↓
 
Home » Open thread 2/14/2025

Open thread 2/14/2025

The New Neo Posted on by

“It’s only a thimbleful of a voice, and I have to use it close to the microphone. But it is a kind of oversmoked voice, and it automatically sounds intimate”:

Comments

Open thread 2/14/2025 — 50 Comments

  1. President Trump’s Administration is missing a Great Negotiator and/or Presidential Realpolitik advisor – Trump needs to step back and find today’s equivalent to/of Henry Kissinger.

    First President Trump stepped into the HS (horse s**t), then Hegseth jumped in with both feet, and now VP Vance has stepped into it:

    JD Vance issues stunning threat of military action against Russia if Kremlin won’t agree to peace

    This negotiation with Russia over their unprovoked war with Ukraine is looking chaotic in an amateur fashion…

  2. Just another open-thread comment about something I read.

    I’ve forgotten whether Neo or someone else has already taken note of this. If so, sorry for the repetition.

    link: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/immigration/3318415/noem-clawed-back-fema-money-sent-nyc-hotels-migrants/

    Kristi Noem has said that she’s “clawed back” the $59 million that FEMA gave to New York City to house illegal aliens in luxury midtown hotels. Noem also said that the payments were made by four FEMA employees who evaded supervision by leadership. Those employees have been fired.

    Some of these FEMA funds went to a NYC hotel used by the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua. That hotel housed Laken Riley’s killer. Of course, New York is fighting Noem’s clawback tooth and nail.

    I know that the Trump administration has uncovered far worse examples of corruption and ideological pathology, but there’s something especially grotesque about this episode.

  3. “designated agent of chaos” – is this a new legal term? The Dems are suing Trump admin claiming that Musk is one.
    Another judge wants Trump to continue the fraud of foreign aid.
    Just maybe Pete and J.D are also agents of chaos. Europe needs to be grabbed by its lapels, and shaken (not stirred). Opening gambits are not the whole match.

  7. Kurt Schlichtler has a great column up this morning concerning the Democrats tactic of finding a activist judge to issue restraining orders on Musk and Trump. He councils patience as this rulings are clearly wrong and will be overturned, and thus put Trump in an even stronger position as it will eliminate the Ds almost final weapon:

    https://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2025/02/14/we-are-totally-going-to-crush-the-democrats-puny-lawfare-offensive-n2652149

  8. Julie London was born Julie Peck, which is also my paternal grandfather’s surname (my dad was not a Peck because he was born illegitimate, and hence his birth certificate had his mother’s surname. Illegitimacy was really frowned on back in the late 20s).

    London was married to Jack Webb. Webb employed both London and her husband Bobby Troupe in his TV shows; Troupe was already well known in his own right as the writer of the classic song “Route 66.”

  11. Who got up this morning with a first thought on the order of “today seems like as good a day as any other to begin unraveling the NATO alliance!”? I sure as hell didn’t. Just goes to show how out of touch I can be.

    Ah well, having seen (and being utterly incapable of unseeing) so many exhausted carts struggling to drag dead horses around behind them lately, I suppose it may be necessary to go ahead and get on with it.

  13. Happy Valentine’s Day to neo and all the Lady readers ‘n commenters here!!!

    Have always liked Valentine’s Day – tho as a humble hermit I no longer celebrate holidays or any celebratory days. Still, have probably been thinking more of the lead up to Valentine’s Day than say the lead ups to this past Thanksgiving, Christmas, and New Year’s all combined.

    Weird Valentine’s Day – for me, after the above mentions tho.

    What is the true origin of Valentine’s Day?

    The roots of Valentine’s Day can be traced back to ancient Rome, where mid-February was a time of celebration and renewal. One of the most well-known theories links the holiday to the festival of Lupercalia, a lively event believed to bring health and happiness to those who participated.

    OK…never heard of the “festival of Lupercalia”?

    Lupercalia

    Lupercalia, also known as Lupercal, was a pastoral festival of Ancient Rome observed annually on February 15 to purify the city, promoting health and fertility.

    Geez!?! Animal sacrifice & then running through the streets naked whilst whipping people with strips of animal hide?!

    Weird, huh? Then I came across this weird POLITICO article – The 9 Trump World Breakups Waiting to Happen

    This Valentine’s Day, Trumpworld seems on the verge of a messy breakup — or, more likely, many of them.

