poesel

Russians gradually have been learing of Ukrainian experience of artillery fire control. If in 2022  - mid 23 we have seen typical Soviet style of whole batteries and even battalions of side-by-side standing guns simultainous work, that now Russians are more and more shifting to dispersing of artillery and work by single guns of a battery with individaual targeting for each.
Here is google-translated post about changes since 2022. "The work was carried out in areas with a low coeeficient of UAV use" - means "ineffective area fire with low UAV usage", though for summer 2022 it's not always could be true, or soldiers then reported about dozen Orlans and Zala, ajusting fire. Probably ajusting was inefefctive or come on too long command chain, which made it ineffective.

 
And addition to this post by other Russian artillerist with my translation:
I'l throw my 5 cents:
Regimental artillery tied on artillery chief (of regiment). He, sitting on command post (let's call it in such way) together with chief of recon, watch streams from UAVs (and intercepted streams of the enemy). Spotting the target chief of artillery transmits it to battery commander or senior battery officer  [he is commander of 1st artillery platoon also] and they transmit this data to the gun. 2-7 minutes for targeting of the gun, the bird [drone] in the sky. First shoot - the fire ajustment from artilelry chief directly to the gun. Or artillery chief opens the map, come into communication with gun commandr through the radio and gives the targeting (angle, azimuth, lines). The gun crew lives on position 2-5 days, further a rotation is coming. Nobody drink on position, it's taboo, else they go to "zakrep" [probably those who have to hold the ground after assault] - and this is more scary than to stormers. 
We don't work with mortars since new year. This is no longer relevant becaus of crews life preservation purposes. Drones already fly on 10 km in the rear, so they clicks them at once  

And here Russian feedback about CAESERs

Should Trump win, couldn't (and wouldn't) Biden just value old weapon stocks at one cent per piece and have it ship to Ukraine out of his own purse? Not exactly very gentlemanlike for an outgoing president but in this case...

More detailed sattelite shots of Dzhankoy airbase has appeared
Large article with preliminary analysis: https://www.twz.com/news-features/major-damage-at-russian-airbase-in-crimea-after-ukrainian-attack
Some photos from this article:
At least battery set of S-400/S-300 destroyed

Something similar to separately standing radars in zone of cluster subminition explosions

 

It's confirmed preliminary information about Russian command center of Central military district troops was hit with two Storm Shadows in Luhansk on April 13 on the territoruy of local machine-building factory.
As result of this strike was killed colonel Pavel Kropotov, commander of 59th control brigade of Central military district. Likely more names of HQ officers will come later
 

On the topic of democracy (democracy indexes, democratic backsliding and the like) I can actually contribute with more than my typical "expert amateur's" opinion since poli sci is my academic background.
The Economist Democracy Index appears to be from 2021 (based on Norway's and Sweden's scores of 9.75 and 9.26 respectively). That year Switzerland dipped down below 9.00, which changed its colour in the map @The_Capt posted. It might be a colour vision thing @kimbosbread? Personally I know that my red-green colour vision is in the dumps, and I cannot make out any distinction what so ever between the colours assigned to 8, 7 and 6 in that map. That still places it as a full democracy though.
It should be noted for the Economist Democracy Index's use of the term "Flawed democracy" doesn't mean that it's not a democracy, undemocratic or the like:
In the case of the USA, this likely refers to issues such as voter turnout, gerrymandering, first-past-the-post and the virtual two party system, civil rights, etc. Emphasis on "likely" though, because the Economist Democracy Index is based on anonymous scoring from undisclosed experts, so no one can say with certainty what particular aspects influenced a state's scoring.
 
V-dem is in my experience the preferred democracy index, notwithstanding any personal bias (it's from my alma mater). What makes the most difference (going by the examples cited here) though is how you measure democracy: Visual Capitalist choses to measure shares of the global poluation as opposed to number of states. This leads to statistical oddities/misrepresentations of the scale of democratic backsliding, since states are entities: if say State A and State B have become democracies whereas State Z has become an autocracy, that's a net increase in democracy, regardless of the fact that State A & B only have a combined population of say 20 million whereas State Z has a population of 1 billion. That's how Visual Capitalist arrives at the dire conclusion of "2010 Democracy: 50.4% vs 2021 Democracy: 29.3%".
India alone being reclassed from "electoral democracy" to "electoral autocracy" is behind a not insignificant portion of that change: the number of people living in electoral autocracies increased by 1.76 billion between 2010 and 2021 (India's population today reaching 1.41 billion). The remaining net global population which has shifted from "liberal/electoral democracy" to "electoral/closed autocracy" is "only" 0.7 billion. I.e., one single country falling back into autocracy is behind a smidge over 2/3 of that shift.
 
