And why would that be particularly expensive?

I'm confused. 'Red' is a single state paying for nuclear forces and conventional forces. 'Blue' is an alliance of states. 'Blue' decides not to have nuclear forces. Once 'Blue' has marginal conventional force superiority, why would adding extra conventional forces matter?

why does 'no nuclear deterrent' imply 'very large conventional forces'? if the other side has significant nuclear weapons, how would very large conventional forces deter?

If you have used a frontier model (GPT-5.2 Thinking Extended, Claude 4.6 Opus, Gemini 3 Pro) to try to do real work for an hour or more & still felt that AI is just overhyped nonsense, please share, I want to understand why.

That doesn't mean these systems do everything well, but they do a lot well

really important this: some schools more-or-less require a good deal of connectivity, and that is going to have to change if schools are going no-phone-zone

Maybe Russian and Polish speakers could handle that? The first bit sounds quite like the Polish word for 'who' (kto)

Specialist batsmen playing at the highest level.

I think you are maybe thinking of the Taiping Rebellion rather than the Boxer Rebellion?

It is a fascinating piece that really tries to bring out the subtleties of the whole story and the varying, and conflicting, motives of the different actors - recommended.

Best of luck to you with that: art, craft and play are so important.

I thought so; what will doubling down look like for you? Is the intent then to be a (more?) visible beacon of this human approach?

That sounds an interesting and exciting move. Is there anything which you were doing before that you won't be doing in this coming year? More hand-drawn/coloured maps and illustrations rather than digital? More hand-sculpted models rather than 3D printing?

Perhaps we as viewers/readers do/did infer that communicative intent. But I think that sufficiently convincing AI products will break that confidence in our own inferences.

If I am insufficiently skilled to visually tell the difference between original and copy, how can I justify different reactions to them? If someone then gives me the different histories of the creation of the original and copy, then I must be reacting to the history, not the art.