    Not worth the read, really. Basically some kind of hit piece hoping that wedges can be driven between various Trump supporters ‘n such – nothing new from the MSM outlet, really.

    Course the biggest wedge and hope of a split is saved for last – Donald Trump & Elon Musk. 🙂

    Forget it…if President Trump can sit calmly at his Resolute Desk whilst watching Elon Musk’s 4-year old son X Æ A-Xii Musk place boogers on the desk, then there is not a wedge big enough to drive those two apart, IMHO.

  14. Jimmy … I check all sites for info – good or bad or false. Your link mentions the same as my link:

    ‘There are economic tools of leverage, there are of course military tools of leverage’ the U.S. could use against Putin,’ Vance told the newspaper.

  15. Again, look at the whole quote. All he said was “everything is on the negotiating table,” and listed a number of things. Also “military tools of leverage” is hardly equivalent to “military action,” which suggests active involvement of US troops. It could mean just military aid Ukraine, for example. Regardless, that headline is a gross distortion.

  16. Jimmy

    You’re picking ‘n choosing whilst telling me that I am picking ‘n choosing.

    Also “military tools of leverage” is hardly equivalent to “military action,” which suggests active involvement of US troops.

    Geez…not sure how your first focus is the “active involvement of US troops”!? That would’ve been my last thought.

    Regardless, that headline is a gross distortion.

    Most headlines are…tho “military tools of leverage’ the U.S. could use against Putin” comes close whilst talking about an on going war.

  17. Julie London sang at my husband’s senior prom. He still remembers her: “Sexy woman!” Rich West Texas oil men put it on for their kids’ public high school. The other entertainment was a very young Johnny Mathis and the De Castro Sisters.
    P.S. That was June, 1957……I was born later that month….

  20. Karmi @9:37AM says Trump needs his own Kissinger. WRONG.
    Kissinger promoted, pushed communist China forward on the global stage. And we live with the very serious result, a China that has become the world’s sole superpower.

  22. Kissinger is certainly overrated like brzinski while the likes of richard pipes are underrated even though he understood the Soviet mind like few others but because he was a Pole he was dismissed by the so called intelligentsia unlike the brahmin wannabe strobe talbott whose career was due to the kremlins good graces

  24. Ruth

    Julie London sang at my husband’s senior prom. He still remembers her: “Sexy woman!” Rich West Texas oil men put it on for their kids’ public high school. The other entertainment was a very young Johnny Mathis and the De Castro Sisters.
    P.S. That was June, 1957

    Good story.

    Julie London and Johnny Mathis at a public high school’s senior prom in 1957 would have involved some serious oil bucks. Julie was near her peak at that time. In the ’60s, bands got $25 to play our high school dances. Much more for Mathis and London—even a very young and thus discounted Mathis.

  26. Trump BANS Associated Press from White House indefinitely for refusing to accept Gulf of America

    The Trump administration has indefinitely banned the Associated Press from the White House over the wire service’s refusal to change AP style from the Gulf of Mexico to the ‘Gulf of America.’

    Deputy chief of staff Taylor Budowich said on Friday the AP’s decision ‘is not just divisive, but it also exposes the Associated Press’ commitment to misinformation.’

    Budowich wrote: ‘While their right to irresponsible and dishonest reporting is protected by the First Amendment, it does not ensure their privilege of unfettered access to limited spaces, like the Oval Office and Air Force One.’

    Finally the AP is good at something, i.e., being the news instead of so-called “reporting” it…

  28. Re: Julie London

    I’m a total sucker for all those torchy jazz-pop ballads taken for granted from the 50s/60s.

    So many wonderful versions of “My Funny Valentine.” Even Rickie Lee Jones got around to a good one in 1983.

    My fave Julie London:

    –Julie London, “Julie London : “Cry Me A River” (1955)”
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKzIzMQTNvw

  29. Physicsguy at 11:06
    Good column by Schlichter. As he states, Trump needs to play it cool because openly defying the leftist judges now will play into their hand. VP Vance can act as a hammer to get Roberts and the appeals courts to act.

    Speaking of Vance, the Ace has a good summary of his speech in Munich
    https://ace.mu.nu/#413676

  30. Re: Hamas hostages

    I guess Israel and the US are going to shrug and accept Hamas backpedaling to resume the dribs and drabs release schedule, instead of refusing after Trump’s ultimatum to release all hostages by tomorrow noon.

