I started on a 50Mbps plan which was a massive upgrade from what Comcast offered at the time, so I was pretty pleased with that. At one point I noticed something dragging down my connection, and found signs of people attacking my servers. That was easily dealt with, however what surprised me was the speed of the traffic I was seeing. After blocking the attack I pushed up my torrents and realized I had been upgraded to a 100Mbps connection and didn’t realize it (I really do love my local provider!).

So yeah, for general web browsing you probably won’t notice any difference between those two speeds. If you are downloading specific content then of course the downgrade will take twice as long, and as others mentioned it shouldn’t affect your streaming speeds at all.

I used to live further North and I miss the snow. We still get some here, but it typically melts off within a week or two.

I dunno, I feel like there’s a distinction between being timid and being cautious. Yeah we all wish things could have ramped up much faster and knocked Putin back to his bunker like a coward, but if we had misjudged his readiness then there might not be a Ukraine left today. We know better now, and I think Russia’s disastrous ICBM testing gave everyone a good idea of what to expect. And the fact that they’re not turning to North Korea of all places for support? Yeah it’s not looking good for Russia’s military.

Yes, and they were given artillery shells. They were also initially given short-range missiles to limit the range of attacks so Russia couldn’t claim we were arming Ukraine for an all-out attack on Russia. And then as more information came in about the state of Russia’s military, better missiles were supplied.

The whole point of this was to prevent provoking Russia into a full nuclear launch. It’s only been two years, did you seriously forget the concerns with the US getting involved at all? Russia claimed to have the largest arsenal of nuclear weapons in the world, and there wasn’t much solid information to contradict that claim. It sounds to me like you think everyone should have risked a global nuclear meltdown against a small man who acted like he was the toughest kid on the block, rather than playing it safe in case he really did have all those nukes ready to launch. Sure, NOW we know better, but in February of 2022 there was still a reason to believe he had the capacity, and we certainly know Putin is mad enough to have pulled the trigger.

As I mentioned to the other commenter, all countries proceeded with discretion. We also didn’t realize how bad of shape Russia’s infrastructure was in, so that demanded a slow approach to try and prevent a nuclear retaliation. Now we know that’s not going to happen, thus lifting the restrictions on attacking within Russian territory.

It’s funny how the opinion on the US’s role in this war over the last two years has gone from “WTF are we doing risking a nuclear war with Russia” to today where folks seem to be saying “why didn’t we stomp Russia from the very beginning?”. The answer in both cases was obvious, I don’t know why anyone has forgotten the reason for that initial caution.

You do realize no country is going to give up their best military secrets? And the pricing is likely true of every contributing country.

The restrictions were in no way arbitrary. This whole thing has been a game of chicken with Putin. Would you rather that other countries immediately escalated to scare Putin into launching his nukes? Frankly I’m happy it hasn’t come to that, and with multiple countries now giving the go-ahead to launch attacks inside of Russian territory, maybe the Russian people will start questioning the motivations behind this war that Putin started.

Your concept of a “trickle” is interesting. The US has contributed nearly as much to Ukraine as every other country combined. (As of September, that was about $92 billion from the US versus about $112 billion from all other countries).

That’s an interesting take when the NRA can literally schedule a meeting with Trump or other presidents the next day. And which “dumbest” laws are you referring to? You mean things like not wanting people showing signs of mental instability to be able to run out an buy a gun as soon as they’re released from the hospital? Maybe you don’t like the idea of that short waiting period the first time someone buys a firearm? Perhaps it was the law that didn’t allow children to purchase guns (requiring parental consent)? I mean yeah, I can see how the non pro-gun GOP must have been appalled at those ideas.

Also, for curiosity, can you tell me what gun legislation the GOP has NOT blocked?

22 percent of Democrats said they found the killing acceptable, compared to 16 percent of independents and 12 percent of Republicans.

Funny how the pro-gun party suddenly doesn’t like it when the victim is a CEO rather than school kids.

George Takei

I actually read something this week stating this the gunman’s words were based on some actual thing the insurance companies use. Of course it wouldn’t be any official motto, but behind the scenes we’re all pretty aware that we’re nothing but numbers to these companies.

And remind me again, that was based off of the insurance company’s own motto of “delay, deny, dispose”? After all we’re just a disposable product to them, right?

tl;dr – After ruling out military and commercial sources, they still have no idea who was running the drones.

Sightings include a few interesting details… There appears to have been clusters of 10-30 smaller drones being controlled by a larger stationary drone which was around 6 feet across. All of the drones stayed in the air for 2-3 hours (which seems like an unusually long period?). Observations through night vision goggles described the large drone as having four arms with propellers, and some drones may have been fixed-wing with a 10’ wingspan. The most curious thing is that no sound was ever reported even from the large drone. The sightings stopped almost immediately after a large investigation was announced, but as far as anyone was concerned, no laws were ever broken.

This is Texas we’re talking about here… of course they’re not going to work it out.

Thanks!

Is there a non-paywalled version?

In a movement that vilifies experts and political elites, having a plan is suspect — perhaps, proof that you’re one of “them.” But having big ideas and just “a concept of a plan?” That’s inspired, baby.

If someone is directly responsible for the deaths of millions of people and the courts hold the position that corporate profits outweigh human life, then yeah eventually someone is going to take matters into their own hands. The real question is, will this become a trend? For example, would anyone really be upset if all the would-be school shooters look at this as an example of how their frustrations could be used to make a real difference in the world? Imagine if CEOs were suddenly afraid of real-world consequences when their greed hurts people?

Naw, just give them an extensive medical procedure where their “time” runs out and they get to feel the rest of the surgery. I mean, fair is fair.

Same here, I was wondering what was going on.