There are weapons that use sensor fusion already, with computer vision being used mostly on the offensive side. The issue for fixed defensive emplacements is that the attack drones are quite fast, and small for their lethality. The fusion is built off radar, acoustic (sound) and visible spectrum, but isn't reliable and only recently portable. Humans (which have excellent sensing capability) have been in the loop with aimed jammers, and this has become standard equipment at the platoon level.

Timely detection is hard, and the interception is tricky too. Costly interceptors work better than bullets, and can protect a larger area, but even a 95% interception range isn't super effective, as we saw with some of the $1b radomes lost by US Forces this year.

Personally, I think we've sadly only seen the start of autonomous, self-guided 'suicide' drones. These are the weapons that terrify me. Not accountable, cheap, and they can easily be turned against civilian infrastructure. Computer vision is robust, but shrinking the sensor + decision maker still needs work (at least, thats what the unclassified info tells me)

The main difference between WWI and Today's trench warfare the the level of intelligence available, combined with the ability to precision-strike.

It's interesting because drones are very mobile, able to be deployed close to the front, and extremely deadly, but simultaneously limited. The heavier payload ones can also be longer range, but counter-UAV technology (mostly jamming) makes these harder to use. In comparison, the shorter-range drones can be sent via cable - impossible to jam, but limited flight distance due to the trailing wire + weight.

The application of drones on the battlefield also favors the defender. The small-payload drones are exceptional at taking out moving vehicles and light infantry, and overhead imagery (via drone or satellite) is nearly omnipresent. With neither side able to secure complete air power, the normal target softening approach of airstrikes followed by troop movement isn't viable, and then drones take out even the most spread-out groups moving forward. The result is that the doctrinal 3:1 attacker ratio that favors defenders is even more lopsided with drones. I fear that we'll see a greatly increased use of autonomous weaponry as a result, which is extremely dangerous for humanity.

I'm convinced this is astroturfing in the same vein as the "Just stop oil" protesters that do all that trolly shit. The goal is for you to view green technologies negatively by association, and to feel like the science and decision-making behind them is suspect.

Its a long, long border, mostly undefended in the west. A lot of infrastructure undefended, and a very brittle supply chain when it comes to civilian logistics and power. A handful of fighter jets would be a nightmare for rail lines and oil depots.

"Nearly doubling to 100 co-sponsors" doesn't mean shit. Talk to me when it's 60 senators and 220 representatives.

We have the most profoundly impotent democratic "leadership" who are completely comfortable with our slide into fascism, even though it'll almost certainly mean the end of their positions of power.

This is parroted a lot by commentators online but I'm increasingly convinced it isn't true. I think showing pity or understanding for these kind of braindead bigots actually encourages the rare braindead bigot reading social media to hold on longer. I'm old enough to remember these statements made in 2016, pleading to gently convert conservatives into liberals. Instead we see a continual ratcheting of bigotry and hate against the left, because it appears not compassionate, but weak.

I think that if instead people went online and saw universal derision and scorn for these people, they would quietly revise their worldview. As it is, it seems like each MAGA voter needs to experience consequences personally before they revise their stance. Folks need to remember that conservative media is telling these "low-information voters" that minorities and "liberals" desperately want to destroy them. So when we say "oh no, come on over!" it seems like a trap, or like we are disingenuous.

You also need to consider that social media is so ideologically fractured by algorithm and media preference, you need to go out of your way to find a dissenting viewpoint. Basically all political punditry is performative at this point, with zero minds being swayed by logical arguments.

This is why I've stopped feeling or expressing remorse for any MAGA folks who suffer under the regime.

And sadly, despite how horrific it is- at the end of the day, it is legal. He didn’t hunt these people down and end them. He denied them coverage. This needs to change, but vigilantism clearly isn’t going to do it, and this is evident in the fact that it’s still happening. In fact, I believe it’s even worse now.

In the aftermath of the killings, approval of claims skyrocketed. If CEOs kept getting deleted for their horrifically immoral actions, then I've no doubt we'd have a different healthcare system right now. Your bootlicking is exactly what they rely on to literally keep killing people. You are enabling them to kill people.

It's a trolly car problem. If I'm confronted with this moral dilemma, I'm choosing the lever that kills the CEO to save millions of lives.

Where do we draw the line where murder isn’t okay just because we don’t like what someone does?

In this case, this person was so vile, so directly contributing to the misery of society, the slope aint slippery at all.

There is a reason we have laws in place to stop slippery slopes like this from happening. And we are better than these assholes. They got to do what they do using our system of law- so we will need to use that system of law to stop them.

The reason is that law enforcement is a tool to protect capital. The police and politicians will never step in for this issue, because they are captured by the capitalist class. Nothing you can do (well...) can change that fact, and they want you to waste your time on performative protests and attempts at legal reform.

If Luigi had killed his health insurance claim worker instead, you'd never even have known his name. You don't need to remind me that I'm better than CEOs. I'm completely certain of it. Because I don't make my daily work harvesting money via the suffering of millions of people.

https://www.cybercom.mil/Media/News/Article/3895345/russian-disinformation-campaign-doppelgnger-unmasked-a-web-of-deception/

Huh?

A huge portion of social media is from bots. Twitter removed millions of bots this week and it doesn't even dent the bot population there.

Foreign countries target American media because its military + nuclear arsenal is unbeatable in a full-scale war. No country would ever consider a war with America, so as a result efforts are dedicated to weakening it from within through psyops. Hence, lemmy.ml exists.