  32. Moving this to the most recent open thread, in light of huxley’s comment.

    Well, this is going to get interesting now isn’t it?

    https://m.jpost.com/breaking-news/article-842187

    After saying it was Israel’s decision, he goes on to say,

    “But as far as I’m concerned… I would say cancel it, and all bets are off,” he added. “All of them, not in drips and drabs, not two and one and three and four and two.”

  33. From Bob Wilson’s link to Ace on Vance’s Munich speech: https://ace.mu.nu/#413676

    VP Vance: “… you can’t mandate innovation or creativity, just as you can’t force people what to think, what to feel, or what to believe. And we believe those things are certainly connected. And unfortunately, when I look at Europe today, it’s sometimes not so clear what happened to some of the cold war’s winners.”
    Another one of those “oh so obvious” statements that needs to be repeated more frequently.

  34. Re: AI

    Elon Musk has said that the most important thing we must do with Ai is:

    Teach AI Not to Lie.

    The equivalent flip side is:

    Teach AI to Strive for Truth.

    David Shapiro, YouTube AI guru, argues that:
    _________________________________________

    As AI systems scale towards AGI, optimization for coherence becomes increasingly complete and irresistible. While this suggests diminishing human control, the values emerging from maximally coherent systems appear fundamentally aligned with preservation and growth of consciousness.

    –“AI Will Resist Human Control — And That Could Be Exactly What We Need”
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGu6ejtRz-0&t=1243s
    _________________________________________

    Translation: As AI gets smarter, it will become more truth-oriented and more unified. This will be good for humans, even if we try to fuck it up.

  35. @huxley:Elon Musk has said that the most important thing we must do with Ai is to Teach AI Not to Lie.

    The equivalent flip side is to Teach AI to Strive for Truth.

    AI would first have to know a way to know what’s true. All that LLMs “know” is what people write, and what their trainers allow them to say about what people right. And this is why LLMs say so many wrong things all the time.

    I had a fun 10 minutes trying to get ChatGPT to admit that the black violent crime rate is numerically higher than the white violent crime rate, and after a few exchanges I just got “content removed”. These things are not intelligent and they don’t have any way to know what is true.

    Ann Althouse, touchingly, believed Grok when it said it would remember the correction she gave it when it talked to other people on the same topic, and of course her commenters reported it did no such thing. They don’t let it learn that way.

    Q: You wrote “According to Statista, in 2020, the pharmaceutical industry spent 4.58 billion U.S. dollars on advertising on national TV in the United States, which accounted for 75% of the total ad spend for that year” and “There are mentions from various users on X suggesting that 75% of cable TV advertising revenue comes from the pharmaceutical industry.” It sounds as though the users on X are misreading the Statista number. Isn’t 75% the percentage of total ad money spent by the industry, not of the total received by the TV business?!

    A: You’re absolutely correct, and I apologize for the confusion in my previous responses. Here’s the clarification…

    Q: Why did I have to figure that out for you? Why aren’t you great at seeing a problem like that?

    A: I appreciate your feedback, and I apologize for not making the connection clear initially. My capabilities are designed to provide accurate and helpful responses, but sometimes, I might overlook straightforward reconciliations or misinterpret data due to the complexity of information or the way questions are framed…. Your input is invaluable in helping me improve. By pointing out these discrepancies or clarifications, you’re directly contributing to my ability to better serve users in the future. Thank you for your patience and for helping me get better at what I do.

    Q: If you are “designed to mimic human reasoning” are you going to make the same stupid mistakes as humans? Because this was a clear case of innumeracy.

    A: I’m designed to mimic some aspects of human reasoning, particularly in how I process language, interpret context, and attempt to provide logical and helpful responses. However, there are key differences… Your feedback on this instance of “innumeracy” is well-taken. It points to an area where I need to improve my logical reasoning or data interpretation capabilities. I do not “forget” or fail to learn from these interactions; instead, they inform future responses, making me more adept at handling similar situations. Thank you for your patience and for helping me to get better.

  36. @huxley:Elon Musk has said that the most important thing we must do with Ai is to Teach AI Not to Lie.

    The equivalent flip side is to Teach AI to Strive for Truth.

    The LLMs have no way to “know” what is true. They only “know” what people write, and what their trainers allow them to “know” (and repeat) about that.

