I've started a new thread on this, because I think the potential depth
for discussion justifies doing so ...

On 25/06/2023 08:31, Roderick Stewart wrote:
>
> On Sat, 24 Jun 2023 22:46:53 +0100, MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>
>> On 24/06/2023 22:35, Adrian Caspersz wrote:
>>>
>>> If you have any technical interest in a subject, you will find it on
>>> YouTube and other streaming platforms.

In the past, I have used YouTube quite often - finding out how to
repair something, watch a dimly remembered pop-video, hear again an old
comedy LP, etc - however, now, for the Ukraine War, I skim through it
every day, usually watching one or two short videos.

>> I rarely watch anything on YouTube because they seem to be mostly
>> done by young kids full of their own self-importance.

Certainly there's an amount of that, but, as above, there are worthwhile
offerings as well.

> True, but for me that makes the genuine ones all the more valuable. An
> inevitable consequence of material being presented on Youtube rather
> than a traditional broadcast channel is that it won't have had to run
> the gauntlet of producers, editors, consultants etc before being
> chosen as suitable for broadcast, thus depriving you of the need to
> think for yourself. You must use your own knowledge and common sense
> and judge for yourself what you think is worthwhile, just as you would
> judge the validity of what someone says in real life. The better
> Youtube channels usually have the absolute minimum of 'production
> values' or none at all, sometimes just a simple presentation by a
> single individual who knows their stuff.

Yes, particularly that latter point. YouTube videos are refreshingly
free from the artifice, in the worst possible sense of the word, of
modern TV production. Instead of the toe-curlingly embarrassing
awkwardness of presenters walking down busy streets talking to
themselves, we have an old-fashioned talking head to camera, with the
far more natural and therefore comfortable feeling that they are talking
to you personally, and no-one seems to complain about this departure
from 'accepted' modern TV production standards. Instead of pictures of
the countryside laced with birds of prey calls because someone can press
a button in a studio desk to insert it into the soundtrack regardless of
whether it's an appropriate sound for that landscape, we just hear the
natural sounds of that particular scene, and again, no-one seems to
complain. Instead of the use of depressing derelict buildings to
present science documentaries because they are cheaper than renting a
studio, we have people's own homes, and again, no-one seems to complain.
Etc, etc ...

I am sure others can provide many similar examples.

> Mainstream media don't even
> try to compete on these terms, presumably because it would involve an
> admission that much of what they do in the interests of presentation
> is pointless and wouldn't justify the money they are paid to do it.

However, main stream media do put stuff on YouTube, particularly I've
noticed news shorts, so perhaps you have leanings towards conspiracy
theory there?! Nevertheless, whatever the actual reasons for their not
making cheap-looking videos, there is a great deal of truth in your
assertion that a lot of post-production 'gloss' is not needed,
especially for ephemeral items such as news. It's the information given
that is important.

Generally, I find You-Tube a bit of PITA, but useful none the less ...

A PITA because I find its interface rather clunky. The Ukraine War
demonstrates this quite well. For example, if you put Ukraine War into
its search engine you end up with this ...

1) https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=ukraine+war

.... however if you set a filter on upload date so that the most recent
are at the top, you get the startlingly different this ...

2) https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=ukraine+war&sp=CAI%253D

It seems that you either have to have what YT consider most topical for
you as a UK viewer which removes a lot of the dross, or warts and all
sorted by upload date; seemingly you can't have both.

Further, as far as (1) goes, it doesn't show a fair number of good-ish
more analytical sources, while there is a preponderance of
blood-and-guts shoot 'em ups from The Sun and The Daily Mail. As far as
(2) goes, there is a vast array of stuff in foreign languages and/or of
dodgy provenance to be scrolled through, tens of sensationalist
click-bait headlines like ...

"Wagner Group: Invasion from Belarus! Offensive. Ukraine war footage"

"Ukrainians attack Russians plunged into chaos"

"Ukraine is f*cked..."

"UKRAINE WILL BE DESTROYED"

"Hundreds of NATO troops arrive in Ukraine after crossing the terrifying
Dnipro river"

.... or the ones mixing reality with sensational unreality such as ...

"THE UKRAINIAN ARMY HAS CROSSED THE DNIPRO RIVER, RUSSIANS ARE RUNNING
IN FEAR OF BEING ENCIRCLED!

.... happily the first part of which is true, but unhappily the second
part is not. Then there are the misleading title maps showing arrows of
Ukrainian flags pushing Russian flags all the way back to the border.
Etc, etc ...

