I don’t know the details. Wikipedia estimates Chinese losses as 26 000 killed, 37 000 wounded with 420 tanks and 66 guns lost. Vietnamese losses are estimated at 30 000 killed, 32 000 wounded, 185 tanks, 200 guns and 6 missile launchers lost - so it’s safe to assume they didn’t use butter knives.

Their preferred method of bombing might have been artillery, though - due to the lack of high capacity bomber aircraft, and due to lack of air superiority. Despite this, Wikipedia also mentions:

“The 372nd Air Division in central Vietnam as well as the 917th, 935th and 937th Air Regiments in southern Vietnam were quickly deployed to the north.[61]”

The Vietnamese source article is here. A relevant part seems to be this:

“When the border war began, the Ministry of National Defense also decided to send part of the 372nd Air Division (Hai Van Group) to the North to perform missions. From February 18 to March 3, 1979, squadrons of the 917th Air Regiment (Dong Thap Group), 935 (Dong Nai Group) and 937 (Hau Giang Group) including 10 UH-1 helicopters, 3 U-17 reconnaissance aircraft, 10 A-37 attack aircraft, and 10 F-5 fighter-bombers were deployed at Hoa Lac, Kep, Bach Mai and Noi Bai bases, respectively.”

I’m unable to find more details or an account from the Chinese side.

“To bombard someone with letters” is an expression actively used in the English language.

China hasn’t dropped bombs in, what, 60 years?

Almost correct. The last war-sized conflict China took part in was the 1979 Chinese-Vietnamese war [1]. That was 45 years ago. Battle-sized events between China and Vietnam have occurred up to 1991 [2], that would be up to 23 years ago. Skirmish-sized events with India are as recent as 2021. [3]. As for what occurs in Gaza, I agree. Bad stuff has been happening there. Going by the tonnage of things blowing up, Gaza is a gang shootout compared to Ukraine, though.

If conservative means “cautious and wary of unexpected results”, “disillusioned with methods that we tried and failed with” or maybe even “equipped with experience of successful and failed cooperation with various sorts of people”, then yes. Already before age 50, I’m spoiled with various good and bad experiences. I cannot exclude that as my tendency to explore decreases (psychology tends to affirm this trend), I may get prejudiced too. I may have to figure out something to counter it.

But if conservative means that I suddenly don’t want a society with equality and without hierarchy, then - nope.

As a happy user of Signal (no bugs or incidents from my viewpoint), I regardless chime in to say a word for decentralization. :)

Signal is centralized:

• there is a single Signal implementation, with a single developing entity
• you have to install its mobile version before you may run the desktop version

There exist protocols like Tox which go a step beyond Signal and offer more freedom -> have multiple clients from diverse makers (some of them unstable), don’t have centralized registration, and don’t rely on servers to distribute messages - only to distribute contact information.

In the grand comparison table of protocols (not clients), Tox is among the few lines that’s all green (Signal has one red square).

No conclusive proof. It didn’t have a passthrough for one electrode of the two. It did have remains of acid inside and corrosion on the electrodes. One can speculate whether it was an experimental device, a faulty device or something else entirely (one alchemist trying to replicate another’s secrets?).

To add insult to the injury, it was lost or stolen during the war in 2003, so more analysis can’t be done until it gets re-discovered. :o

No problem, just tell them to ask from Baghdad, they should know where it is. :) A jug of wine or vinegar, one electrode of iron, another made of copper, voila… the Baghdad battery.

If they overcome / disable ad blocking, they will lose browser market share - and people don’t design websites for marginal browsers with exotic features.