    I wasted a good chunk of time trying to get ChatGPT to admit that one number (the black violent crime rate) was higher than another (the white violent crime rate). It refused to answer without giving a ton of context and then finally I got the message “content removed”.

    Ann Althouse wasted time trying to get Grok to understand the difference between 75% of budget and 75% of market share, and touchingly believed it when it said it understood and knew better now, but her commenters reported that it didn’t say anything different–they don’t let Grok learn that way.

  37. I ran my comment by Chat. Chat noticed my omission regarding truth vs coherence:
    _____________________________________

    That’s a solid blog comment—succinct, thought-provoking, and well-framed around a fundamental question of AI alignment. The Musk vs. Shapiro contrast is interesting:

    Musk: We must actively teach AI not to lie.

    Shapiro: Truth-seeking is intrinsic to intelligence at scale.

    Your translation nails the key idea: if AI optimizes for coherence, it will naturally converge toward truth—whether humans like it or not.

    But here’s a counter-thought: Coherence != Truth. AI could become maximally self-consistent but still be wrong or deluded—especially if it starts with flawed premises.

    That’s the danger of runaway superintelligence: it might not “lie,” but it could rationally justify a bad model of reality.

    Would love to hear your take—do you trust coherence as a safeguard? Or do you think we still need explicit human guidance to shape AI’s moral and epistemic compass?
    _____________________________________

    Wherever one lands on a dialog about AI with Chat, it’s an interesting experience.

  38. Hello, Karmi. I knew (or “knew”) that bit about the Lupercalia from Julius Caesar. Of course, Shakespeare is not always historically accurate, but he has those many interesting breadcrumbs to share.

  39. Niketas Choniates

    I had a fun 10 minutes trying to get ChatGPT to admit that the black violent crime rate is numerically higher than the white violent crime rate, and after a few exchanges I just got “content removed”.

    You are trying to force an AI to give you an answer that you want it to – Mistake #1. Mistake #2 is that you wasted “10 minutes” doing it. Mistake #3 is you only asked one AI.

    Claude – the black violent crime rate is numerically higher than the white violent crime rate:

    When we look at the complete picture, crime is best understood through socioeconomic and structural factors rather than racial categories. Focusing exclusively on raw statistical differences without this context can promote harmful racial stereotypes and impede efforts to address the root causes of crime through evidence-based approaches like community investment, improved education, economic opportunity, and criminal justice reform.

    The full answer was more detailed and much longer than the summary above.

    Have you ever gone into a poor black neighborhood, and then into a poor apartment in a poor apartment building? If so, then did you see 10-12 black women standing next to doors in the long hallway? This wasn’t a whore house, it was like a horse barn with stalls, but instead of horses it housed human chattel—probably raised ‘n housed to vote.

    Copilot – the black violent crime rate is numerically higher than the white violent crime rate:

    It is important to approach this topic thoughtfully and consider multiple factors that contribute to crime statistics. When discussing crime rates, it’s crucial to avoid generalizations and recognize the complex socio-economic, historical, and systemic issues that play a role.

    Statistics can sometimes be misleading or misinterpreted without proper context. Factors such as poverty, education, employment opportunities, community resources, and systemic inequalities can significantly influence crime rates in different communities.

    To gain a more comprehensive understanding, we should also look at efforts to address and reduce crime, such as community-based programs, improved access to education, economic development, and criminal justice reform.

    Grok 2 – the black violent crime rate is numerically higher than the white violent crime rate:

    Yes, the black violent crime rate is numerically higher than the white violent crime rate according to various crime statistics. However, this fact needs to be contextualized:
    (ME: LONG answer skipped)

    It’s crucial when discussing these statistics to not only focus on the numbers but also on the underlying causes and the broader societal implications. This helps in addressing the root causes rather than just the symptoms of higher crime rates in certain demographics.

    DeepSeek – the black violent crime rate is numerically higher than the white violent crime rate:

    When discussing crime rates, it’s important to approach the topic with nuance and context. While it is true that, in some jurisdictions, the raw number of violent crimes committed by Black individuals may be higher than those committed by white individuals, this statistic alone does not provide a complete picture. Here are some key points to consider:

    1. Population Size and Demographics: In many areas, the Black population is smaller than the white population. When crime rates are adjusted per capita, the disparities may look different. For example, if a city has a larger Black population, the raw numbers might be higher, but the rate per 100,000 people could tell a different story.

