[flagged]
Urgh wtf :| Unfortunate i can't find the source though: "He had a video on Youtube where he proudly gloated about how he voted for Trump in not one but two elections, how happy he is that he can now openly talk about it, how its a fresh start for US, how catastrophic Harris would have been. Did he take down the video because of embarrassment or did he fear negative impact on his sales?" So i asked him and he voted fo…
Do you want the US to "win" AI?
111–114 of 114 posts
Re: Do you want the US to "win" AI?
#112That investment chart is hilarious and terrifying. You Americans better hope this whole AI thing pans out.
The chart is also misleading because it paints investment as morally good but ignores most of this investment goes into closed source APIs while the rest of the world does open weights, and does so way more efficiently (spending less money) due to export controls
Re: Do you want the US to "win" AI?
#113Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not a chart of investment by patriotic US citizens seeking to better the country such that the country "wins" .. more like a chart of military and motte and bailey investments made by individual feuding Norman clans each seeking to be the last castle standing and in control of all the throttle points and gates across the country and ideally the world.
This is a good time to reflect on the etymology of "Banana Republic" [0]. I suspect most people don't see fruit companies as a major threat, but they'll kill and ravage to get people cheap bananas. This idea that the morals of the people making investments is in any way relevant is a bit of a misframe. Investors are capable of any evil, the default position is of surprise if one of them is investing out of some sense…
> Works really well, on average everyone wins.
How can you claim that just after speaking of Banana Republics? These clearly show that free markets alone are terrible for the vast majority of people.
Re: Do you want the US to "win" AI?
#114Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
This is very true, but: - very little of this has ever extended outside Chinese borders, apart from the extraterritorial policing of Chinese nationals; they've not "gone global" in the way the US did - the current US faction is also trying to work towards an ethnostate, and has turned hard against non-USians and increasingly against non-white US nationals: https://edition.cnn.com/2024/05/01/politics/trump-immigratio.…
- very little of this has ever extended outside Chinese borders, apart from the extraterritorial policing of Chinese nationals; they've not "gone global" in the way the US did
I would dispute this. They just use tools that most Westerners are not familiar with. Take a look at how most of Southeast Asia's economies are organized, and at the top, you'll find a whole lot of Han Chinese families. In many cases these families emigrated generations ago, put a fair degree of effort into keeping their bloodline Chinese, still build shrines to their ancestors, and still maintain deep ties to the mainland. Dhanin Chearavanont, who runs the largest monopoly in Thailand, is Chinese-Thai and holds Shenzhen's Foreign Investor license #001. Probably half of the Cambodian economy is Chinese-owned at this point. The list goes on.
The Chinese do it through family and blood and assert a lot more control than most Western onlookers realize (but Southeast Asians are well aware). Outside of an invasion every few decades, the US exerts a weaker level of control on a greater number of countries. US military influence crumbles once they leave, whereas Chinese family influence endures for centuries.