20 ms·

I do care. It's an unfortunate truth that we're exiting a global peace era and entering one of (hopefully just...) implied conflict. Our biggest geopolitical r

I do care. It's an unfortunate truth that we're exiting a global peace era and entering one of (hopefully just...) implied conflict. Our biggest geopolitical rival that's been threatening a hot war also distilling the things we build is not a good thing. Trump is a huge self-own by our electorate sadly, but being concerned about a conflict between China and the US is a very bi-partisan concern for good reason.

Tostino 2mo ago
Ask yourself, who seems to be the destabilizing force if you take a step back and look at the state of things objectively? There is some blame on all sides for sure, not saying it's black and white...but come on.
- GlickWick 2mo ago
  I think the major destabilizing force is the country that has been building the infrastructure for a hot war over Taiwan for the last decade while simultaneously blatantly funding the conquest of Ukraine. The US stupidly withdrawing from the world stage is definitely making this worse, of course, but it is not the catalyst. It's unfortunately a very likely side effect of a social media campaign by the same actor to make said hot war easier to win.
  - henry2023 2mo ago
    Hey, we started another war and are funding the most destabilizing force in the world but look at this theoretical war …
  - p-e-w 2mo ago
    In the decade during which you claim China has been preparing for a hot war, the United States invaded multiple countries and waged hot wars on three continents. It’s ridiculous to compare China to the US when it comes to warmongering. They’re not even in the same ballpark.
    - GlickWick 2mo ago
      Yeah, the US is not an incredible actor, but China is funding the most brutal war in modern history (the invasion of Ukraine) in order to provide a smokescreen for their own invasion.
      - tsimionescu 2mo ago
        The Ukraine war is large and terrible, but its nowhere near comparable in brutality to the genocide in Gaza, that the US is funding, providing weapons for, and protecting diplomatically.
        Swoerd 2mo ago
        [dead]
  - 4wsn 2mo ago
    It's literally on their border and the history is akin to if The South established its own nation state in Cuba after the Civil War and China became its ally. At least admit the double standard. I don't mind realpolitik but it's so tedious when it's not plainly stated and there's this veneer of civility. Yes, the US is allowed to do whatever it wants to in South America. No, other nation states don't have a sphere of geographic influence if the US doesn't want them to.
    - stickfigure 2mo ago
      Taiwan has been self governing for longer than almost everyone that lives there has been alive. It's also a vibrant democracy. If you care about democracy and human rights, it's morally reprehensible NOT to support Taiwan. We can debate the ethics of intervening in strongman dictatorships like Venezuela, Cuba, or Iran, but Taiwan is clear.
      - doctorwho42 2mo ago
        Cool, and it's morally reprehensible to NOT support drastic action to curb the worst effects of climate change, and start trying our very best to prepare our children and grandchildren for an adulthood where they will be clawing back minor things we take for granted even in today's world of regular continent spanning forest fire smoke pollution.
      - 4wsn 2mo ago
        "Democracy and human rights", "strongman dictatorships". Dear God this rhetoric has aged like milk. I can't believe we ever fell for it.
  - duplessitous 2mo ago
    Despite withdrawing from our role on the world stage, we have in no way adapted isolationist like policies. We kidnapped the leader of another country, we are bombing Iran with impunity and will begin striking civilian infrastructure as a response to terrorist within that country, https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2026/07/22/trump-iran-bomb-strait-hormuz/91006801007/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2026/07/22/trum... China didn't make us do this any more than they made us bomb civilian fishing boats in South America. We are a major destabilizing force at the moment, China existing does not somehow negate the actions we take of our own free will. Refusing to acknowledge our role in destabilizing the globe at the moment is a level of infantilization that I, and many others, find unacceptable. We are all adults, China is responsible for their role and the US is responsible for its role. A social media campaign is not forcing the folks in Washington to drop bombs on Iranian civilian infrastructure, the jack asses in Washington did all of this on their own