Oh! Really?! Just who do all you guys think you're kidding? Well,
someone, presumably, otherwise they wouldn't be bothering to produce
such dross. All of which goes to show that there are suckers
everywhere, and their votes count as well as anyone else's!

If it's of any interest, I've found the following have had useful things
to say about the Ukraine War on YouTube. Most are openly pro-Ukraine,
and, like everyone else, produced videos too soon about the "impending
Russian Civil War", which quickly became outdated! Nevertheless, in
their different ways, the following are pretty good; some have
particular videos I would recommend underneath:

Anders Puck Nielsen - Danish Security Analyst
https://www.youtube.com/@anderspuck

Excellent English, good knowledge, insightful videos.

Is there a military reason behind the Nova Kakhovka disaster?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQ6rJJvssao

How to spot a Russian false flag operation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jabKKr3pstU

Nord Stream sabotage and hybrid war on Europe
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hk-0qJXyido

William Spaniel
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=william+spaniel

Rather unnaturally over-precise diction and unashamedly intellectual in
style, but useful broad analysis in terms of things like Game Theory.

The Counterattack Begins
How Ukraine Crafted a Potential Russian Nightmare
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtDGD-HOyKY

Why Putin Fragmented His Military:
A Tale of Internal Rivalries and Intentional Mismanagement
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxxywKsDBHA

Why Won’t Hungary and Turkey Let Sweden into NATO?
Inside the Alliance’s Bizarre Unanimity Rule
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5p_a9QiL-hA

Denys Davydov
https://www.youtube.com/@DenysDavydov

A former Ukrainian civil pilot, so unsurprisingly pro-Ukraine. Gives
daily round-up of news and map updates in pretty good, but not perfect,
English.

Jake Broe
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=jake+broe

Former USAF veteran. Rather long-winded, occasionally finds stuff I've
missed elsewhere, but also perhaps a little to prone to conspiracy
theory, cf the recent one about Prigozhin's rebellion.

'Combat Veteran Reacts' - Paul, US Army veteran.
https://www.youtube.com/@CombatVeteranReacts

Occasional slight stutter. Besides daily updates, does videos on
particular subtopics, for example, there's quite a funny clip today
about cringe-worthy Russian propaganda. Some of his more political
stuff seems wide of the mark to me:

Russian MoD is Still Disconnected From Reality!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDUAJ_2UKvs

Also, a month or two ago, I spent some time analysing the Russian deaths
in Ukraine, because there seemed to be so little hard information out
there. If anybody's interested, this what I made of the numbers at the
time (it's free-flow text, not a webpage, so probably you'll want to
enable text wrap if choosing to view it in an editor):

www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/Russian_Deaths_In_Ukraine.txt

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

Don't you find though that the biggest issue now is finding what is
available one which platform aand how to record it?
Its just too complicated. Maybe we should just go back to talking to each
other and listening to the radio.
Brian

--
Brian Gaff - briang1@blueyonder.co.uk

Blind user, so no pictures please!

