this post was submitted on 04 May 2024
220 points (100.0% liked)

the_dunk_tank

15917 readers
7 users here now

It's the dunk tank.

This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.

Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.

Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.

Rule 3: No sectarianism.

Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome

Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)

Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.

Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.

Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml

Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] GrouchyGrouse@hexbear.net 62 points 6 months ago (3 children)

"China bad"

I wonder if it was like this back when the USSR was a thing.

[–] itappearsthat@hexbear.net 72 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

It was, on the other hand it made the undeniable achievement of sputnik deeply traumatizing to the american elite psyche. The only response they could muster was a kind of unhinged shrieking. Honestly I don't think that will ever be topped in US history; per wikipedia on the sputnik crisis:

This created a crisis reaction in national newspapers such as The New York Times, which mentioned the satellite in 279 articles between October 6, 1957, and October 31, 1957 (more than 11 articles per day).

[–] emizeko@hexbear.net 58 points 6 months ago (4 children)

China's on a trajectory to make the same kind of technological breakthrough, imagine the panic if China suddenly demonstrated a room-temperature semiconductor with low energy requirements or, I dunno, zero point energy

[–] Washburn@hexbear.net 48 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I can't wait to see the reaction even when the Chinese space program puts someone on the moon for the first time in 50 years, while the US is just giving blank checks to Elon Musk, Boeing, and Lockheed.

[–] emizeko@hexbear.net 42 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (3 children)

did you see that amazing shit where they are close to developing an underwater propulsion technique that uses lasers on the skin of the submarine?

Chinese scientists close in on laser propulsion for superfast, silent submarines | https://archive.ph/RiEX7

[–] Pentacat@hexbear.net 23 points 6 months ago (1 children)

As a bonus, it would remove all the submarine’s unwanted hair.

[–] emizeko@hexbear.net 5 points 6 months ago

run silent, run depilated

[–] Smeagolicious@hexbear.net 15 points 6 months ago (1 children)

So am I missing something fundamental? Silent or stealth supercavitation propulsion seems extremely difficult just by its nature of creating constant explosions lol, but I am a complete layperson. I did read the take that it could be considered stealth by virtue of simply moving fast enough to use its own propulsion signature as a mask? Genuinely curious, the project sounds really cool

[–] Awoo@hexbear.net 10 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Isn't the point that this is removing all moving parts of the submarine? No mechanical pieces, no engine (it's nuclear), no propellor, no jet. Replaced with laser.

It won't be completely soundless, you're always going to make some sort of sound based on displacing water. But any reduction on existing methods is going to make objects that are already incredibly hard to detect even harder.

[–] Smeagolicious@hexbear.net 6 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

That's what I thought as well, I just wasn't sure if it balanced out against a cavitation based propulsion system - maybe it does(!), but idk lol. I just assumed it would be relatively easy to detect via sonar but with a very different profile obv.

Edit*: then again, we are comparing the volume of cavitation vs a conventional submarine drive system. Could very well be that the conventional engine with more moving components is just straight up louder than bubble explosions >.>

[–] Tankiedesantski@hexbear.net 34 points 6 months ago

The reaction will be incredibly racist, almost certainly starting with denial, then allegations of copying, and ending with sour grapes.

[–] Tankiedesantski@hexbear.net 40 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I think Huawei 5G was a mini-Sputnik Moment. China leapfrogged the US in a crucial future technology and went global with it. Key difference here is that the US spun up its science and tech sector to try to keep up with the USSR, whereas now the US is just using lawfare and sanctions to keep Chinese 5G from spreading.

[–] CatoPosting@hexbear.net 7 points 6 months ago

Would you mind giving a link / explaining what makes the Chinese 5G so much better?

[–] marxisthayaca@hexbear.net 26 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Fusion would probably break the American mind

[–] Des@hexbear.net 16 points 6 months ago

i'm Chinas number 1 booster for this scenario and i can't wait

break my mind BAYBEE

[–] GrouchyGrouse@hexbear.net 34 points 6 months ago

Holy fuck and they had to plink that out on old typewriters. The coffee and cigarettes that fueled that binge.

[–] Maoo@hexbear.net 37 points 6 months ago

The Parenti quote about the US media spinning every event in the USSR as devious and malevolent is relevant.

[–] emizeko@hexbear.net 23 points 6 months ago

yes, if not worse