[–] 3 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Earlier bombs were unreliable. It wasn't rare to have an entire squadron in multiple sorties to target a single bridge even in uncontested skies.

The bad navigation and aiming equipment as well as dumb bombs resulted in COP to be in 100s of meters in best case. This was exacerbated by flaky mechanisms: better to have UXO than to accidentally grief some ground staff.

That's mostly what we see today. Bombs in random areas because the flight lost track of position or met a cloudy patch of skies on the target and decided to drop the payload to maintain their return range.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 2 points 4 days ago (1 child)

    Let me introduce you to your new best friend: regulatory capture. This gives you the worst of all: low cost of doing business with high deregulation similar to self-regulation but with the ability to point to the regulatory body for any high profile issues

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago

    It's not that simple from the manufacturers perspective.

    Setting up a new fab takes years. Usually 5 or more for a grounds up build. Less for an upgrade (1-2 years or so). Lots of in-progress fabs have been sped up and we will see more supply sooner, but not soon enough.

    Making less HBM and more DDR RAM doesn't make sense for $hareholders, so we are stuck with getting supply at a trickle such that the marginal cost for both is equal or it's a contract with a penalty larger than any profits

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 5 points 1 week ago

    Simply lovely. There long names are for mounting since they are persistent w ross reboots.

    The short ones can change of there are no mounting options or more or fewer devices than before.

    PS: even the networking devices have this funky naming

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • view more: ‹ prev next ›