This document should only be read by those persons for whom Paranoia is
normal
and its contents are probably boring and confusing. If you receive this
e-Mail
message in error, do not notify the sender immediately, instead, print it
out and make
paper animals out of it. As the rest of this disclaimer is totally
incomprehensible, we have not bothered to attach it.
"Java Jive" <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:u7esa5$1dskd$1@dont-email.me...
> I've started a new thread on this, because I think the potential depth for
> discussion justifies doing so ...
>
> On 25/06/2023 08:31, Roderick Stewart wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 24 Jun 2023 22:46:53 +0100, MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 24/06/2023 22:35, Adrian Caspersz wrote:
> >>>
> >>> If you have any technical interest in a subject, you will find it on
> >>> YouTube and other streaming platforms.
>
> In the past, I have used YouTube quite often - finding out how to repair
> something, watch a dimly remembered pop-video, hear again an old comedy
> LP, etc - however, now, for the Ukraine War, I skim through it every
> day, usually watching one or two short videos.
>
> >> I rarely watch anything on YouTube because they seem to be mostly
> >> done by young kids full of their own self-importance.
>
> Certainly there's an amount of that, but, as above, there are worthwhile
> offerings as well.
>
> > True, but for me that makes the genuine ones all the more valuable. An
> > inevitable consequence of material being presented on Youtube rather
> > than a traditional broadcast channel is that it won't have had to run
> > the gauntlet of producers, editors, consultants etc before being
> > chosen as suitable for broadcast, thus depriving you of the need to
> > think for yourself. You must use your own knowledge and common sense
> > and judge for yourself what you think is worthwhile, just as you would
> > judge the validity of what someone says in real life. The better
> > Youtube channels usually have the absolute minimum of 'production
> > values' or none at all, sometimes just a simple presentation by a
> > single individual who knows their stuff.
>
> Yes, particularly that latter point. YouTube videos are refreshingly free
> from the artifice, in the worst possible sense of the word, of modern TV
> production. Instead of the toe-curlingly embarrassing awkwardness of
> presenters walking down busy streets talking to themselves, we have an
> old-fashioned talking head to camera, with the far more natural and
> therefore comfortable feeling that they are talking to you personally, and
> no-one seems to complain about this departure from 'accepted' modern TV
> production standards. Instead of pictures of the countryside laced with
> birds of prey calls because someone can press a button in a studio desk to
> insert it into the soundtrack regardless of whether it's an appropriate
> sound for that landscape, we just hear the natural sounds of that
> particular scene, and again, no-one seems to complain. Instead of the use
> of depressing derelict buildings to present science documentaries because
> they are cheaper than renting a studio, we have people's own homes, and
> again, no-one seems to complain. Etc, etc ...
>
> I am sure others can provide many similar examples.
>
> > Mainstream media don't even
> > try to compete on these terms, presumably because it would involve an
> > admission that much of what they do in the interests of presentation
> > is pointless and wouldn't justify the money they are paid to do it.
>
> However, main stream media do put stuff on YouTube, particularly I've
> noticed news shorts, so perhaps you have leanings towards conspiracy
> theory there?! Nevertheless, whatever the actual reasons for their not
> making cheap-looking videos, there is a great deal of truth in your
> assertion that a lot of post-production 'gloss' is not needed, especially
> for ephemeral items such as news. It's the information given that is
> important.
>
> Generally, I find You-Tube a bit of PITA, but useful none the less ...
>
> A PITA because I find its interface rather clunky. The Ukraine War
> demonstrates this quite well. For example, if you put Ukraine War into
> its search engine you end up with this ...
>
> 1) https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=ukraine+war
>
> ... however if you set a filter on upload date so that the most recent are
> at the top, you get the startlingly different this ...
>
> 2) https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=ukraine+war&sp=CAI%253D
>
> It seems that you either have to have what YT consider most topical for
> you as a UK viewer which removes a lot of the dross, or warts and all
> sorted by upload date; seemingly you can't have both.
>
> Further, as far as (1) goes, it doesn't show a fair number of good-ish
> more analytical sources, while there is a preponderance of blood-and-guts
> shoot 'em ups from The Sun and The Daily Mail. As far as (2) goes, there
> is a vast array of stuff in foreign languages and/or of dodgy provenance
> to be scrolled through, tens of sensationalist click-bait headlines like
> ...
>
> "Wagner Group: Invasion from Belarus! Offensive. Ukraine war footage"
>
> "Ukrainians attack Russians plunged into chaos"
>
> "Ukraine is f*cked..."
>
> "UKRAINE WILL BE DESTROYED"
>
> "Hundreds of NATO troops arrive in Ukraine after crossing the terrifying
> Dnipro river"
>
> ... or the ones mixing reality with sensational unreality such as ...
>
> "THE UKRAINIAN ARMY HAS CROSSED THE DNIPRO RIVER, RUSSIANS ARE RUNNING IN
> FEAR OF BEING ENCIRCLED!
>
> ... happily the first part of which is true, but unhappily the second part
> is not. Then there are the misleading title maps showing arrows of
> Ukrainian flags pushing Russian flags all the way back to the border. Etc,
> etc ...
>
> Oh! Really?! Just who do all you guys think you're kidding? Well,
> someone, presumably, otherwise they wouldn't be bothering to produce such
> dross. All of which goes to show that there are suckers everywhere, and
> their votes count as well as anyone else's!
>
> If it's of any interest, I've found the following have had useful things
> to say about the Ukraine War on YouTube. Most are openly pro-Ukraine,
> and, like everyone else, produced videos too soon about the "impending
> Russian Civil War", which quickly became outdated! Nevertheless, in their
> different ways, the following are pretty good; some have particular videos
> I would recommend underneath:
>
> Anders Puck Nielsen - Danish Security Analyst
> https://www.youtube.com/@anderspuck
>
> Excellent English, good knowledge, insightful videos.
>
> Is there a military reason behind the Nova Kakhovka disaster?
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQ6rJJvssao
>
> How to spot a Russian false flag operation
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jabKKr3pstU
>
> Nord Stream sabotage and hybrid war on Europe
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hk-0qJXyido
>
>
> William Spaniel
> https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=william+spaniel
>
> Rather unnaturally over-precise diction and unashamedly intellectual in
> style, but useful broad analysis in terms of things like Game Theory.
>
> The Counterattack Begins
> How Ukraine Crafted a Potential Russian Nightmare
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtDGD-HOyKY
>
> Why Putin Fragmented His Military:
> A Tale of Internal Rivalries and Intentional Mismanagement
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxxywKsDBHA
>
> Why Won’t Hungary and Turkey Let Sweden into NATO?
> Inside the Alliance’s Bizarre Unanimity Rule
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5p_a9QiL-hA
>
>
> Denys Davydov
> https://www.youtube.com/@DenysDavydov
>
> A former Ukrainian civil pilot, so unsurprisingly pro-Ukraine. Gives
> daily round-up of news and map updates in pretty good, but not perfect,
> English.
>
>
> Jake Broe
> https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=jake+broe
>
> Former USAF veteran. Rather long-winded, occasionally finds stuff I've
> missed elsewhere, but also perhaps a little to prone to conspiracy theory,
> cf the recent one about Prigozhin's rebellion.
>
>
> 'Combat Veteran Reacts' - Paul, US Army veteran.
> https://www.youtube.com/@CombatVeteranReacts
>
> Occasional slight stutter. Besides daily updates, does videos on
> particular subtopics, for example, there's quite a funny clip today about
> cringe-worthy Russian propaganda. Some of his more political stuff seems
> wide of the mark to me:
>
> Russian MoD is Still Disconnected From Reality!
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDUAJ_2UKvs
>
>
> Also, a month or two ago, I spent some time analysing the Russian deaths
> in Ukraine, because there seemed to be so little hard information out
> there. If anybody's interested, this what I made of the numbers at the
> time (it's free-flow text, not a webpage, so probably you'll want to
> enable text wrap if choosing to view it in an editor):
>
> www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/Russian_Deaths_In_Ukraine.txt
>
> --
>
> Fake news kills!
>
> I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
> www.macfh.co.uk

