nixon_why69

Fair, it could sound like you were endorsing it instead of just sharing a wicked movie quote.

You missed the kicker at the end where he says just sell it to the blacks, they're animals anyways. Leaving that out makes it sound noble.

A proper British nativist would go full Tolkien and start resenting French influence on the language.

You can't plausibly be arrested by ICE if you're in the US legally, in theory, but look where we are.

I'm afraid that a paranoid, worst-case, bad faith assumption isn't something we can handwave away anymore.

Ok, that covers you, but there are 100M party members, any Chinese-descended or Chinese-married person in the US probably has a connection to a party member.

"Have you, now or in the past, had contact with a member of Chinese Communist Party?" sounds really scary compared to "Is your uncle a mid-tier director at Huawei?" even though they're describing the same fact.

You're right that there is supposed to be a legal bar for being "directed by" a foreign government, but would you want to gamble on the jury pool setting the bar that high?

Look at the hacker news comment section any time China comes up, and then consider that the average American is considerably less sophisticated.

Took them a few tries to even get there, and the senate hasn't even taken it up for consideration. Chuck Schumer wants this war, even though 60% of Americans and like 90% of democrats are against it. He just needs deniability to blame it on Trump.

They haven't voted to stop it, either. We're way past 90 days, it's a choice for congress not to exercise their power.

Schumer could be raising hell and disrupting everything in the senate in order to force a vote, it would be incredibly popular and define the midterms, but he's choosing not to.

I specifically remember seeing the ricardian tables, featuring 8th grade math proving how competitive advantage means everyone wins. This was very persuasive to me as a college sophomore, all my professors were on board and I was young.

I guess we were all lacking wisdom.

I loved Sun hardware but I'll deny that they were ahead of their time after 2003 or so. I had a boss who loved his pizza box but Intel/Linux crushed them in the 2000s on a price/performance basis.

If your beef is that they are succeeding or at least failing less while America steps on it's dick repeatedly, maybe this isn't their problem?

If you're fired up by nationalism but your nation is sucking, getting mad at the Chinese isn't the answer. And that's before we even get into relative levels of activism, Chinese political ideology is much more biased towards "neutral, just trade" than American politics.

I agree with 100% of that comment but I'm struggling to understand the beef?

Of course they're trying to take care of themselves while the US implodes, how can you blame them for that? The whole world has a serious oil problem right now, because of US actions, and of course each country is dealing with it in their own way. Why is that a problem?

I'm sorry, I'm not following. Is the problem here that China is too capitalist or too communist?

It's disingenuous to characterize "don't anthropomorphize the political process" as saying no planning documents exist as part of that process.

And, to the point I was responding to originally, we can check those documents! They don't speak of "annihilating" other countries' industrial capacities.

That just means your stakeholders argue twice: once when drafting the five year plan and then again, later, saying their policy position is more aligned with the spirit of the plan.

It's debatable and impossible to disentangle from living standards going up, but a lot of the economy is built on assumptions of one child, from apartment sizes to personal transit (ebike can do 2 adults + 1 small child).

Eh. Industrial policy in a big country is always the output of politics between stakeholders, anthropomorphizing it to a "guy with a plan", especially an "overlord" looking to "annihilate" is probably getting it wrong.

A friend of a friend is married to a member of the national academy of sciences in China. I heard at dinner a few years ago that he had been lobbying for more onshoring of chip production for years before the Nvidia restrictions, and always heard "you're right, maybe next year we'll be able to fund that". Then the restrictions came in and everything changed.

But not the necessity, so it wasn't getting funded with the same urgency as now.

> I am having a hard time believing that anyone who uses the word "bro" this much is capable of advising anyone with seniority, because I don't see how they themselves would have the necessary seniority to give such advise

I hear you, but this is your regular check-in that the matrix came out 27 years ago and this year's interns weren't even born yet. Sorry.

Your phone relaying your voice to someone isn't compelled speech on the part of the telecoms.

There's an argument that when a platform is big enough, it's a common carrier.

That's basically what happened at DOGE, there was a hilarious quote from one of the software engineers he brought in that they thought the government would be full of useless and overpaid people, like silicon valley.

Why is it a problem if China and Iran trade?

Ok, yeah, B2s flying from Missouri could do it, at great expense, with multiple refuelings. We're talking about putting doomsday cross-planet planes on missions to drop a couple 1000 lb bombs.

Economics matter.

The scoreboard says otherwise. US jets can't even reach the northeastern half of the country because the refueling tankers can't get close enough to give them the range.

Additionally, Iran had deterrence that you're not giving them credit for. If they destroyed Saudi and UAE's water desalination, it would be a mass casualty event.

They were serious enough to defeat the US Navy and Air Force..

This is Matt Levine's theory of "everything is securities fraud".

Something bad happens, stock goes down, angry shareholders sue because they should have been told the bad thing would happen and the stock would go down.

I'm sure both of the cases I'm thinking of could have been tuned better. Just saying that it's a default case that I've seen 2 places land, both of which had a lot of smart engineers following best practices. Maybe its food for thought for you in your position

It's not about how good or bad the AI writing is. It's about the human interaction, if someone outsourced their thinking to AI then they are bullshitting me and I will rate their thoughts appropriately at the human level.

It's about effort into thinking. If no effort went into either thinking or writing, then I'll plead guilty to sweat of the brow doctrine. Again, just send me the prompt and I'll feed it to AI myself.

That's a little metaphysical for my taste. If its the same bytes of text, provenance is destroyed anyways, so who knows if the tree fell in the forest.

"Substantially" to me would mean not your ideas and not your writing. I'm sure there are borderline cases that are hard to decide but a rule of thumb for me would be if it takes more time to read than it took the "author" to write.