• 0 Posts
  • 14 Comments
Joined 2 months ago
cake
Cake day: July 2nd, 2026

help-circle
  • In germany in the 18th/19th century there was the extreme duelling form of “übers Sacktuch schießen” where both duellists stood very close (both gripping the same cloth) and were shooting at the same time with pistols, but only one was loaded. Since the distance was so close, missing was impossible and only random chance decided the winner/survivor.


  • I can see the allure because it implies that every conflict could become life-threatening, therefore everybody should weigh their words carefully.

    In reality though it would emphasize the weight of trained duellists higher than those with well-informed convictions. If you cannot speak the truth because well-paid professional duellists could suppress you anytime by threat of duel (or shame of declining it).

    There is a good reason why pretty much every modern civilization stopped this practise: Too much was needlessly lost (see Hamilton, Fermat, many students in the 18th century Europe…).









  • “Rapid dominance attempts to affect the will, perception, and understanding of the adversary to fight or respond to our strategic policy ends through imposing a regime of Shock and Awe” (Ullman & Wade, 1996)

    One could argue that “shock & awe” is a military strategy to specifically terrorize the enemy force, for example a military opponent. This would blur the line above (terrorism vs military) as it intends to affect the opponents minds with fear of the attacking group and thus coerce them away from their goal.

    This strategy is one performed by an organized military that is (theoretically) bound by the rules of warfare (like the Geneva Convention) and unlawful acts can be prosecuted by either their own military law system or an international court (like the Hague). Non-state actors (insurgents, terrorist groups) on the other hand are not beholden to any law. To me, this is another relevant distinction: Is the act itself one of terror or military necessity? And is the actor a governmental organization beholden to the law?


  • I tolerate both steam and heroic. I can see how a launcher is useful for centralized library management (updates and reinstallation), but I also see how it is a lot of concentrated attention and potential adspace / datamining tool.

    I tolerate steam because they have good features & an okay track record, and heroic because I want to receive the free epic games but do not want to give them real estate on my pc.