On 29/06/2023 10:41, Brian Gaff wrote:
>
> Don't you find though that the biggest issue now is finding what is
> available one which platform aand how to record it?

Yes, they're constantly trying to prevent us copying things for our own
use, this has a history going back centuries to the days of printed
books, but, while I certainly think there should be a fair use clause
allowing copying of something owned by a family for use within that home
or family, there are wider issues ...

For example, the author of the justly celebrated "Three Men In A Boat",
Jerome K Jerome, noted in his autobiography that at the time the US had
no copyright laws, so the book, arguably the funniest in the English
language, was published freely over there and for a long while he never
got royalties from that.

To get back on topic, with YouTube in particular there has been an
evolutionary arms race as successive versions of the platform tried to
obfuscate their system ever more complicatedly to prevent copying, but
hacking programmes like YouTube-DL and YouTube-DL Plus were always soon
updated.

The simple truth is this, as long as the output can be seen by the
general public, one way or another it can be copied. Creators have to
decide whether to accept this and make payment voluntary, or put their
content behind a paywall.

Spare a thought, though, for earlier times. As many here will know, I'm
scanning my way through family documents going back centuries to the
time of Queen Anne, and I keep more finding copies of the same original
documents, painstakingly and laboriously hand copied by various members
of the family! At least we don't have to do that any more, though at
some time or other it will all need transcribing into searchable digital
text, though I'll cross that bridge if ever I live that long.

> Its just too complicated. Maybe we should just go back to talking to
> each other and listening to the radio.

Bit difficult when your in the SE of England and I'm in Scotland!

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

Yes, 'spoilt for choice' is the phrase that comes to mind when
comparing today's online broadcasting with what was available when my
family acquired its first television set - only one channel, black and
white, 12 inch screen, 405 lines, 4:3 aspect ratio, mono sound, no
subtitles and programmes only for a few hours each day, at set times.

Now there's a vast amount of stuff to choose from, and you can spend
hours browsing and watching trailers if that's your preference.
Alternatively, with an Amazon stick if you happen to know the name of
a film or TV programme you want to watch you can just enter it in a
search box (or as one of my grandsprogs showed me, press the blue
button and speak it) and it will find it even if it's on another
platform. I'm not sure how much provision there is, if any, for those
unable to see the menus, but navigation will probably have improved by
the time this becomes the standard way of watching television. It took
broadcasting quite a few years to acquire such basic things as colour,
stereo, high definition etc, so give it time...

Rod.