    - GlickWick 2mo ago
      Nobody is refusing to acknowledge our role in destabilizing things. This is a thread about why the US might be afraid of an also bad-actor rival funding a huge proxy war against it controlling major technology.
      - duplessitous 2mo ago
        I mean if you want to get back on the topic of this thread, it has nothing to do with what you just said. The thread started by discussing AI distillation and this was your initial comment, just to get us back on track > Our biggest geopolitical rival that's been threatening a hot war also distilling the things we build is not a good thing They didn't distill Fable, it is impossible on any timeline. So where do we go next, the start of this thread is a complete dead-end as it is asserting a falsehood This was the comment i responded to so we can get back on track to that comment if you'd like > I think the major destabilizing force is the country that has been building the infrastructure for a hot war over Taiwan for the last decade while simultaneously blatantly funding the conquest of Ukraine. We are refusing to aid Ukraine and actively antagonize their leader. We are kidnapping leaders from other countries. We are bombing civilian infrastructure. We are the major destabilizing force, not the one planning a hypothetical invasion
- JumpCrisscross 2mo ago
  > who seems to be the destabilizing force if you take a step back and look at the state of things objectively? All of them. Pretending there is a benevolent bully among Russia, China and America is baseless. This is probably the strongest moral argument for open-weight models. It decouples AI, somewhat, from military-industrial might.
  - barbazoo 2mo ago
    This is proof the US propaganda is working. How much damage has China done recently militarily?
    - JumpCrisscross 2mo ago
      > This is proof the US propaganda is working This is a thought-terminating cliche. (The folks telling you to stop being sheeple are unusually consistently claimed independent thinkers.) > How much damage has China done recently militarily? Exempting the Iran war, which has no justification, as much as America. We’re both backing proxies. (Though we’ve had a while since we shot at or annexed our neighbours.)
      - advael 2mo ago
        It seems pretty silly to answer a question about military intervention by insisting that the major instance of military intervention by a world power that's happened in the last year shouldn't be counted
        JumpCrisscross 2mo ago
        > by insisting that the major instance of military intervention by a world power that's happened in the last year shouldn't be counted I’m not. I’m saying exempting that, we have an even field of conflict mongering. Counting Iran, the field is biased, but we have significant sampling-timing issues for something like “is there war.” China has violently annexed sovereign countries in the past decades. Its threats to do the same again are at least as serious as Trump’s Greenland nonsense. There can be more than one baddie.
- johnsmith1840 2mo ago
  Almost all current world events as of now are directly tied to the fact that the west is in active freakout mode over china building a army large enough to attack the entire world. Iran and venuzuela are a direct response to it. 1. China is actively genociding an entire ethnic people. 2. They are actively building a military larger and faster than any country on earth in all of history. 3. They are actively threatening ALL of their neighbors with war. Actively attacking their ships and building military bases in other countries territory. 4. China's open stated goals are to conquer and control its neighbors and every single step over the last 10 years is proof of that.
  - OrvalWintermute 2mo ago
    You left out the bodypart business they are now in too.
solumunus 2mo ago
I’m not convinced that it’s a bad thing. What is your actual argument?
- GlickWick 2mo ago
  My argument is that a major world power is pushing towards global conflict by simultaneously funding the conquest of Ukraine while building its own invasion fleet for Taiwan. Allowing them to also destabilize us internally is not exactly a good idea.
  - SecretDreams 2mo ago
    I thought you were talking about the US for a minute...
    - GlickWick 2mo ago