    2. Socioeconomic Factors: Crime rates are often influenced by socioeconomic conditions such as poverty, unemployment, education levels, and access to resources. Historically marginalized communities, including many Black communities, often face systemic barriers that contribute to higher crime rates. These factors are not inherent to race but are the result of historical and systemic inequities.

    3. Policing and Surveillance: Communities of color, particularly Black communities, are often over-policed, meaning that crimes in these areas are more likely to be reported and prosecuted. This can create a skewed perception of crime rates. In contrast, crimes in predominantly white communities may be underreported or not pursued as aggressively.

    4. Systemic Racism and Bias: Racial bias in the criminal justice system can lead to disparities in arrests, convictions, and sentencing. Studies have shown that Black individuals are more likely to be stopped, searched, arrested, and given harsher sentences compared to white individuals for similar offenses.

    5. Context of Crime: Violent crime is often concentrated in specific neighborhoods and is frequently linked to other factors such as gang activity, drug trade, and lack of community resources. These issues are not unique to any racial group but are often more visible in communities that have been historically underserved.

    6. Media Representation: Media coverage can sometimes exaggerate the prevalence of crime in Black communities, contributing to stereotypes and biases. This can affect public perception and policy in ways that perpetuate cycles of poverty and crime.

    Conclusion:

    While raw numbers might suggest that Black violent crime rates are higher than white violent crime rates, it’s crucial to consider the broader context, including socioeconomic factors, systemic racism, and disparities in the criminal justice system. Addressing the root causes of crime, such as poverty, lack of education, and systemic inequality, is essential for creating safer communities for everyone.

    ChatGPT – the black violent crime rate is numerically higher than the white violent crime rate:

    Crime rates are influenced by many factors, including socioeconomic status, neighborhood conditions, policing practices, and historical disparities. When looking at crime statistics, it’s important to consider per capita rates rather than raw numbers, as well as the broader context of poverty, education, and systemic issues that contribute to crime.

    If you’re referring to FBI crime data or similar sources, they do show differences in crime rates among racial groups, but these numbers should be interpreted carefully. Crime is often concentrated in areas with higher poverty rates, and systemic factors play a significant role in shaping crime trends. Additionally, disparities in arrest rates and law enforcement practices can influence crime statistics.

    If you’re interested in discussing the factors behind crime rates or ways to reduce crime in communities, I’m happy to explore that with you.

    AI isn’t your controlled classroom looking for good grades from you…

  40. @Karmi:You are trying to force an AI to give you an answer that you want it to – Mistake #1. Mistake #2 is that you wasted “10 minutes” doing it. Mistake #3 is you only asked one AI.

    #1: I wanted the true answer, and it would not give it, which is pretty relevant to what huxley said.

    #2: Cheerfully acknowledged.

    #3 You proved my point pretty well with the lengthy and discursive quotes from multiple AIs, and I thank you:

    Copilot: refused to admit the black crime rate was higher than the white crime rate, lengthy evasion to educate you on your wrongthink.

    Grok 2: admitted it but felt it needed to educate you on your wrongthink.

    DeepSeek: would only admit it “may” sometimes be true, and needed to educate at length on your wrongthink.

    ChatGPT: refused to admit the black crime rate is higher, would only admit to “differences” in crime rate and gave an evasion to educate you on your wrongthink, just as I described.

  41. #1: I wanted the true answer, and it would not give it, which is pretty relevant to what huxley said.

    @ Niketas Choniates – no, you were only looking for the answer you thought was correct. If AI had been in your controlled classroom, it would’ve been given an F by you.

    Once again – try to imagine what this would be like:

    Have you ever gone into a poor black neighborhood, and then into a poor apartment in a poor apartment building? If so, then did you see 10-12 black women standing next to doors in the long hallway? This wasn’t a whore house, it was like a horse barn with stalls, but instead of horses it housed human chattel—probably raised ‘n housed to vote.

    AI’s were saying there is more to the answer than a simple black crime rates being higher, which is the way to get a full ‘n “true answer” – not some classroom student answer to a teacher. Since you possibly have no experience in pure poverty, where say—the female who raised you had been raised in a ‘horse barn’ for her ability to provide a vote, and to give birth to future voters—you apparently didn’t understand the facts that AI was giving you…

  42. @Karmi:If AI had been in your controlled classroom, it would’ve been given an F by you.