On Thu, 29 Jun 2023 10:41:34 +0100, "Brian Gaff"
<briang1@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

>Don't you find though that the biggest issue now is finding what is
>available one which platform aand how to record it?
> Its just too complicated. Maybe we should just go back to talking to each
>other and listening to the radio.
> Brian

On 27/06/2023 15:38, Java Jive wrote:
>
> Yes, particularly that latter point.  YouTube videos are refreshingly
> free from the artifice, in the worst possible sense of the word, of
> modern TV production.  Instead of the toe-curlingly embarrassing
> awkwardness of presenters walking down busy streets talking to
> themselves, we have an old-fashioned talking head to camera, with the
> far more natural and therefore comfortable feeling that they are talking
> to you personally, and no-one seems to complain about this departure
> from 'accepted' modern TV production standards.  Instead of pictures of
> the countryside laced with birds of prey calls because someone can press
> a button in a studio desk to insert it into the soundtrack regardless of
> whether it's an appropriate sound for that landscape, we just hear the
> natural sounds of that particular scene, and again, no-one seems to
> complain.  Instead of the use of depressing derelict buildings to
> present science documentaries because they are cheaper than renting a
> studio, we have people's own homes, and again, no-one seems to complain.
>  Etc, etc ...

And instead of outdoor presenters walking hurriedly past the camera
while jabbering at us - as if they're in an acute, desperate, and
cross-legged hurry to find a toilet: yes, Landward, I do mean your
presenters - we have someone standing still and addressing the camera
naturally just as if you are with them and they are talking to you, and
again, no-one seems to complain.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 27/06/2023 15:38, Java Jive wrote:
>
> Also, a month or two ago, I spent some time analysing the Russian deaths
> in Ukraine, because there seemed to be so little hard information out
> there.  If anybody's interested, this what I made of the numbers at the
> time (it's free-flow text, not a webpage, so probably you'll want to
> enable text wrap if choosing to view it in an editor):
>
> www.macfh.co.uk/Temp/Russian_Deaths_In_Ukraine.txt

Surprisingly to me, considering this is the first major war in Europe
since WW2, to which it has many parallels, no-one seemed much
interested. However, if anyone was and still is, there's a seemingly
fairly accurate and robust analysis of Russian casualty figures at the
following link - as of 2023-05-27, about 47,000, rather lower than my
own suspicions:

https://meduza.io/en/feature/2023/07/10/bring-out-your-dead

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

Oops ...

On 10/07/2023 16:30, Java Jive wrote:
> Surprisingly to me, considering this is the first major war in Europe
> since WW2, to which it has many parallels, no-one seemed much
> interested.  However, if anyone was and still is, there's a seemingly
> fairly accurate and robust analysis of Russian casualty figures at the
> following link  -  as of 2023-05-27, about 47,000

.... deaths ...

> rather lower than my
> own suspicions:
>
> https://meduza.io/en/feature/2023/07/10/bring-out-your-dead

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 10/07/2023 16:30, Java Jive wrote:
> considering this is the first major war in Europe
> since WW2

Former Yugoslavia? Not as big but a lot of people died.

On 10/07/2023 18:23, MB wrote:
>
> On 10/07/2023 16:30, Java Jive wrote:
>>
>> considering this is the first major war in Europe
>> since WW2
>
> Former Yugoslavia?  Not as big but a lot of people died.

Yes, believed to be about 130-140,000 ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yugoslav_Wars

.... and there are particularly striking similarities between all three
situations:

- Genocide. We have all grown up with some sort of understanding of
the horrors of what Nazi Germany did to Jews and other minorities, so it
was profoundly shocking, to me at least, when the Serbians began
genocide, even though actually that has to be understood as being partly
retaliatory after earlier pre-WW2 genocides by others against
themselves, not that in any way that can be regarded as any
justification. And now we have the horrific Russian brutality in
Ukraine involving the rape of many women and the castration of tens,
perhaps hundreds, of young men, and the deliberate targeting of civilian
structures such as residential flats, schools, and hospitals in airstrikes.

- In all three situations, surrounding nations failed for too long
to confront expansionist violence from increasingly demagogic dictators,
thus tacitly encouraging its continuation and increase.

- In at least one of them, but possibly all three, the demagogic
leader came/has come to believe in his own rhetoric and aura of
invincibility, which, although it has terrible short term consequences,
in the long term is a very fortunate thing, as it ensured/will ensure
his eventual downfall. If Hitler had listened to his generals in the
later part of the WW2, the defeat of Nazi Germany would have been much
more difficult. If Putin hadn't stuck for so long by his incompetent
pals Shoigu and Gerasimov and trusted the lies they were telling him,
maybe Ukraine would already have been defeated, instead of now seeming
the most likely victor, though I fear it will be some time yet before
they finally come out on top.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 27/06/2023 15:38, Java Jive wrote:
>
> Denys Davydov
> https://www.youtube.com/@DenysDavydov
>
> A former Ukrainian civil pilot, so unsurprisingly pro-Ukraine.  Gives
> daily round-up of news and map updates in pretty good, but not perfect,
> English.