      The US is building a Taiwan invasion fleet?
      - tsimionescu 2mo ago
        No, the US is actively invading Iran, by ship and by air. And they've invaded Venezuela. And they're actively supporting Israel's invasion of Lebanon and Gaza. And they're bombing a few more countries now and then, especially in Africa. China is not actively involved in any war at all. They may be supporting Russia with resources, but it's nowhere near the level of material and diplomatic support that the USA is providing to Israel's genocide and war of aggression on Lebanon.
  - solumunus 2mo ago
    How is it destabilising? Do you purely mean China have exposed ill thought out investments? That’s capitalism my guy. The market is working as intended. When the investments fail there will be volatility but it’s hardly existential for the US. Open models are good for the whole world, I would argue it’s a net positive for individuals.
deleted 2mo ago
[deleted]
guax 2mo ago
Might wanna reflect on who’s threatening hot war lately.
- GlickWick 2mo ago
  The main actors threatening (and delivering) a hot war are China, and by proxy, Russia. The Ukraine war is absolutely and transparently enabled by China, who is also trying to actively destabilize the EU and the US in order to make its conquest of Taiwan more likely. Yes, the US has an idiot in charge who is threatening these things in response, too. However, unlike China, the electorate does not support him. His election is also almost certainly due to aggressive campaigns to destabilize the US internally for this exact purpose.
  - stanleykm 2mo ago
    Sorry who is China threatening a hot war with? As far as I can tell the US is doing most of the warring these days…
    - GlickWick 2mo ago
      Taiwan, while simultaneously preparing an invasion fleet trained to stop US and EU attempts at a rescue.
      - ClumsyPilot 2mo ago
        [flagged]
    - deleted 2mo ago
      [deleted]
  - deleted 2mo ago
    [deleted]
  - dgellow 2mo ago
    The US isn’t just _threatening_, it is in an open war right now, invaded Venezuela, started trade war with US allies
mathisfun123 2mo ago
> Our biggest geopolitical rival People on here have zero consistency in their worldviews. Ask any capitalism zealot (ie hners) whether markets are zero sum and they'll wax poetical about "creating value". But then talk to them about Chinese competition and suddenly everything is a rivalrous good lolol. I hate to break it to you, your so called rival won this game decades ago when you undercut the working class to make a buck and laundered cheap Chinese labor as productivity. So if you believe the Chinese are rivals um welcome to "reap what you sew" <shrug>.
- GlickWick 2mo ago
  I'm not the "hive mind" of HN or whatever. Individuals hold unique opinions. Yes, China is a rival. No, they have not won. Their economy is in a lot of trouble, likely far worse than the shape of the US's currently. That situation may accelerate a hot war though, as has historically been the case globally.
  - stanleykm 2mo ago
    You need to stop watching those “China is gonna collapse any minute now…” youtube videos
    - GlickWick 2mo ago
      I don’t. I do read major reputed economists though, and they are not exactly bullish on China. Don’t create fictional versions of the people you argue with. This is the second time in a span of 10 minutes that you’ve done it. It completely undermines any attempt to discuss something, and drops your integrity to zero.
      - drdexebtjl 2mo ago
        Are any of those major reputed economists Russian or Chinese by any chance? Or are they just Western economists repeating Western bias under a veil of objectivity?
      - 2mo ago
4wsn 2mo ago
I keep hearing about this "we" as if it's still a coherent nation state and not just an unaccountable ruling class from both parties where the most severe consequence is failing upwards into a lobbyist provided position. I literally have no moral preference when it comes to the US or the CCP nor do I care if the entire nation state fails, let alone loses to a geopolitical rival.
- dataflow 2mo ago
  > nor do I care if the entire nation state fails You should care because of the nukes, if nothing else.
  - crote 2mo ago
    Are we even sure they still work? The last test was 34 years ago, after all. For all we know some crafty contractors or NCOs have been making very good money off of selling "spare" parts - just like we saw when Russia first tried to invade Ukraine...
  - ClumsyPilot 2mo ago
