Search

The Daily Bureaucrat listed statements where various individuals and organizations had, in his opinion, doubted the success of new inventions. He mentioned that the Michigan Savings Bank estimated in 1903 that the horse would persist and the car would be merely a fashion phenomenon for the wealthy. According to Thomas Watson, in 1943 there might have been a market for computers globally for perhaps five devices, and he said that Ken Olson stated in 1977 that nobody would need a computer in their home. He said that Steve Ballmer expressed doubt in 2007 that the iPhone would gain significant market share. Paul Krugman noted that the economic impact of the internet in 1998 would have hardly been greater than that of fax machines. He reported that Bill Gates predicted in 2004 that email spam would be resolved within two years, and that Marty Cooper assessed in 1981 that mobile phones would not completely replace landlines. The list also included Lord Kelvin’s claim in 1895 about the impossibility of heavier-than-air airplanes, Darryl F. Zanuck’s 1946 assessment of the short-lived nature of television, and Erasmus Wilson's prediction in 1878 about electric lights going out after the Paris World’s Fair. William Preece, according to The Daily Bureaucrat, said in 1876 that the telephone was not needed because there were enough messengers. He recounted that Lee De Forest deemed moon travel impossible in 1957 and that Dionysius Lardner predicted in 1830 that fast travel would lead to passengers choking. He said Thomas Edison rejected the use of alternating current in 1889. Finally, The Daily Bureaucrat asked what was now being said about the new Tesla Roadster. #teknologia #innovaatiot #historia (translated)

Mario Nawfal wrote that Europe had relied for four years on Ukraine acting as a shield with the United States behind it. According to him, the warning of the former German top general was coming true: Russia was winning, Washington was withdrawing, and Europe was left alone. #Eurooppa #Ukraina #Venäjä #EU #US #RU #DE (translated)

Jari Sarasvuo reminded that it took 65 years and 7 months from the Wright brothers' first flight of about 50 meters until Americans went to the Moon and returned safely to Earth. According to him, both events occurred within the lifetimes of many people. Sarasvuo assessed that the comparison could provide perspective to pessimistic detractors, but immediately doubted whether it would do so. #historia #avaruus #inspiraatio (translated)

Showing the execution as a livestream could have served as an effective deterrent – the world would have seen how America treats terrorists and scum like Hasan. On the other hand, many good and kind-hearted people may not want to see him die – not through a livestream or any visual medium. U.S. President Donald Trump says the execution of the army psychiatrist will not be shown live, news agency Reuters reports. #Trump #teloitus #Yhdysvallat (translated)

Henri Vanhanen wrote that he understands Volodymyr Zelensky's frustration with Donald Trump but criticized Europe for not intervening more actively in the negotiations. Vanhanen stated that Ukraine accepted a ceasefire proposed by the United States in the spring of 2025, which Vladimir Putin rejected. According to him, Trump threatened Russia with consequences, invited Putin to Alaska, and continued to seek a deal. Ultimately, according to Vanhanen, Russia's terms for peace were shaped to be acceptable to the Americans, after which Ukraine and European countries had to amend them. Vanhanen compared Putin's negotiation style to the Soviet style, which he associated with Foreign Minister Andrei Gromyko: first, a lot is demanded, concessions are rejected, and it is expected that the opposing party will offer more. He assessed that Trump needed a visible agreement more than Putin, which is why, in his opinion, Russia could wait for new initiatives from the United States. Vanhanen criticized Trump for letting Russia's demands influence what Ukraine was pressured to concede. He questioned why Europe had not presented a joint peace proposal with Ukraine or jointly decided how to respond to Russia's next refusal. Vanhanen noted that the United States' influence is undeniable and its participation is necessary, but he believed that Trump should not be given exclusive rights to define the direction of the negotiations. In his opinion, Europe did not need to be ashamed of Trump's lack of historical knowledge or understanding of Russia's negotiating tactics, but Europe's passivity was still harder to defend. https://t.co/qs68FaMyfW #Ukraina #Eurooppa #Trump (translated)

According to the author, Zelensky spoke directly and Trump's America was becoming Finlandized. He described an underlying ideological anti-European sentiment, an attacking unidentified peace movement, and seemingly profitable business. The author expressed appreciation for politicians who presented an honest assessment of the situation regardless of the circumstances. #Politiikka #Eurooppa #Zelenski #FI #US (translated)