If we were to look at states instead (the typical poli sci method and arguably the more accurate measurement), we get this more positive picture:

Between the end of the Cold War and 2022, liberal democracies have remained virtually the same, more than half the world's closed autocracies have gone the way of the dodo, and electoral democracies and electoral autocracies are tied at 32.58%: back in 1990, electoral autocracies were almost 30% ahead of electoral democracies, and a staggering 36.84% of the world's states were closed autocracies. Closed autocracies were by far the most common form of government in the world when the Cold War ended: today its the opposite, it's the least common.
 
That was an argument against Visual Capitalist's measurement of democracy. Democratic backsliding is accepted among most experts, but there's not much certainty as to whether or not this will turn out to be a lasting development or if it's simply a symptom of many politically and socially underdeveloped/unprepared states which were democratised when the Cold War wrapped up simply having reverted to forms of government which are more in line for what could be expected of them.
 
 
Edit: I was going to write a brief reply. Instead I wrote more here than I've gotten done on my thesis during the last two months combined. FFS...

I'm always a bit concerned whenever I see any of my friends online advocating "tearing it all down". They never have any suggestions about what to replace it with. And anything you could replace it with would either be worse, or mostly the same but for a few modifications. The system as it is actually has the framework of a pretty good system. It just needs some tweaking. Rather that screaming into the void about tearing it all down, I think we'd do ourselves a lot more good by having constructive arguments over which tweaks would improve the system.
I'd avoid using terms like "evolution" and "species". There is evidence that our species has evolved measurably in the recent past (as in "within the last 10,000 years"). The most notable sign of recent evolution being the evolution of lactase persistence in European populations (clearly a post-agriculture development, probably as a reaction to dairy farming). But there is no evidence at all that our psychology has evolved since the rise of the first civilizations (about 6,000 years ago) in a way that would have any influence on which political systems would be most effective. It's our systems that are changing to better suite the brains we have. It isn't our brains changing to allow us to use better systems. We are certainly still evolving. But the timescales involved are so long compared to the timescales on which we refine our political systems that it just isn't relevant.
I actually think the jury is in. Loads of countries other than the US are democracies. It's obvious at this point that there are much better implementations of democracy than the US system (downsides of being first). But almost universally, people living in democracies (including the US) are better off than people living in autocracies. Democracies do collapse and revert to autocracies (and it feels like the US is currently skirting the danger zone on that). But autocracies also collapse and become democracies. And so far it appears that autocracies collapse at a higher rate than democracies. The overall trend so far appears to be towards greater democratization. 

Not to dispute the general direction of this post, but I have to set some things right:
- no one is using solar panels instead of fences in Germany. But some people have installed solar panel as(!) fences. That did occur, but is very rare
- Germany has willingly killed her own solar industry herself about 10 years ago. Mostly by ****ing up subventions which went to China instead of European manufacturers. Germany basically paid for the creation of the solar industry in China, and we lost 5-figure jobs here. Thanks to the ignorance on the side of the Merkel government which believed that solar (and wind) had no future
Now China owns the market and the US is paying immense subventions for solar factories so that companies relocate there. Currently, it is pointless for Germany (and Europe in general) to push money in that direction because that would only end in an economic fight with the US & China.
OTOH if China would embargo solar panels that would be annoying but would mostly hurt China itself. The biggest market is the West.

Not to dispute the general direction of this post, but I have to set some things right:
- no one is using solar panels instead of fences in Germany. But some people have installed solar panel as(!) fences. That did occur, but is very rare
- Germany has willingly killed her own solar industry herself about 10 years ago. Mostly by ****ing up subventions which went to China instead of European manufacturers. Germany basically paid for the creation of the solar industry in China, and we lost 5-figure jobs here. Thanks to the ignorance on the side of the Merkel government which believed that solar (and wind) had no future
Now China owns the market and the US is paying immense subventions for solar factories so that companies relocate there. Currently, it is pointless for Germany (and Europe in general) to push money in that direction because that would only end in an economic fight with the US & China.
OTOH if China would embargo solar panels that would be annoying but would mostly hurt China itself. The biggest market is the West.