    Nukes are the only thing keeping corrupt ruling class and their ambitions in check. On either side of ideological divide. It’s the only weapon that’s going to hit them along with the foot soldiers
- mywittyname 2mo ago
  > both parties I'm sorry, but only one "party" is comprised of fascist plutocrats speed-running the end of democracy in the USA. The USA and world would be a vastly different place had a different party maintained power in the USA 10 years ago.
  - runarberg 2mo ago
    As I see it, one party is comprised of fascist plutocrats, and the other party is comprised of their enablers. In dictatorships the latter is called controlled opposition, I don‘t know what the latter is called in a democracy, but in absence of a better word “both parties” gets the meaning across IMO.
Balinares 2mo ago
I don't think I would characterize this last era as one of global peace.
dgellow 2mo ago
> It's an unfortunate truth that we're exiting a global peace era You’re a tiny bit late on that one
- GlickWick 2mo ago
  No, we are in the process of an exit. This takes time
  - ClumsyPilot 2mo ago
    Does this sentence have any meaning at all? There are 30 Active military conflicts right now.
chews 2mo ago
Wow, what happened to no holds barred American capitalism? Is it bad when the Chinese somehow do it better? The US stateowning US Steal, Intel, and possibly openai is no different than the Chinese ownership model… and before the US took stakes in the companies they were just bankrolling them as customers SpaceX Oracle etal. If life is a meritocracy, you gotta give it to the Chinese for their immense growth and improvement of living from agricultural poverty to technical supremacy. I don't want to hear the they stole our IP argument either, because all math is borrowed from something else. Distillation is innovation, in booze and in models.
- 1234letshaveatw 2mo ago
  "what happened to no holds barred American capitalism?" you mean the strawman that never existed?
  - chews 2mo ago
    Unlike the xenophobia
mywittyname 2mo ago
Luckily for the peace side, the USA's inability to achieve their mission objectives in a war against an adversary that was perceived as being substantially weaker means they are very much less likely to engage in one with a "near peer". The take away from modern conflicts is that massive military size disparities don't translate into successful invasions anymore. In other words, it's unlikely USA will pursue a conflict with China, and it's unlikely China will pursue a conflict with Taiwan.
- sroussey 2mo ago
  I don’t think those are “learned” lessons. Only how to push harder next time.
- mlinhares 2mo ago
  Yes, the administration is definitely and would not start a war for no reason other than to start a war. People really have to stop sanewashing the government, it doesn't work anymore, these people are not thinking through what they're doing.
martythemaniak 2mo ago
I honestly wonder what world folks like you live in. The US is currently at war, repeatedly threatening several other places and engaged in several costly trade wars. From my Canadian perspective, you are a danger and a menace. China is a commodity supplier. Do the war crimes your country is currently committing not register for you at all? The daily threats, insults, and economic attacks on your 'allies', does that register? China supports Russia in its war formally, but practically it sells Ukraine whatever it needs, because a weak vassal-like Russia is very much in their interests. The US is far, far more outspoken and active supporter of Russia in this war. Finally, there will be no hot war with China. They'll likely blockade and invade Taiwan before the end of the decade, but the US will not do anything, partly because it'll be exhausted from it's never ending middle east wars, partly because it'll only take a small bribe to get Trump to back off. He's genuinely fond of dictators like Xi.
- sroussey 2mo ago
  Or… war with China is inevitable if only to keep the gap in military capabilities. There is a thinking to mow down their military while we still can in some circles. Like those in power currently. Scary.
Tyrubias 2mo ago
Our biggest geopolitical rival is also the only thing standing in the way of a potential duopoly on LLMs using closed weight models. I would not say I’m a fan of the PRC by any means, but I also do not want to see closed weight models controlled by two big companies dominating what I can use. Especially since said companies arbitrarily restrict model usage and can ban users for no reason.

