71–76 of 76 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
OpenRouter or Fireworks are two of many that allow you to run numerous different models. You can use open code harnesses like Pi or Opencode that connect easily to these services. https://openrouter.ai/ https://fireworks.ai/ http://pi.dev/ https://opencode.ai/
Thank you! Is there one you’d recommend in particular when working with sensitive data?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This framing of a zero sum game is counterproductive. I agree but that's not at all what I was getting at. Quite the opposite. The mistake America made, what made it vulnerable, was playing everything like a zero sum game. We're in the early days of that behavior coming to roost.
No, that is exactly what you were getting at: > China played the smart long game and took advantage of America's... Zero sum games imply that if there is a winner, there has to be a loser. That one country takes advantage of another.
“If you assume everyone only has hammers, you'll end up getting screwed”, or something like that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, that is exactly what you were getting at: > China played the smart long game and took advantage of America's... Zero sum games imply that if there is a winner, there has to be a loser. That one country takes advantage of another.
I think they're saying America ended up positioning itself as the loser because they framed things as a zero-sum game . Which of course is a generalization, neither America nor China is a monolith, but I can certainly see some presidencies of the last decades leaning more into this attitude than others. “If you assume everyone only has hammers, you'll end up getting screwed”, or something like that.
I think there is an obvious example in the FAA of a successful safety regulation of another potentially dangerous technology industry. A similar agency would seem to me like a logical starting point. I did some minor work a long time ago in commercial avionics software and while it was a very tedious process I did have confidence in it. Obviously a lot of things would have to be different but the basic structure of d…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, that is exactly what you were getting at: > China played the smart long game and took advantage of America's... Zero sum games imply that if there is a winner, there has to be a loser. That one country takes advantage of another.
I think they're saying America ended up positioning itself as the loser because they framed things as a zero-sum game . Which of course is a generalization, neither America nor China is a monolith, but I can certainly see some presidencies of the last decades leaning more into this attitude than others. “If you assume everyone only has hammers, you'll end up getting screwed”, or something like that.
I didn't bother responding earlier, and I'm not sure why I'm responding now because I don't think "because they framed things as a zero-sum game." explains anything, and it sounds like something that sounded like a retort but offered without any evidence means nothing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think they're saying America ended up positioning itself as the loser because they framed things as a zero-sum game . Which of course is a generalization, neither America nor China is a monolith, but I can certainly see some presidencies of the last decades leaning more into this attitude than others. “If you assume everyone only has hammers, you'll end up getting screwed”, or something like that.
> I think they're saying America ended up positioning itself as the loser because they framed things as a zero-sum game. I didn't bother responding earlier, and I'm not sure why I'm responding now because I don't think "because they framed things as a zero-sum game." explains anything, and it sounds like something that sounded like a retort but offered without any evidence means nothing.
If even the suggestion of considering different points of view feels like an attempt to disprove your own position, then that mainly says something about how you are approaching this exchange.