Not to dispute the general direction of this post, but I have to set some things right:
- no one is using solar panels instead of fences in Germany. But some people have installed solar panel as(!) fences. That did occur, but is very rare
- Germany has willingly killed her own solar industry herself about 10 years ago. Mostly by ****ing up subventions which went to China instead of European manufacturers. Germany basically paid for the creation of the solar industry in China, and we lost 5-figure jobs here. Thanks to the ignorance on the side of the Merkel government which believed that solar (and wind) had no future
Now China owns the market and the US is paying immense subventions for solar factories so that companies relocate there. Currently, it is pointless for Germany (and Europe in general) to push money in that direction because that would only end in an economic fight with the US & China.
OTOH if China would embargo solar panels that would be annoying but would mostly hurt China itself. The biggest market is the West.

Not to dispute the general direction of this post, but I have to set some things right:
- no one is using solar panels instead of fences in Germany. But some people have installed solar panel as(!) fences. That did occur, but is very rare
- Germany has willingly killed her own solar industry herself about 10 years ago. Mostly by ****ing up subventions which went to China instead of European manufacturers. Germany basically paid for the creation of the solar industry in China, and we lost 5-figure jobs here. Thanks to the ignorance on the side of the Merkel government which believed that solar (and wind) had no future
Now China owns the market and the US is paying immense subventions for solar factories so that companies relocate there. Currently, it is pointless for Germany (and Europe in general) to push money in that direction because that would only end in an economic fight with the US & China.
OTOH if China would embargo solar panels that would be annoying but would mostly hurt China itself. The biggest market is the West.

Not to dispute the general direction of this post, but I have to set some things right:
- no one is using solar panels instead of fences in Germany. But some people have installed solar panel as(!) fences. That did occur, but is very rare
- Germany has willingly killed her own solar industry herself about 10 years ago. Mostly by ****ing up subventions which went to China instead of European manufacturers. Germany basically paid for the creation of the solar industry in China, and we lost 5-figure jobs here. Thanks to the ignorance on the side of the Merkel government which believed that solar (and wind) had no future
Now China owns the market and the US is paying immense subventions for solar factories so that companies relocate there. Currently, it is pointless for Germany (and Europe in general) to push money in that direction because that would only end in an economic fight with the US & China.
OTOH if China would embargo solar panels that would be annoying but would mostly hurt China itself. The biggest market is the West.

Not to dispute the general direction of this post, but I have to set some things right:
- no one is using solar panels instead of fences in Germany. But some people have installed solar panel as(!) fences. That did occur, but is very rare
- Germany has willingly killed her own solar industry herself about 10 years ago. Mostly by ****ing up subventions which went to China instead of European manufacturers. Germany basically paid for the creation of the solar industry in China, and we lost 5-figure jobs here. Thanks to the ignorance on the side of the Merkel government which believed that solar (and wind) had no future
Now China owns the market and the US is paying immense subventions for solar factories so that companies relocate there. Currently, it is pointless for Germany (and Europe in general) to push money in that direction because that would only end in an economic fight with the US & China.
OTOH if China would embargo solar panels that would be annoying but would mostly hurt China itself. The biggest market is the West.

1) Basically every industrial country has far more energy generation capacity than it needs to ensure continuous production - even if several plants need to be taken off the grid for maintenance or simply damage repairs. 
2) Outside of the planned over-capacity, older power plants are not immediately demolished when a newer one is finished. They remain for years as a "strategic reserve". And due to improved technology energy companies are almost always building something newer and more efficient somewhere, so there is a continuous rotation from older to newer.
3) Special government programs like in Germany, where renewables are being pushed, means that a lot of conventional power plants have been taken off the grid, but are not destroyed. Germany gets between 30% and 40% of its daily energy from renewables (and growing), and has roughly the same capacity, mostly in coal plants, dormant and ready to be fired up. 
Ukraine's economy before the war used 125 TWh per year, which has dropped significantly due to the war to something below 100 TWh.
Germany alone has likely 200 TWh of unused capacity next to the 500 to 600 TWh it currently needs per year.

Just to set the record straight: 'not long ago' is about 60 years (depending on which law you mean).

Just to set the record straight: 'not long ago' is about 60 years (depending on which law you mean).