Tostino 2mo ago

Ask yourself, who seems to be the destabilizing force if you take a step back and look at the state of things objectively? There is some blame on all sides for sure, not saying it's black and white...but come on.

GlickWick 2mo ago
I think the major destabilizing force is the country that has been building the infrastructure for a hot war over Taiwan for the last decade while simultaneously blatantly funding the conquest of Ukraine. The US stupidly withdrawing from the world stage is definitely making this worse, of course, but it is not the catalyst. It's unfortunately a very likely side effect of a social media campaign by the same actor to make said hot war easier to win.
- henry2023 2mo ago
  Hey, we started another war and are funding the most destabilizing force in the world but look at this theoretical war …
- p-e-w 2mo ago
  In the decade during which you claim China has been preparing for a hot war, the United States invaded multiple countries and waged hot wars on three continents. It’s ridiculous to compare China to the US when it comes to warmongering. They’re not even in the same ballpark.
  - GlickWick 2mo ago
    Yeah, the US is not an incredible actor, but China is funding the most brutal war in modern history (the invasion of Ukraine) in order to provide a smokescreen for their own invasion.
    - tsimionescu 2mo ago
      The Ukraine war is large and terrible, but its nowhere near comparable in brutality to the genocide in Gaza, that the US is funding, providing weapons for, and protecting diplomatically.
      - Swoerd 2mo ago
        [dead]
- 4wsn 2mo ago
  It's literally on their border and the history is akin to if The South established its own nation state in Cuba after the Civil War and China became its ally. At least admit the double standard. I don't mind realpolitik but it's so tedious when it's not plainly stated and there's this veneer of civility. Yes, the US is allowed to do whatever it wants to in South America. No, other nation states don't have a sphere of geographic influence if the US doesn't want them to.
  - stickfigure 2mo ago
    Taiwan has been self governing for longer than almost everyone that lives there has been alive. It's also a vibrant democracy. If you care about democracy and human rights, it's morally reprehensible NOT to support Taiwan. We can debate the ethics of intervening in strongman dictatorships like Venezuela, Cuba, or Iran, but Taiwan is clear.
    - doctorwho42 2mo ago
      Cool, and it's morally reprehensible to NOT support drastic action to curb the worst effects of climate change, and start trying our very best to prepare our children and grandchildren for an adulthood where they will be clawing back minor things we take for granted even in today's world of regular continent spanning forest fire smoke pollution.
    - 4wsn 2mo ago
      "Democracy and human rights", "strongman dictatorships". Dear God this rhetoric has aged like milk. I can't believe we ever fell for it.
- duplessitous 2mo ago
  Despite withdrawing from our role on the world stage, we have in no way adapted isolationist like policies. We kidnapped the leader of another country, we are bombing Iran with impunity and will begin striking civilian infrastructure as a response to terrorist within that country, https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2026/07/22/trump-iran-bomb-strait-hormuz/91006801007/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2026/07/22/trum... China didn't make us do this any more than they made us bomb civilian fishing boats in South America. We are a major destabilizing force at the moment, China existing does not somehow negate the actions we take of our own free will. Refusing to acknowledge our role in destabilizing the globe at the moment is a level of infantilization that I, and many others, find unacceptable. We are all adults, China is responsible for their role and the US is responsible for its role. A social media campaign is not forcing the folks in Washington to drop bombs on Iranian civilian infrastructure, the jack asses in Washington did all of this on their own
  - GlickWick 2mo ago
    Nobody is refusing to acknowledge our role in destabilizing things. This is a thread about why the US might be afraid of an also bad-actor rival funding a huge proxy war against it controlling major technology.
    - duplessitous 2mo ago
      I mean if you want to get back on the topic of this thread, it has nothing to do with what you just said. The thread started by discussing AI distillation and this was your initial comment, just to get us back on track > Our biggest geopolitical rival that's been threatening a hot war also distilling the things we build is not a good thing They didn't distill Fable, it is impossible on any timeline. So where do we go next, the start of this thread is a complete dead-end as it is asserting a falsehood This was the comment i responded to so we can get back on track to that comment if you'd like > I think the major destabilizing force is the country that has been building the infrastructure for a hot war over Taiwan for the last decade while simultaneously blatantly funding the conquest of Ukraine. We are refusing to aid Ukraine and actively antagonize their leader. We are kidnapping leaders from other countries. We are bombing civilian infrastructure. We are the major destabilizing force, not the one planning a hypothetical invasion
JumpCrisscross 2mo ago
> who seems to be the destabilizing force if you take a step back and look at the state of things objectively? All of them. Pretending there is a benevolent bully among Russia, China and America is baseless. This is probably the strongest moral argument for open-weight models. It decouples AI, somewhat, from military-industrial might.
- barbazoo 2mo ago
  This is proof the US propaganda is working. How much damage has China done recently militarily?
  - JumpCrisscross 2mo ago
    > This is proof the US propaganda is working This is a thought-terminating cliche. (The folks telling you to stop being sheeple are unusually consistently claimed independent thinkers.) > How much damage has China done recently militarily? Exempting the Iran war, which has no justification, as much as America. We’re both backing proxies. (Though we’ve had a while since we shot at or annexed our neighbours.)
    - advael 2mo ago
      It seems pretty silly to answer a question about military intervention by insisting that the major instance of military intervention by a world power that's happened in the last year shouldn't be counted
      - JumpCrisscross 2mo ago
        > by insisting that the major instance of military intervention by a world power that's happened in the last year shouldn't be counted I’m not. I’m saying exempting that, we have an even field of conflict mongering. Counting Iran, the field is biased, but we have significant sampling-timing issues for something like “is there war.” China has violently annexed sovereign countries in the past decades. Its threats to do the same again are at least as serious as Trump’s Greenland nonsense. There can be more than one baddie.
johnsmith1840 2mo ago
Almost all current world events as of now are directly tied to the fact that the west is in active freakout mode over china building a army large enough to attack the entire world. Iran and venuzuela are a direct response to it. 1. China is actively genociding an entire ethnic people. 2. They are actively building a military larger and faster than any country on earth in all of history. 3. They are actively threatening ALL of their neighbors with war. Actively attacking their ships and building military bases in other countries territory. 4. China's open stated goals are to conquer and control its neighbors and every single step over the last 10 years is proof of that.
- OrvalWintermute 2mo ago
  You left out the bodypart business they are now in too.

