skells @skells@qoto.org
Joined Feb 2021
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleksey_Krylov
In 1917 he became CEO of the Russian society for shipbuilding and trade (the ROPiT, Русское общество пароходостроительства и торговли). After the October Revolution he peacefully transferred the ROPiT merchant fleet to the Soviet government and continued to work for the Russian Navy. In 1921 he was sent to London to re-establish scientific contacts, working there as a representative of the Soviet government. In 1927 he returned to the Soviet Union.
Krylov wrote about 300 papers and books. They span a wide range of topics, including shipbuilding, magnetism, artillery, mathematics, astronomy, and geodesy. His floodability tables have been used worldwide. Of note are his works in hydrodynamics including theory of ships moving in shallow water (he was the first to explain and calculate the significant increase of hydrodynamic resistance in shallow water) and the theory of solitons. In 1904 he built the first machine in Russia for integrating Ordinary differential equations.[1]
Krylov in the 1930s
In 1931 he published a paper on what is now called the Krylov subspace and Krylov subspace methods.[2] The paper deals with eigenvalue problems, namely, with computation of the characteristic polynomial coefficients of a given matrix. Krylov was concerned with efficient computations and, as a computational scientist, he counts the work as a number of separate numerical multiplications, something not very typical for a 1931 mathematical paper. Krylov begins with a careful comparison of the existing methods that include the worst-case-scenario estimate of the computational work in the Jacobi method. Later, he presents his own method which is superior to the known methods of that time and is still widely used.
Krylov also published the first Russian translation of Isaac Newton's Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica (1915).
the urge for conquest is a purely Russian phenomenon and Europeans want nothing to do with it
@7 @roboneko https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/author/2685
I've read Dreamer's Tales, very nice
@7 you're too kind, although you really shouldn't encourage us
@7 good luck, europeans like to fight too much
@7 @antisophon@mk.absturztau.be representative democracy squared
@7 appreciate the effort
yeah I'm more inclined to believe there's a running together of various forms of conspiracy and an emergent behaviour of actors protecting their vested interests.
the other side of the arguement is that there is historical precedent for serious conspiracy, the first and second triumverates come to mind, but they were about domination of a centralised ruling City, not the level of decentralisation and conflicting/coupled interests we see today.
Bismark/Metternich come close but both were characterised not only by diplomatic/politcal genius but also being at the mercy of political circumstance, even as they rode that wave
@7 geeze, ok galaxy brain
@7 Aside, I do not consider von der Leyen a decision maker
@7 Bornholm is gonna be one hell of a mystery/horror/thriller in 2040
skells
boosted
sev, you geopolled all over the feed again
> If the CIA saw the need, saw the weakness, and the director at the Russia Desk approved a black-op, then technically no one authorized such an attack.
Perhaps, I suspect those sorts of bureaucratic boundaries are far more permeable than that.
I still struggle with the overarching Davos narrative tbh, even though I agree with the broad strokes. Don't buy they're that competent/united.
Not that the decision makers aren't competent generally, just that I don't see the genius level competency required to navigate something as complex as this.
I like Luongo generally though, he has an eye for details.
skells
boosted
@skells Oof, I was loving this until the conclusion in the 13th tweet quoted -- and my complaint is really small. He seems to dance around the subject of what bodies and agencies actually perform the actions which is just soft at this point in the argument, but actually answering the question brings up questions I don't know can be answered:
* If the CIA saw the need, saw the weakness, and the director at the Russia Desk approved a black-op, then technically no one authorized such an attack.
* If Davos has sympathetic operatives in any part of the US Intelligence Community then there are far bigger problems than a pipeline to be concerned about, because Davos' plan isn't to hang the US out to dry -- it's to take the US down with them at the slightest hint of anything less than totalitarian success.
But past that point we come to agreement again. Past that point, it's an act of war; not necessarily by the US but a cheque which can only be signed by the US as it were. "The mouth writing cheques that the ass can't cash."
There's a lot in here worth reading though for everyone; it ties a lot of the geopol together quite nicely for those seeing it as a two-player game. Even I've made that mistake at times.
* If the CIA saw the need, saw the weakness, and the director at the Russia Desk approved a black-op, then technically no one authorized such an attack.
* If Davos has sympathetic operatives in any part of the US Intelligence Community then there are far bigger problems than a pipeline to be concerned about, because Davos' plan isn't to hang the US out to dry -- it's to take the US down with them at the slightest hint of anything less than totalitarian success.
But past that point we come to agreement again. Past that point, it's an act of war; not necessarily by the US but a cheque which can only be signed by the US as it were. "The mouth writing cheques that the ass can't cash."
There's a lot in here worth reading though for everyone; it ties a lot of the geopol together quite nicely for those seeing it as a two-player game. Even I've made that mistake at times.
https://tomluongo.me/2022/09/29/the-curious-whodunit-of-nordstreams-1-and-2/
interested in your thoughts/criticism
@7 spidermen j'acccuse.jpg
Joined Feb 2021
