QinShiHuangsShlong [none/use name]

The smallest transistors currently in production are the intel 18A which have a gate length of 18 angstroms or 1.8nanometers.

However this is more of a naming convention than actual size as transistors have moved off planar design for a while now as FINFETS and GAA transistors became the norm.

The smallest planar transistors are around 22nm which would give you around 450,000 stacked end to end in one cm. This doesn’t take into consideration buffer devices or any proper layout procedure.

I however don’t think that’s the core breakthrough here. It’s more about it’s durability seemingly.

Crackkker chauvinism will know no end until an end is put to it.

Sounds to me USSR revolution wasn’t that “successful” afer all

Reducing the USSR to a “failure” because it collapsed is ahistorical idealism and the height of liberal nonsense. We should judge a formation by the contradictions it resolved, not by whether it achieved eternity. Tsarist Russia was a feudal wreck where peasants starved and most couldn’t read. Within decades, the Soviet project doubled life expectancy, wiped out illiteracy, and industrialized a continent-sized country, dragging millions out of poverty.

Women gained full legal equality in 1918: abortion rights, divorce, workplace access, while Western women were still fighting for the vote. Socialized childcare and mass employment pulled women into public life on a scale capitalism wouldn’t match for generations.

And let’s not forget who actually broke fascism: the Red Army fought four-fifths of the Wehrmacht, lost 27 million people, and took Berlin while the West sat on the sidelines and even continued to trade with the nazi beast for years into the war (see the history of ford factories and IBM).

Collapse doesn’t retroactively erase what was built. “Anarchists” like you who dismiss seventy years of concrete progress because the state eventually fractured aren’t radical they’re reactionary. Material gains for millions don’t vanish because the system that produced them later unraveled.

The aftermath of the collapse proved the stakes that people like you refuse to grapple with. The 1990s were catastrophic. Life expectancy cratered, millions plunged into homelessness and destitution, women and children were trafficked by the tens of thousands, and the entire country was looted by oligarchs with IMF blessing. The chaos bred Yeltsin’s drunken comprador regime, which paved the way for Putin’s rise as his right-hand man a direct product of the Soviet collapse. When you cheer the unraveling of a workers’ state even a deeply flawed one, you’re not celebrating freedom. You’re celebrating the road that led straight to oligarchs, fascists, and some of the worst reaction imaginable. But you don’t really care about anyone but yourself.

A crisis is when "the poors"^TM can afford housing.

Building shared skills for shared growth with BRI partners

Li Mingliang (executive director of the Belt and Road Tianjin Strategic Research Institute and professor at the School of International Business of Tianjin Foreign Studies University) on how the Belt and Road Initiative is increasingly driven by vocational education cooperation, with China exporting skills training to partner countries to support employment and industrial development, while stressing that future success depends on deeper localization, stronger integration, and adaptation to digital and green technology.

You just don’t understand, the tyranny of bedtime is the greatest tyranny of all.

Harry Potterism or StarWars Syndrome

Houses are for speculation not for living —JDPON DON

You are right, the United States is still the world’s dominant military superpower overall, but that’s not really relevant to this specific point. In this specific case (the Sentinel ICBM versus comparable Chinese missiles) it is clearly behind. The reasons vary as you rightly pointed out: rigid doctrine, arms-control treaty legacies, extreme cost inflation, industrial constraints, and political limits on mobility and basing. All of that matters for why the gap exists, but it does not change the material outcome. China fields newer, more advanced, more survivable, more flexible systems designed for modern strategic conditions, while the US is spending almost unimaginable sums to preserve an increasingly vulnerable fixed-silo model and continue to enrich defense company shareholders.

So this missile is costing $150B+ to develop, wont even enter production until 2029 and will probably be $200M+ per unit and it is less advanced than the DF-41 from 2017 not to mind China’s full missile ecosystem or the new DF-61?

Beautiful gambit from the Amerikkkans.

It’s been a farce. If you want a sort of sad laugh check the NATOpedia list of designated terrorist orgs and ctrl+f Israel.