solumunus 2mo ago

I’m not convinced that it’s a bad thing. What is your actual argument?

GlickWick 2mo ago
My argument is that a major world power is pushing towards global conflict by simultaneously funding the conquest of Ukraine while building its own invasion fleet for Taiwan. Allowing them to also destabilize us internally is not exactly a good idea.
- SecretDreams 2mo ago
  I thought you were talking about the US for a minute...
  - GlickWick 2mo ago
    The US is building a Taiwan invasion fleet?
    - tsimionescu 2mo ago
      No, the US is actively invading Iran, by ship and by air. And they've invaded Venezuela. And they're actively supporting Israel's invasion of Lebanon and Gaza. And they're bombing a few more countries now and then, especially in Africa. China is not actively involved in any war at all. They may be supporting Russia with resources, but it's nowhere near the level of material and diplomatic support that the USA is providing to Israel's genocide and war of aggression on Lebanon.
- solumunus 2mo ago
  How is it destabilising? Do you purely mean China have exposed ill thought out investments? That’s capitalism my guy. The market is working as intended. When the investments fail there will be volatility but it’s hardly existential for the US. Open models are good for the whole world, I would argue it’s a net positive for individuals.

deleted 2mo ago

[deleted]

guax 2mo ago

Might wanna reflect on who’s threatening hot war lately.

GlickWick 2mo ago
The main actors threatening (and delivering) a hot war are China, and by proxy, Russia. The Ukraine war is absolutely and transparently enabled by China, who is also trying to actively destabilize the EU and the US in order to make its conquest of Taiwan more likely. Yes, the US has an idiot in charge who is threatening these things in response, too. However, unlike China, the electorate does not support him. His election is also almost certainly due to aggressive campaigns to destabilize the US internally for this exact purpose.
- stanleykm 2mo ago
  Sorry who is China threatening a hot war with? As far as I can tell the US is doing most of the warring these days…
  - GlickWick 2mo ago
    Taiwan, while simultaneously preparing an invasion fleet trained to stop US and EU attempts at a rescue.
    - ClumsyPilot 2mo ago
      [flagged]
  - deleted 2mo ago
    [deleted]
- deleted 2mo ago
  [deleted]
- dgellow 2mo ago
  The US isn’t just _threatening_, it is in an open war right now, invaded Venezuela, started trade war with US allies

mathisfun123 2mo ago

> Our biggest geopolitical rival People on here have zero consistency in their worldviews. Ask any capitalism zealot (ie hners) whether markets are zero sum and they'll wax poetical about "creating value". But then talk to them about Chinese competition and suddenly everything is a rivalrous good lolol. I hate to break it to you, your so called rival won this game decades ago when you undercut the working class to make a buck and laundered cheap Chinese labor as productivity. So if you believe the Chinese are rivals um welcome to "reap what you sew" <shrug>.