Henri Vanhanen wrote that NATO's commander for European forces, Alexus Grynkewich, had described the alliance's strategic thinking in preparation for a possible Russian attack without revealing classified operational plans. According to Vanhanen, the speech aimed to convey that an attack on NATO territory would fail, and to reassure Europeans. He noted that the speech did not indicate, in his view, that NATO was anticipating an immediate attack. Vanhanen mentioned that Grynkewich summarized the theory of victory in three phases: the attack would be halted, its advance would be paralyzed, and if necessary, the military system supporting the attack would be broken. According to Vanhanen, this could mean strikes not only against the attacking troops but also against their logistics, command, and other support systems, if necessary, within Russian territory. The goal, in his interpretation, would not be to defeat Russia as a state, but to prevent it from seizing even part of NATO territory and pressuring the alliance to accept the situation. Vanhanen also highlighted from the speech that the plan took into account a situation where U.S. forces would be tied up in another war. He considered this a crucial issue for Europe and referred to the limited military resources of the United States and Trump's Russia policy, which he believed had made Washington's decisions difficult to predict. Vanhanen proposed that alongside NATO's plan, Europe needs its own plan for victory. Its goal would be for European NATO countries to be able to repel and defeat a large-scale conventional Russian attack over the next ten years even without U.S. combat troops. He believed this would require a joint assessment of the shortcomings in European defense, regular exercises without the assumption of U.S. participation, and binding decisions to correct the deficiencies. Vanhanen wrote that the purpose of a credible deterrent would be to make the initiation of war unprofitable for Russia. #Nato #Venäjä #turvallisuus (translated)

We are helping them (the Ukrainians), and we are sharing intelligence information, U.S. President Donald Trump claimed on Tuesday that Americans are still providing intelligence information to Ukraine. Ukraine struck several targets the previous day, – Ukraine struck several targets the previous day, Trump said. #Ukraina #Zelenskyi #Yhdysvallat (translated)

Henri Vanhanen wrote that, in his opinion, the sharp rise in diesel prices in the United States was not caused by the war in Ukraine but by the war against Iran initiated by the United States and Israel. He believed that Americans were paying the price for their president's foolish decisions. https://t.co/FimuKb3WYM #Trump #Yhdysvallat #Iran (translated)

Henri Vanhanen wrote that Donald Trump's Russia policy may not have been guided by a coherent strategy. According to him, Trump made decisions one by one, seeking quick political gains, and then had to fix the consequences. In his assessment, Vanhanen linked Trump's diminished commitment to arming Ukraine, the energy price increases resulting from the war in Iran, and the recent diesel trade with Russia. He believed that trade could bolster the Russian economy and give Vladimir Putin a means to pressure Ukraine into halting strikes on Russia's oil refineries. Vanhanen also criticized Trump for condemning strikes that he claimed weakened Russia's war economy. Vanhanen noted that Trump’s administration had not sought significant new funding from Congress for arming Ukraine. According to him, previously agreed deliveries had continued, and European countries had purchased American weapons for Ukraine. He stated that Trump was not fundamentally on the side of Ukraine or Europe but was primarily pursuing his own interests. According to Vanhanen, Finland's security should not be built on the assumption that there is a plan behind Trump's decisions that would turn in favor of Europe. He urged preparedness for the possibility that U.S. aid could be delayed or smaller than expected, to strengthen the availability of defense equipment and air defense, and to deepen cooperation with Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Britain, Poland, and the Baltic countries. He also believed that Europe should be able to support Ukraine and maintain economic pressure on Russia by its own means. #Trump #Venäjä #Ukraina (translated)

Henri Vanhanen wrote that the agreement announced by Donald Trump with Vladimir Putin to bring millions of tons of Russian diesel to the global market would be very bad news for Ukraine. According to Vanhanen, the arrangement would give Russia new opportunities to earn from energy exports, even though its war of aggression in Ukraine would continue. Vanhanen assessed that the agreement could help Russia mitigate the economic impacts of the strikes on Ukraine's oil refineries. He wrote that the strikes had caused problems and fuel shortages for Russia. In his view, facilitating Russia's energy exports would also reduce the pressure on Putin to negotiate an end to the war. Vanhanen considered it possible that the promised deliveries might not materialize, as he claimed Russia's refining capacity had suffered from the strikes. Vanhanen speculated that Trump was aiming for lower fuel prices in the United States before the midterm elections, but questioned the agreement's impact on prices. He also found the political message of the agreement concerning: in his view, the Kremlin could present it as evidence that Russia is not isolated and that the U.S. president is willing to do business with it. According to Vanhanen, the agreement could place Ukraine's strikes on Russia's oil industry in conflict with Washington's fuel price objectives. He urged Europe to prepare for greater responsibility in supporting Ukraine and pressuring Russia, and maintained that Russia's war economy should not be helped to recover. https://t.co/gpRe9acHoW #Ukraina #Venäjä #Trump (translated)

Matias Turkkila wrote that OpenAI's CEO Sam Altman admitted to being wrong in his assessment of anti-Semitism. According to Altman, he had long considered anti-Semitism, especially in the United States left, to be less significant than claimed. #antisemitismi #vasemmisto #SamAltman (translated)

Mikko Välimaa wrote to Timo Stewart that the matter could be interpreted in many ways, but outwardly it often seemed that the goal was to limit Yle's journalism and at the same time Finnish public discourse. He lamented that the issue had to be discussed on an American X platform. #journalismi #keskustelu #sosiaalinenmedia (translated)

1. Uskollinen liittolaisemme Trump harkitsee dieselin vientikieltoa. Kuulostaa amerikkalaiselta sisäpolitiikalta, mutta osuu suoraan Eurooppaan: puolet meidän dieseltuonnistamme on tullut viime kuukausina Yhdysvalloista. Lähi-itä toimittaa murto-osan entisestä. #Trump #diesel #EU_TRANSITIONS #US #EU #ME