Dark humour 6:40 in: Ukrainians hack a Russian military operative's
site, and hilariously use the money he had raised towards the war effort
to buy him something unexpectedly peaceful!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lob8rEngSNE

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 10/07/2023 16:35, Java Jive wrote:
>
> Oops ...
>
> On 10/07/2023 16:30, Java Jive wrote:
>> Surprisingly to me, considering this is the first major war in Europe
>> since WW2, to which it has many parallels, no-one seemed much
>> interested.  However, if anyone was and still is, there's a seemingly
>> fairly accurate and robust analysis of Russian casualty figures at the
>> following link  -  as of 2023-05-27, about 47,000
>
> .... deaths ...
>
>> rather lower than my own suspicions:
>>
>> https://meduza.io/en/feature/2023/07/10/bring-out-your-dead

However, there is an interesting snippet in today's report from the
Institute for the Study of War:

https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-august-3-2023

"The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) took down Russian Airborne Forces
(VDV) Commander Colonel General Mikhail Teplinsky’s August 2 speech,
possibly due to his disclosure of Russian casualties in Ukraine.
Teplinsky claimed on VDV Day (August 2, a holiday celebrating the
Russian airborne forces) that at least 8,500 VDV personnel have been
wounded in Ukraine since the start of the war, a rare official
disclosure of Russian casualties, which Russian officials have largely
sought to obscure as the war has progressed.[10] Russian MoD mouthpiece
TV Zvezda took down Teplinsky’s August 2 speech, and some Russian
sources claimed this removal was due to the casualty count.[11] BBC and
opposition outlet Mediazona have confirmed that at least 1,800 VDV
personnel were killed in action in Ukraine as of July 30, and a killed
to wounded ratio of 1:3 is on average (if not slightly better) for
Russian forces in Ukraine.[12] The Russian MoD may have also sought to
censor Teplinsky’s disclosure of details regarding new VDV formations,
as Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu and other military officials have
previously discussed the establishment of other formations but not
specified their names and exact subordination to existing units.[13]
Teplinsky previously capitalized on Russia’s ”Defender of the
Fatherland” Day on February 23 to criticize Russian Chief of the General
Staff and overall theater commander Army General Valery Gerasimov about
the extent of Russian casualties in Ukraine.[14]"

So BBC/Mediazona estimated 1,800 VDV killed, but now the Russians have
officially though accidentally confirmed at least 8,500 VDV wounded.
Using the usual formula of 2-3x as many wounded as killed depending on
the nature of the conflict, that would suggest about at least 8,500/3 =
2,833 at most 8,500/2 = 4250 VDV KIA, which respectively are 1.57 and
2.36 times more than the BBC/Mediazona calculation. If this can be
scaled up to their total figure of 47,000 Russian KIA, that would give
us that the actual figure is between about 74,000 and 111,000.

Yet still they keep fighting, because the war cannot end while Putin and
his henchmen remain in power, because politically they have painted
themselves into a corner, and cannot afford to admit that the war was a
mistake, still less any form of defeat.

Incidentally, another interesting YouTube source, rather sad yet also
fascinating, gives extracts from tapped phone calls of Russian service
personnel back home, and from their wives and mothers in online groups
trying to find out what is happening to their loved ones:

YouTube - Insights from Ukraine and Russia
https://www.youtube.com/@insightsfromukraineandrussia

While most of our sympathy naturally goes to Ukrainian victims of
Russian aggression, unwilling Russian service men and their families are
victims too. In one call, you hear one of them say: "At least I haven't
had to kill a Ukrainian yet!". In another, you hear of a tank unit with
just one tank, and it's from the Soviet post-war era! In a recent
video, two deserters who are practically the sole survivors from a
decimated unit phone an uncle saying that their cause is lost and they
don't know what to do, because they have already been declared missing,
and they fear being shot if they return.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

While I know that my previous posts on the Ukraine War did not generate
much interest here, there are people here who have complained in the
past at my attempts to silence some of the liars among us, claiming
those attempts were an attack on free speech. Well, now people who are
telling the truth are under attack at YouTube, seemingly because their
channels analyse the war in Ukraine and support Ukraine. Those here who
were so keen to support the free speech of liars, particularly those who
use X formerly known as Twitter, may care also to support the free
speech of those who tell the truth, watch the following video, and take
the actions requested:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIztFagZKyY

On 27/06/2023 15:38, Java Jive wrote:
>
> If it's of any interest, I've found the following have had useful things
> to say about the Ukraine War on YouTube.  Most are openly pro-Ukraine,
> and, like everyone else, produced videos too soon about the "impending
> Russian Civil War", which quickly became outdated!  Nevertheless, in
> their different ways, the following are pretty good; some have
> particular videos I would recommend underneath:
>
> Anders Puck Nielsen - Danish Security Analyst
> https://www.youtube.com/@anderspuck
>
> Excellent English, good knowledge, insightful videos.
>
>   Is there a military reason behind the Nova Kakhovka disaster?
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQ6rJJvssao
>
>   How to spot a Russian false flag operation
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jabKKr3pstU
>
>   Nord Stream sabotage and hybrid war on Europe
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hk-0qJXyido
>
>
> William Spaniel
> https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=william+spaniel
>
> Rather unnaturally over-precise diction and unashamedly intellectual in
> style, but useful broad analysis in terms of things like Game Theory.
>
>   The Counterattack Begins
>   How Ukraine Crafted a Potential Russian Nightmare
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtDGD-HOyKY
>
>   Why Putin Fragmented His Military:
>   A Tale of Internal Rivalries and Intentional Mismanagement
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxxywKsDBHA
>
>   Why Won’t Hungary and Turkey Let Sweden into NATO?
>   Inside the Alliance’s Bizarre Unanimity Rule
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5p_a9QiL-hA
>
>
> Denys Davydov
> https://www.youtube.com/@DenysDavydov
>
> A former Ukrainian civil pilot, so unsurprisingly pro-Ukraine.  Gives
> daily round-up of news and map updates in pretty good, but not perfect,
> English.
>
>
> Jake Broe
> https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=jake+broe
>
> Former USAF veteran.  Rather long-winded, occasionally finds stuff I've
> missed elsewhere, but also perhaps a little to prone to conspiracy
> theory, cf the recent one about Prigozhin's rebellion.
>
>
> 'Combat Veteran Reacts' - Paul, US Army veteran.
> https://www.youtube.com/@CombatVeteranReacts
>
> Occasional slight stutter.  Besides daily updates, does videos on
> particular subtopics, for example, there's quite a funny clip today
> about cringe-worthy Russian propaganda.  Some of his more political
> stuff seems wide of the mark to me:
>
>   Russian MoD is Still Disconnected From Reality!
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDUAJ_2UKvs

As the video link above explains, this last is one of the channels under
attack.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

Java Jive wrote:

> While I know that my previous posts on the Ukraine War did not generate
> much interest here [...] now people who are
> telling the truth are under attack at YouTube, seemingly because their
> channels analyse the war in Ukraine and support Ukraine.

I do follow a few Ukraine related channels, couple of ukranians, couple
of russians, one ex-pat brit. The ukranians (unsurprisingly) do put a
hell of a lot of pro-ukraine spin on things, I'm afraid war-fatigue is
probably setting-in ...

On 03/10/2023 02:55, Andy Burns wrote:
> Java Jive wrote:
>
>> While I know that my previous posts on the Ukraine War did not
>> generate much interest here [...] now people who are telling the truth
>> are under attack at YouTube, seemingly because their channels analyse
>> the war in Ukraine and support Ukraine.
>
> I do follow a few Ukraine related channels, couple of ukranians, couple
> of russians, one ex-pat brit.  The ukranians (unsurprisingly) do put a
> hell of a lot of pro-ukraine spin on things, I'm afraid war-fatigue is
> probably setting-in ...
>
+1
Despite all the spin from both sides on the ground it almost appears to
be a WW1 trench warfare scenario with gains reported as one farmers
field or one street or one building in a town. This is despite all the
modern weaponry. Get a tank or aircraft too near the front line and its
likely to be destroyed.

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On 03/10/2023 09:37, alan_m wrote:
>
> On 03/10/2023 02:55, Andy Burns wrote:
>>
>> Java Jive wrote:
>>
>>> While I know that my previous posts on the Ukraine War did not
>>> generate much interest here [...] now people who are telling the
>>> truth are under attack at YouTube, seemingly because their channels
>>> analyse the war in Ukraine and support Ukraine.
>>
>> I do follow a few Ukraine related channels, couple of ukranians,
>> couple of russians, one ex-pat brit.  The ukranians (unsurprisingly)
>> do put a hell of a lot of pro-ukraine spin on things, I'm afraid
>> war-fatigue is probably setting-in ...
>
> +1
> Despite all the spin from both sides on the ground it almost appears to
> be a WW1 trench warfare scenario with gains reported as one farmers
> field or one street or one building in a town. This is despite all the
> modern weaponry. Get a tank or aircraft too near the front line and its
> likely to be destroyed.

