> At this point, however, it’s not obvious how to stop the deal.
Impeachment, but congress has bent over so much that they can taste their shoes.
US's big bet on quantum computing may not be legal
41–50 of 123 posts
Re: US's big bet on quantum computing may not be legal
#42I think we're all seeing a theme.
[flagged]
Re: US's big bet on quantum computing may not be legal
#43I think we're all seeing a theme.
Is the theme that any direction US tech advances in results in a persistent campaign of negative hit pieces aimed at trying to halt/destroy any achievements? Written by "journalists"/publishers that have never, and will never, say a single negative thing about china? Sure seems like that's the theme.
Plenty of that on Ars Technica, even by the same author. Baseless silly whataboutism as usual.
Re: US's big bet on quantum computing may not be legal
#44> "could argue that it has been harmed by the diversion of the funds to a different field. But that argument would likely take so long to sort out in court that all the money would have been spent by then." So if I steal from someone and spend it fast enough, I wouldn't be responsible anymore and can get away with it? That's how that sounded to me.
If I understand legal terminology correctly*, this is what a "preliminary injunction" is for. * eh. I'm not a lawyer.
The principle of ‘Standing’, however, means that you also cannot sue unless you can show actual harm to yourself.
Yes, these contradict each other somewhat.
Re: US's big bet on quantum computing may not be legal
#45Re: US's big bet on quantum computing may not be legal
#46This is a novel for a book. In a race where the rules are broken by some participants, how secure are your own systems when your opponent can access invisible technology long before the others? This should make you think.
It’s literally classic prisoners dilemma?
Hint: it doesn’t give warm fuzzies.
Re: US's big bet on quantum computing may not be legal
#47> At this point, however, it’s not obvious how to stop the deal. Impeachment, but congress has bent over so much that they can taste their shoes.
They like the payment, and yelling about it while actually not doing anything about it means they get the benefits (as long as their constituents buy it!) while not having to do the actual hard work on take on real risk.
When it blows up, they can even say ‘I told you so!’, often while profiting from it insider trading wise.
Re: US's big bet on quantum computing may not be legal
#48Quantum itself is the most scummy, grift-filled industry. Every quantum company is riding the AI/semiconductor hype wave with basically zero revenue prospects or long-term application of the tech. Companies trading at 200x earnings, IONQs CEO claiming to the “next NVIDIA”/“base case is Cisco’s market cap” — just ridiculous.
If you have enough money, you can say whatever bullshit and the pilot fish around you will clap.
Re: US's big bet on quantum computing may not be legal
#49For the past year and a half, the US administration have plunged the country in a rule of law twilight zone: the rule of law still exists, and there are still independent jurisdictions to enforce it, but the administration decided they didn't care, and they just overcome any court dismissal of their orders with a new illegal order that courts will have to push back a few month later.
Which means that, in practice, the US isn't governed by the rule of law anymore, but by the whim of the Czar's court.