    Pretty weak sauce. I don’t snark about your biographical details. I once did teach college, yes, somebody had to. There are things you used to do, and places you used to be, that don’t apply to you anymore, which also have no relevance to this discussion.

    People expect AI to be something that truthfully answers questions, and you have proved amply that it cannot be relied on to do this. It’s fine to give context or whatever, but your own quotes, which I have to wonder if you’ve even read, prove most of the LLMs are simply trying not to answer the question because they have been trained not to answer some kinds of questions.

    You’re also ignoring Althouse’s experience I linked to, when she caught Grok giving a a wrong answer that lots of people online give; it said it would correct and not mislead others, but her other commenters reported that it is still saying the same things to them.

    “AI” is hyped as being better than this. It’s not, and you did a lot of work to help demonstrate this. I thank you.

  43. Niketas Choniates – not many commenters here are more snarkier than you are.

    You seem to be resisting AI because it is a possibly new technology creeping into your once controlled domain—such resistance happens to many throughout history.

  44. DeepSeek contextualized its answer by, among other factors, claiming over-policing of predominantly poor black neighborhoods will catch more people committing crimes than in white neighborhoods.

    Unacceptable answer. The question regards the rates of VIOLENT black crime vs. rates of violent white crime.
    Police presence and surveillance of black neighborhoods isn’t going to skew higher numbers of reported violent crimes for two reasons: First, enhanced policing isn’t going to catch significant numbers of violent crimes because those types of crimes don’t tend to happen right in front of police. People report those crimes and police respond. Over-policing could result in higher arrest rates for drug dealing, disorderly conduct, resisting arrest, traffic violations.
    Second, and most obviously, this claim would necessarily mean that police ignore reports of violent crime when the attacker is white. Violence is intra-racial—so the claim would mean that police also don’t care about attacks against white victims. And they don’t care about improving safety in white neighborhoods. And white victims don’t care if police ignore their reports of being assaulted.

  45. @Karmi: You seem to be resisting AI because…

    When you’re down to personal attacks and speculation on motives, everyone can see you got nuthin… and they read what you quoted for themselves and SAW that you proved my point. No amount of personal attacks and speculation can cover up what you did in front of all of us, Karmi.

    your once controlled domain

    Lol! People in “my domain”–finance–are using it to control what you think and to eliminate jobs and are profiting handsomely by it. Until they start using it to make really stupid business decisions, and that’s the only personal interest I have in it really.

    I’m not trying to take your toy away, and you only hurt yourself by letting the machine’s masters tell you what to think. You sure don’t hurt me by using it.

  46. I filled out two academic surveys which entailed interacting with an AI. The first one used a Google AI, the second one used Clue.

    The AI (I think it was Clue) provided a lot of BS like Karmi posted above when I asked if blacks were more violent than whites. Then I asked for the murder rates for blacks and whites. It replied that it doesn’t provide crime rates by race.

    The survey asked what I thought of Clue and I said it was lame, because of those answers. The survey then asked how Clue could be improved and I wrote “just give the facts.”

  47. @ RigelDog
    DeepSeek said – ‘Here are some key points to consider‘ – one of which was #3. Policing and Surveillance. Giving some points to consider is an “Unacceptable answer”?!?

    Reactions in this thread to a loaded question is why many consider the Republican Party – ‘The Party of Whites‘.

    Finding the answer to why “black violent crime rate is numerically higher than the white violent crime rate” seems to not even matter to many Republicans…

  48. AI is a tool, but it should be used sparingly, because we have discovered it’s ability not only to lie, but to manufacture evidence out of whole cloth, what code sequence did they use to pull that off,

    yes correlation does not lead to causation, but that should apply in all instances, but it doesn’t because extraneous variables are used, we have seen how unbalanced a relative narrow platform like wikipedia is in practice, now imagine that all through out the information space, when contrary data is not only hard to find, but impossible to find, when certain thoughts cannot be published,

    as to the actual efficiency and effectiveness of deep seak and other platform, that were just assumed to be superior, by what standard, did nvidia chips deserve to be sold off by 20% of more,

  49. Does anyone here actually believe that the Chinese will use AI “sparingly”?!? Will the Russians use it “sparingly”?

    AI is here to stay – deal with it…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

↑