Crackkker kkkulture

Isn’t it over 1/2 read at the level of an 11yo or lower? and slightly more than 1/5 are functionally illiterate?

The Peoples Cop*

They’re going to be so mad when they get up their and realize the one real religion died out a thousand years ago.

As if “international law” was ever anything more than a shield for imperialism and a club to beat the global south.

True I did more of a paraphrase than translate. Overall a very cute happy story even if the implications are less so.

A brief list of issues off the top of my head with his post even though its probably a waste of time: • Pretending “not formally governed” = “not Chinese.” Pre-modern states did not work like modern border states. Lack of a permanent bureaucracy does not mean lack of integration.

• Using modern Western sovereignty rules on feudal Asia. This is historical anachronism. No pre-capitalist state functioned the way modern nation-states do.

• Claiming there was “no solid contact” before the 1560s. False. There are records from Sui, Tang, Song, and Yuan periods showing contact, trade, navigation, and military expeditions in the region.

• Misusing the ambiguity of the word 琉球 to imply “maybe China never reached Taiwan.” Ambiguous naming does not equal absence of contact. Medieval geography everywhere used vague terms.

• Pretending written records are the only form of historical evidence. Material migration, trade routes, archaeology, and population movement matter more than paperwork.

• Ignoring continuous Chinese fishing, trade, and settlement activity. Taiwan was part of the Fujian maritime economy long before 1683.

• Acting like Taiwan existed outside China’s economic system. It did not. Food, labor, migrants, tools, taxes, and markets flowed from the mainland.

• Claiming the Dutch “made Taiwan Chinese.” Absurd.

• Treating Han migration as a European colonial byproduct. Chinese migration was driven by land shortages, class stratification, and coastal capitalism, not Dutch planning.

• Downplaying that most settlers came directly from Fujian. This was regional migration, not foreign colonization.

• Portraying Koxinga as only a pirate or warlord. He governed Taiwan using Ming laws, institutions, taxation, and bureaucracy.

• Ignoring that the Zheng regime explicitly identified as Chinese. It never claimed Taiwan was a separate nation.

• Framing the Qing as “foreign Manchu colonizers.” Liberal racial framing. The Qing ruled through Chinese institutions and class structures.

• Pretending the Qing were not a Chinese state. Historically false and rejected even by mainstream historians.

• Treating 1683 as “the first time Taiwan became Chinese.” It was the first time of direct imperial administration, not the beginning of Chinese integration.

• Using sensational sex scandals to replace political analysis. Tabloid storytelling instead of material history.

• Reducing historical change to personal morality and drama. This is liberal moralism, not historical explanation.

• Equating historical complexity with illegitimacy. Late incorporation does not invalidate sovereignty.

• Seemingly Ignoring Japanese colonial rule entirely. Conveniently skips the actual foreign colonization of Taiwan. (I’m not going to read his toilet paper book just going off the post)

• Ignoring US military occupation after World War II. This is central to the modern Taiwan issue.(I’m not going to read his toilet paper book just going off the post)

• Ignoring the KMT dictatorship and White Terror. Over 100,000 Taiwanese were killed or imprisoned under a US-backed regime. (I’m not going to read his toilet paper book just going off the post)

• Erasing US Cold War control of Taiwan’s political system. Taiwan’s current status is a product of American imperialism, not ancient history. (I’m not going to read his toilet paper book just going off the post)

• Pretending the Taiwan issue is about the 1600s. It is about post-1949 imperial containment of China.

• Using “Beijing doesn’t want you to read” propaganda framing. Standard Cold War marketing tactic.

• Appealing to Western audiences’ anti-China bias. The tone and structure are built to flatter liberal prejudices.

• Claiming academic authority while writing pop-imperialist content. Credentials (he doesn’t even have the right ones) used as a shield for ideology.

• Ignoring economic continuity across dynasties. Class relations mattered more than dynastic names.

Probably many more but I have no interest in reading his slop book or further digging through the post or comments.

is the least these people deserve