Yes, while the Ukrainians do appear to be gradually gaining the upper
hand, despite their lack of air power, the slow pace of their success is
dispiriting. Perhaps some of the blame for that has been the West's
reluctance to arm them adequately, and their consequent treacle-like
slowness in doing so, which has played directly into Putin's hands.

However, some of it is also down to the changing possibilities of
warfare. As you suggest, nowadays cheap drones can take out expensive
capital equipment. Of course, this sort of mismatch has happened
before. For example, at the start of WW2, capital ships were considered
state of the art, until the sinking of the Prince Of Wales and the
Repulse by Japanese aircraft in 1941. Thereafter, capital ships mostly
stayed in harbour, and if they didn't, often somehow or other they were
sunk soon after. After WW2, the main type of capital ship that was
still worth anything militarily was an aircraft carrier, the rest were
just for flag-waving.

But while certainly there are some interesting discussions to be had
around the Ukraine War and its technological innovations, it is also
inescapably very depressing to read of its continuing brutality,
particularly on the Russian side, and the slow progress of the side that
we need to win.

However, notwithstanding all the above, the real purpose of my post was
to alert people to the way pro-Russian hackers appear to be trying game
the system at YouTube to silence pro-Ukrainian voices, and to hope that
some may be persuaded to take the actions recommended to put an end to it.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

Java Jive wrote:

> Perhaps some of the blame for that has been the West's reluctance to arm
> them adequately

If the west would supply them with a handful of the "full strength"
ATACMS missiles, so they could take out the Kerch bridge, and a couple
more Black sea cruisers, things could be very different, no doubt
Washington would be concerned how Putin would react to that ...

On 03/10/2023 13:08, Andy Burns wrote:
>
> Java Jive wrote:
>>
>> Perhaps some of the blame for that has been the West's reluctance to
>> arm them adequately
>
> If the west would supply them with a handful of the "full strength"
> ATACMS missiles, so they could take out the Kerch bridge, and a couple
> more Black sea cruisers, things could be very different, no doubt
> Washington would be concerned how Putin would react to that ...

Which is precisely Putin's game. Every suggestion of further arms from
the West to Ukraine results in the Medvedev jack-in-a-box issuing
threats about nuclear armageddon, but the simple truth is that every red
line that Russia has declared has been crossed and no such armageddon
has happened, and it will not because ...

- China, whom he utterly depends on, and other influential nations
such as India, whom he would rather not alienate, appear to have told
him in no uncertain terms that they could not support him further if he
uses nukes.

- The ensuing retaliation from the West, even if it didn't involve
nuclear retaliation, would be far worse for Russia than the current
situation, and would probably be the end of him politically if not
physically as well.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 03/10/2023 11:18, Java Jive wrote:
>
> But while certainly there are some interesting discussions to be had
> around the Ukraine War and its technological innovations, it is also
> inescapably very depressing to read of its continuing brutality,
> particularly on the Russian side, and the slow progress of the side that
> we need to win.

But, such is the human spirit, inevitably there is humour to be found as
well ...

Today there is a story about a Ukrainian tank crew driving an old Soviet
era tank, when it broke down. So on his mobile phone the driver rang
the Russian repair depot for advice about how to fix it. When the
advice had been given, he thanked the depot in the name of the Ukrainian
army. The video titles seem somewhat confused, but the story as told is
as above; last half minute or so of video, 10:26 in:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ri694c6hNCM

Also the there was talk a while back about Russia's latest secret
weapon, Holy Water; 15:25 in:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eefq3Epl69c

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 03/10/2023 14:21, Java Jive wrote:
>
> Today there is a story about a Ukrainian tank crew driving an old Soviet
> era tank, when it broke down.  So on his mobile phone the driver rang
> the Russian repair depot for advice about how to fix it.  When the
> advice had been given, he thanked the depot in the name of the Ukrainian
> army.  The video titles seem somewhat confused, but the story as told is
> as above; last half minute or so of video, 10:26 in:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ri694c6hNCM

The full story is slightly different, but in a way even funnier. This
is a video of the actual officer doing the baiting:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5b4ncaRi9s

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk