Butschi

Whether this is their intention or not, they do it like in WW2: One thing that the bombing campaigns were effective at was keeping the Luftwaffe busy defending the cities instead of contesting the frontlines. Ukraine has to commit Patriots et al. defending the cities instead of shooting down Russian aviation near the front.

Whether this is their intention or not, they do it like in WW2: One thing that the bombing campaigns were effective at was keeping the Luftwaffe busy defending the cities instead of contesting the frontlines. Ukraine has to commit Patriots et al. defending the cities instead of shooting down Russian aviation near the front.

Yeah. There are plenty of possibilities, not all of them false flag and if there's anything Putin has shown himself to not be it's the 4d chessmaster Bond villian we all thought he was before 2022.

No doubt more details (and 'more details') will come out, but the timing seems awfully convenient.

I'm just not convinced that the HMG that was filming got the kill. Looks almost 90, looks a bit far. Maybe some other AA on the other side, not possible to tell from the video. Also, could this be a shahed again?

Anything that makes the target look less like the training images. I guess we are going to see camouflage that is taylored to fool AI not humans. Adversarial attacks were all the rage a few years back, e.g. images modified in way that they look more or less identical to humans but entirely different to AI.

Assuming something smart at work here is probably over-interpreting the videos. The simple explanation for the first video is that the system got distracted by some dirt pattern (doesn't look like it's targeting the guy running) and in the second case the fire made the vehicle look different than the images the system was trained on.
Not saying the system can't be that smart, just that we humans tend to interpret more into those things than there is in reality. More often than not it's a bug, not a feature. 😉

Anything that makes the target look less like the training images. I guess we are going to see camouflage that is taylored to fool AI not humans. Adversarial attacks were all the rage a few years back, e.g. images modified in way that they look more or less identical to humans but entirely different to AI.

Assuming something smart at work here is probably over-interpreting the videos. The simple explanation for the first video is that the system got distracted by some dirt pattern (doesn't look like it's targeting the guy running) and in the second case the fire made the vehicle look different than the images the system was trained on.
Not saying the system can't be that smart, just that we humans tend to interpret more into those things than there is in reality. More often than not it's a bug, not a feature. 😉

Seems a bit far away for a HMG to be accurate enough to catch a missile going at least 200 m/s...
ninja'd by panzermartin

Sorry no way this was from the 0.50. It's equivalent to the Iraqi with a 1909 rifle posing against a down Apache. 

And nobody says they are. The Tiger might get to roll a 100 sided die while the T64 gets a 4 sided one. And still the Tiger can roll a success (rolling that 1) while the T64 doesn't. It is unlikely but that is statistics and you can't argue statistics with a sample size of 1.
And there may be 99 incidents where the T64 makes the spot first and 1 where it doesn't. People rarely post "Yep, look, happened just as I think it should." On the other hand, the one where the Tiger got lucky is almost guaranteed to trigger that "Spotting in CM is broken!!!" post.

Assuming something smart at work here is probably over-interpreting the videos. The simple explanation for the first video is that the system got distracted by some dirt pattern (doesn't look like it's targeting the guy running) and in the second case the fire made the vehicle look different than the images the system was trained on.
Not saying the system can't be that smart, just that we humans tend to interpret more into those things than there is in reality. More often than not it's a bug, not a feature. 😉

Assuming something smart at work here is probably over-interpreting the videos. The simple explanation for the first video is that the system got distracted by some dirt pattern (doesn't look like it's targeting the guy running) and in the second case the fire made the vehicle look different than the images the system was trained on.
Not saying the system can't be that smart, just that we humans tend to interpret more into those things than there is in reality. More often than not it's a bug, not a feature. 😉

Assuming something smart at work here is probably over-interpreting the videos. The simple explanation for the first video is that the system got distracted by some dirt pattern (doesn't look like it's targeting the guy running) and in the second case the fire made the vehicle look different than the images the system was trained on.
Not saying the system can't be that smart, just that we humans tend to interpret more into those things than there is in reality. More often than not it's a bug, not a feature. 😉

Sorry, as I said the energy/metals thing is marginally OT (though probably better than US politix right now), but check these out as a case in point for how deep a hole the West needs to dig itself out of in terms of manufacturing capacity. The headlines speak for themselves:
https://www.rechargenews.com/energy-transition/chinas-making-more-cheap-wind-and-solar-kit-than-the-world-knows-what-to-do-with-the-timing-couldnt-be-worse/2-1-1609984
“Cyclical overcapacity is a feature across the Chinese economy, from steel to lower-end semiconductors,” said clean energy research specialist BNEF in a new report. “But today’s surplus of clean-tech manufacturing is unprecedented.”
https://www.rechargenews.com/energy-transition/dont-get-hooked-on-chinese-batteries-after-quitting-russian-gas-europe-warned/2-1-1519960
https://www.rechargenews.com/wind/unfair-and-a-security-threat-dont-be-tempted-by-half-price-chinese-wind-turbines-warns-european-industry-chief/2-1-1518733
(And keep in mind ALL the leading turbine manufacturers in the world except GE were European, up to about 3 years ago. They are all now going bankrupt/exiting and/or having quality problems as they had to cut so many corners to compete on price with Envision, Minyang, etc.)
****
...So when we talk here about 'flooding the zone' with a bazillion cut-price drones, or antidrone-drones, or anti-antidrones, just *who* is in the position to walk that talk at this moment?
Very important to be realistic about this. Because whatever Ukraine and its allies innovate on the battlefield is being studied and copied, in real time.
Now whether Russia can effectively employ a bazillion cut rate drones or wevs, we can discuss. But I wouldn't answer that one with a hard No either....
 

And nobody says they are. The Tiger might get to roll a 100 sided die while the T64 gets a 4 sided one. And still the Tiger can roll a success (rolling that 1) while the T64 doesn't. It is unlikely but that is statistics and you can't argue statistics with a sample size of 1.
And there may be 99 incidents where the T64 makes the spot first and 1 where it doesn't. People rarely post "Yep, look, happened just as I think it should." On the other hand, the one where the Tiger got lucky is almost guaranteed to trigger that "Spotting in CM is broken!!!" post.

Even with enhanced optics and IR and and and.. there is still a chance things will not be spotted. It's just human nature to miss stuff or pay attention to one thing and miss something else. More importantly that is modeled in the game. So, I agree there is more testing that needs to happen for sure. Just starting with a statistically significant set of runs. That would be a starting point though. All the other factors would then need to be considered. First one I can think of is what happens if the T64 is on a slightly higher elevation does that change things - especially for the guy in the grass.
Feel free to conduct the tests. I would, personally, not even weigh in until that part gets done. If you try to chase every anecdote down you will get tired of running pretty quick. Having said that we should all pursue the issues we think look interesting / problematic.

I think the answer should be a big "No!". It would play right into Putin's hand because then he could just accuse the West of applying double standards. Something along the lines of evil NATO opposing Russia for bringing their brethren in Donbas and on Crimea home into mother Russia's arms after they actually voted to be part of Russia - when they themselves annex countries because they can.
Would also provide more ammo to the anti-NATO/US factions in the West (who don't necessarily love Putin all that much, either) who see NATO/US as just a bunch of warmongers.
If we want to continue playing this as "we are the good guys" then we really have to play by the rules. As hard as it is and knowing that Putin doesn't.

You should, though. Spotting in CM is a statistical process, meaning you throw dice every n seconds. Let's say I have a collection of 6, 8 and 10 sided dice. I only tell you I use one die for the T64 and one for the a Tiger but not which tank gets which. I'll also tell you that you need to roll a 1 in order to make a spot. I make a few dice rolls and tell you that the Tiger made the spot after 5 rolls, the T64 after 8 rolls. Now, tell me which die I used for which tank. (Or maybe I lied and only had 6 sided dice... How can you possibly know?)

I think the answer should be a big "No!". It would play right into Putin's hand because then he could just accuse the West of applying double standards. Something along the lines of evil NATO opposing Russia for bringing their brethren in Donbas and on Crimea home into mother Russia's arms after they actually voted to be part of Russia - when they themselves annex countries because they can.
Would also provide more ammo to the anti-NATO/US factions in the West (who don't necessarily love Putin all that much, either) who see NATO/US as just a bunch of warmongers.
If we want to continue playing this as "we are the good guys" then we really have to play by the rules. As hard as it is and knowing that Putin doesn't.

Shilpkin's study is not the evidence- it's approximation of voting anomalies based on various, quite complicated statistical methods. Russian liberals naturally like to call it "ingenious" and whole plethora of superlatives, but even if it is close to truth, it's still just estimate (there are others who put fraud ballots even higher numbers, like 30+ mlns). Especially that turn-out ratio is very murky this time due to war, immigration, online voting and overall atmosphere. Also note 51% isn't any barrier, since there is no one opposition candidate. It is certain some voting base is by default already "lended" by Putin to certified opposition, like Kharitonov (a communist candidate harnessing sentiments of mostly older people, who under more normal circumstances would also support current president).
     More solid are perhaps exit-polls made by foreign polling companies abroad, but they are naturally very limited in their usefulness too. There is interesting logic there- while in Western countries Putin generally lost royally according to exit polls (like last times, circa 15%; his support in Germany for example was unexpectedly low this time), in Turkey, Cyprus, Greece and several other states that absorbed a lot of Russian emigrees or are popular travel destinations,  his support was something like 30-40%, with accordingly high amount of refusals to questions.
So what we can only be sure is only that Russian society is depoliticized, hunkering down and Putin is only viable candidate. Like it was in last years.
About second part you are right- siloviki are crude when comes to electional frauds. They always were. But still I see no reason to see unexpectedly high official ratings of Putin as some sort of desperation on behalf of Kremlin or tectonic changes in Russian psyche. There are other, simpler explenations, including current propaganda needs, over-zelous local officials and overall geopolitical situation.
 

I think the answer should be a big "No!". It would play right into Putin's hand because then he could just accuse the West of applying double standards. Something along the lines of evil NATO opposing Russia for bringing their brethren in Donbas and on Crimea home into mother Russia's arms after they actually voted to be part of Russia - when they themselves annex countries because they can.
Would also provide more ammo to the anti-NATO/US factions in the West (who don't necessarily love Putin all that much, either) who see NATO/US as just a bunch of warmongers.
If we want to continue playing this as "we are the good guys" then we really have to play by the rules. As hard as it is and knowing that Putin doesn't.

For sure they are topped, but that doesn't mean he wouldn't win anyway in fair (or semi-fair) elections. Genuine potentiall differences in these numbers- 50, 75 or 85%- are not significant from current Kremlin perspective in themselves until Putin wins; and he wins in every possible computation anyway. Most important thing is to show that society support his President in such difficult time- it's the only cause of such high ratings. He could publish more modest results, but it's safer to shore up public will a little bit.
I doubt he see things in that way- it would be rational for sure, but not many things in this regime are.
First- emperor of "awakened" all-Russia will not be manipulating his own election ritual in a way to flatten tastes of some bootlickers in the West. Russia is stronk and mighty, so they should better deal with it "as it is" (to use Putin's own words, repeated ad nauseam). Not to mention these people in the West who want to cut support for Ukraine does not need excuses; everybody knows Muscovia is not democratic. It may actually take off pretensional burden from their shoulders and bring back clear, old version of darwinistic international politics they all love and like to talk so much about.
Second- we should free ourselves from thinking that West is point of reference in everything Kremlin did or does. It wasn't like that in the past, it is even less true today. I would even go as far to say that Putin may be ambitionally testing here how his new, "multipolar" world order works in reality. After all, West didn't care that much when dealing with other bad boys like China, Saudis, Israel etc.

Just to clarify, I do not believe these losses to be sustainable, I have repeatedly said otherwise. Russia has about 1.5-2 years at high intensity left in its storage, before it is down to production numbers only. I quoted the lowest estimation from a western intelligence group.
The issue is that in the short and medium term these losses are replaceable for russia only. After that, they are irreplacable for both but my guess is that by then drones will be so dominant that neither can do anything but dig down and try to get into the earth.

We actually have no idea what Putin’s real base of genuine support is or is not.  First off he controls any and all “polls” either directly or indirectly so trying to gauge who really supports him, who is pretending simply to avoid trouble and who opposes but is afraid to say anything, in real terms is basically impossible to do inside Russia, let alone outside looking in.  “Look a bunch of people lined up to support him” is not a viable basis for deductions.
Second problem is that support, in a functioning democracy, is founded on a basis of “informed decision”.  This means that all sides can spin, argue and slant but in the end the news media and objective journalism is supposed to provide a voter with a range of diverging viewpoints and facts.  Voters can then decide who to support, or not support based on their own personal perception and understanding.  This is damned hard to do in a functioning liberal democracy; however, in Russia it is likely impossible.  Putin controls the mainstream media - we have heard endless stories of dissenters being arrested or charged, hell he passed laws making criticism of this war illegal.  He also has a lot of control within social media, suppressing sites and flooding the RUSNet with stooges.  We have seen enough outright lies and insane claims out of Russian media in the last two years to know that the average Russian simply is not able to access much beyond what Putin wants them to see and hear.  Under these conditions “real support” is nearly impossible because no alternative facts, ideas or even options are ever presented.
Finally, as our Ukrainian friends like to point out continually, the average Russian is poorly educated, poor wealth and largely ignorant…this is why they keep signing up for this war.  To now accuse these people of “knowingly supporting Putin” as if they have access to alternatives is short-sighted at best.  Further, Kraze’s continued insistence to call every living Russian on the planet as vicious war loving murders is not only disingenuous, it treads dangerously close to genocidal narratives that have no place on what is supposed to be a rational objective forum.  We know Russians opposed this war, a few hundred thousand ran away.  Others are resisting passively.  We also know that many really do not even understand what this war is or is not because Putin is preventing them from seeing any truth but his own.  We also know some Russians also buy into this war and Putin fully even knowing the reality.  In the end we are going to have to deal with all of them in some form or another because as much as some people are acting out emotionally here, we are not going to wipe Russia off the face of the earth and salt the ground on their mass graves.
So be pissed off, but do not come here and promote outright disinformation in some sort of weird attempt to get us to all buy into some “every Russian is evil and must die” nonsense.  There are all sorts of sites on the internet where people on both sides can engage in that emotional orgy, but it should not be here.  The second this forum becomes one of those places, I for one, am out.