Here's the thing though - generally - at its best - the West as part of its advantages over more totalitarian  places -  has come to represent toleration  of a whole lot of things which are not necessarily the end of Human Civilization as many  who oppose such toleration seem to think . The West is not going to fall because of trans gender rights or any other sub group of people wanting to express themselves how they feel . Its going to be because of war ,   resource scarcity and global changes to our economic systems due to our continued mis use of the planet .

As a lawyer you should know better that it's much more than just an 'attitude'. It's an entire legal framework underpinning the political ideology of liberal democracy.

Yes the west can sponsor whomever they like, the enemy of my enemy and all that, but there is much more going on here with the particular case of Ukraine because Ukraine has made it no secret that it aspires to joining the EU. As a matter of straightforward facts:-
Ukraine will never join the EU if it does not uphold EU law - indeed it has to adopt EU law in order to be a member. Membership means compliance with the ECHR and its rulings. The ECHR enforces the core principles laid out and agreed upon by the union of liberal democratic states. Some of those principles cover the protection of minority groups and protection of individual freedoms etc.. This is just the way it is. You cannot cherry-pick the core ideas of liberal democracy anymore than you can cherry-pick the legal framework and membership of the EU.          

Well not sure what you are upset about. Haiduk’s attitude seems to be pretty much mainstream in Ukraine. The Ukrainian LGBT community has few of the rights enjoyed in North America, but that has been known for a long time so hardly news. For example, as I understand it, Trans sexuality is still classified as a psychiatric disorder in Ukraine.
The West supports Ukraine because of Russian aggression which means we have a mutual enemy. The West does not choose allies based on shared values, i.e. Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Turkey, etc.

Real life is very different from what you read in social media. Those things you mentioned do exist, but they are few and far between. It is blown out of proportion by the media. Take it with a grain of salt and don't fall for the propaganda. Live in general changes very little and very slow.

Real life is very different from what you read in social media. Those things you mentioned do exist, but they are few and far between. It is blown out of proportion by the media. Take it with a grain of salt and don't fall for the propaganda. Live in general changes very little and very slow.

Real life is very different from what you read in social media. Those things you mentioned do exist, but they are few and far between. It is blown out of proportion by the media. Take it with a grain of salt and don't fall for the propaganda. Live in general changes very little and very slow.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/zelenskiy-thanks-germany-new-patriot-system-critical-time-2024-04-13/
 
Germany will transfer a Patriot battery and additional missiles to Ukraine "immediately" (so, soonish).

IEA Warns Attacks on Russia Plants May Disrupt Diesel Market
The flurry of Ukrainian drone attacks on Russia’s oil refineries risks disrupting global markets for petroleum products, the International Energy Agency said.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-04-12/iea-warns-attacks-on-russia-refineries-may-disrupt-diesel-market
Really? We are deeply concerned. 
Alas, today's night UKR drones couldn't reach Novoshakhtinsk refinery in Rostov oblast - local authorities claimed four drones were shot down/supressed. One fell down on territory of refinery, but didn't cause any significant damage

One thing that is sort of a fuzzy point of contention in robot-world is automated vs. autonomous.  
Something that operates on its own deterministically based on on predetermined responses to inputs and outputs is usually automated/automatic, rather than autonomous.  Even if they have a ton of conditionals (if this changes, do that thing) and closed loop control around setpoints they're usually considered "automated" but not "autonomous".  Factory machines do this.  Aircraft autopilots do this.  Once they get outside their programmed range they stop and wait or throw an error and ask for help.  
Autonomous is generally where you let the system loose in an environment where it doesn't necessarily have prior information about and let it sort out how to act.  Usually for autonomous systems you're giving fuzzier instructions and they wing it when they get outside their training.  Graduate students are like this, at least after their second year or so. Javelins might be on the borderline for this.  They're certainly automatic once you pull the trigger.  They may have some agency in how they get from trigger to bang.

I guess the economics for supplying and carrying an extra sensor package just for the last 20m are not there. Especially since radar works in that range, too.
Ultrasonic is only good if you need to detect stuff that radar doesn't bounce off - like a fly. So unless drones become THAT stealthy, sound is off the table.
 
Wrt to swarm communications: the swarm could communicate in ways that are designed to be low range. Like weak IR for example. No physical chance to pick that up from distance.
With mesh networks, the swarm can also be quite large if its density is high enough to relay the communication.
All doable - only question is when we will see it.