Thank you for sharing. For me your original talk is more convincing, and your Death Star strike plan is the one I would be more willing to follow rather than movie one.

I suppose this is an area where one can have a strong conviction on how things ought to be done, assuming other smart people think the same way, but in reality the way they think about it is closer to the base rate, so communication towards them should be as such.

A lot of important technology do not exists yet for the above.

You assume independent movement and coordination of said movement in a hostile area, while we barely arrived at self-driving cars in well governed, 1st world areas (available only very few places afaik due to not being able to demonstrate high enough reliability to be convincing to lawmakers).

Point-to-point laser communication would be a great solution indeed, but that would also be a great solution for a bunch of other military applications. Yet it is not used, as we do not have reliable solution for working with it in case of moving objects (apart from satelites), too much coordination is needed to find the end points.

There is no software system currently that is even close to completing the requirements.

Let me offer a different point of view on the whole question:

A suicide drone is just a missile. Until recently there was just no way to propel and guide an explosive charge accurately,  reliably and cheaply other than using a rocket engine.

A recon drone is just a helicopter. Until recently there was just no way to propel and guide a good enough observer and transmit the information reliably and cheaply other than a human carrying object using gas turbines.

What happened is now we have better battery and material technology, and way better (smaller) electronic devices (and optimized global supply chains). The cost advantage against missiles is mostly due to inertia in the military-industrial complex: most missiles in inventory were designed against targets with different size and performance parameters. You need a a million dollar AMRAAM missile to intercept an Su-30 flying 80 kms away, maybe flying at 2 mach or at 40 000 feet or pulling 9g maneuvers while dispensing chaff, flares and using EW. (and the missile carrying aircraft may have already pulled the same speed and maneuvers, and may have took off from the desert with 45 degrees Celsius and arrived to - 30 degrees Celsius flight attitude in the next couple of minutes, yet the missile must stay safe and reliable).

The infantryman did not get replaced. They just got missiles available in large numbers, and their own miniature recon helicopters in every bush. It is harder to hide and there are more precision fires to throw at you after getting spotted.

Thanks for writing the post.

Regarding the challenge: I suppose one of the errors made by you was using bad sources in some case, e.g. using the msn.com article for supporting Russian losses.

Regarding the article: although what is presented there is generally valid, it do not feel my understanding/defense increased in a meaningful way, as

1. The suggested steps are more-or-less what I already do.
2. Following them still gets me nerd-sniped due to the "bullshit asymmetry" principle already mentioned in another comment. If in a hostile dispute space, where one (or more) opponents are pushing an agenda and I have limited time (equal to or less than what they have) for counter-argument, this cannot be really pulled off. It is possible that my expectations are just too high though.

I think what I really liked in your dialog with Isusr was it showing how such techniques looked like when someone was using them himself. I haven't experienced that before, especially not with that level of clarity and purposefulness.

Thanks for pinging me. Haven't noticed it yet, will read it now.

I think something along the lines of "Defense Against the Dark Arts" with actionable steps on recognizing and defusing them (and how to practice these) would be great. If you feel like you have the energy and time, more articles on offensive usage (practice) and on theoretical background (how to connect your practical experience to existing LW concepts/memes) would be also nice. But I think the first one (defense) would be the most useful for LW readers.

I think this is an important addition to the site. There had been articles before about the "dark" side/arts, but I think this is the first one where the examples are not thought experiments and abstractions, but actual real world experience from an actual user.

It is helpful for understanding politics.

How much time did they spend practicing with the kids? (Frequency and length of sessions. e.g. 7 times a week for 5-10 minutes)

What economic effects do you expect to see from

1. The attacks themselves (I guess direct damage of property from increased rocket strike volume is not that large?)
2. The following mobilization? (I guess this can be way worse for long term?)

3. Are these current events increasing the stability/popularity of the current Netanyahu government or is it better for the opposition parties?

"Politician's logic"

Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politician%27s_syllogism

Snappy British sitcom clip:

My quick impression for the overlapping similarities:

1. An ambitious leader with a strong vision and mandate to make important decisions.
2. Keeping the organization lean. Even in case of larger projects (construction), teams should be able to operate relatively independently, so at least being lean "locally" (not being forced into a larger hierarchy).
3. Having effective executives with a lot of domain level experience.
4. Keeping inferential-query distances short, whether by time (quick iterations) or space (engineers close to assembly plant), but preferably both.

For me this still points (yet again) towards shortening feedback loops: apart from directly being mentioned, generating the experienced leaders and workers is also possibly based on this. No one had as much experience in designing aircraft as the engineers who worked between the 40s and the 60s, just due to the sheer amount of equipment designed, both due to being less matured (lower hanging fruits), less regulated and just military spending being relatively higher during the era. I wonder though if we could replace some of the experience with simulations and games.