GlickWick 2mo ago
I'm not the "hive mind" of HN or whatever. Individuals hold unique opinions. Yes, China is a rival. No, they have not won. Their economy is in a lot of trouble, likely far worse than the shape of the US's currently. That situation may accelerate a hot war though, as has historically been the case globally.
- stanleykm 2mo ago
  You need to stop watching those “China is gonna collapse any minute now…” youtube videos
  - GlickWick 2mo ago
    I don’t. I do read major reputed economists though, and they are not exactly bullish on China. Don’t create fictional versions of the people you argue with. This is the second time in a span of 10 minutes that you’ve done it. It completely undermines any attempt to discuss something, and drops your integrity to zero.
    - drdexebtjl 2mo ago
      Are any of those major reputed economists Russian or Chinese by any chance? Or are they just Western economists repeating Western bias under a veil of objectivity?
    - 2mo ago

4wsn 2mo ago

I keep hearing about this "we" as if it's still a coherent nation state and not just an unaccountable ruling class from both parties where the most severe consequence is failing upwards into a lobbyist provided position. I literally have no moral preference when it comes to the US or the CCP nor do I care if the entire nation state fails, let alone loses to a geopolitical rival.

dataflow 2mo ago
> nor do I care if the entire nation state fails You should care because of the nukes, if nothing else.
- crote 2mo ago
  Are we even sure they still work? The last test was 34 years ago, after all. For all we know some crafty contractors or NCOs have been making very good money off of selling "spare" parts - just like we saw when Russia first tried to invade Ukraine...
- ClumsyPilot 2mo ago
  Nukes are the only thing keeping corrupt ruling class and their ambitions in check. On either side of ideological divide. It’s the only weapon that’s going to hit them along with the foot soldiers
mywittyname 2mo ago
> both parties I'm sorry, but only one "party" is comprised of fascist plutocrats speed-running the end of democracy in the USA. The USA and world would be a vastly different place had a different party maintained power in the USA 10 years ago.
- runarberg 2mo ago
  As I see it, one party is comprised of fascist plutocrats, and the other party is comprised of their enablers. In dictatorships the latter is called controlled opposition, I don‘t know what the latter is called in a democracy, but in absence of a better word “both parties” gets the meaning across IMO.

Balinares 2mo ago

I don't think I would characterize this last era as one of global peace.

dgellow 2mo ago

> It's an unfortunate truth that we're exiting a global peace era You’re a tiny bit late on that one

GlickWick 2mo ago
No, we are in the process of an exit. This takes time
- ClumsyPilot 2mo ago
  Does this sentence have any meaning at all? There are 30 Active military conflicts right now.

chews 2mo ago

Wow, what happened to no holds barred American capitalism? Is it bad when the Chinese somehow do it better? The US stateowning US Steal, Intel, and possibly openai is no different than the Chinese ownership model… and before the US took stakes in the companies they were just bankrolling them as customers SpaceX Oracle etal. If life is a meritocracy, you gotta give it to the Chinese for their immense growth and improvement of living from agricultural poverty to technical supremacy. I don't want to hear the they stole our IP argument either, because all math is borrowed from something else. Distillation is innovation, in booze and in models.

1234letshaveatw 2mo ago
"what happened to no holds barred American capitalism?" you mean the strawman that never existed?
- chews 2mo ago
  Unlike the xenophobia

mywittyname 2mo ago

Luckily for the peace side, the USA's inability to achieve their mission objectives in a war against an adversary that was perceived as being substantially weaker means they are very much less likely to engage in one with a "near peer". The take away from modern conflicts is that massive military size disparities don't translate into successful invasions anymore. In other words, it's unlikely USA will pursue a conflict with China, and it's unlikely China will pursue a conflict with Taiwan.

sroussey 2mo ago
I don’t think those are “learned” lessons. Only how to push harder next time.
mlinhares 2mo ago
Yes, the administration is definitely and would not start a war for no reason other than to start a war. People really have to stop sanewashing the government, it doesn't work anymore, these people are not thinking through what they're doing.

martythemaniak 2mo ago

I honestly wonder what world folks like you live in. The US is currently at war, repeatedly threatening several other places and engaged in several costly trade wars. From my Canadian perspective, you are a danger and a menace. China is a commodity supplier. Do the war crimes your country is currently committing not register for you at all? The daily threats, insults, and economic attacks on your 'allies', does that register? China supports Russia in its war formally, but practically it sells Ukraine whatever it needs, because a weak vassal-like Russia is very much in their interests. The US is far, far more outspoken and active supporter of Russia in this war. Finally, there will be no hot war with China. They'll likely blockade and invade Taiwan before the end of the decade, but the US will not do anything, partly because it'll be exhausted from it's never ending middle east wars, partly because it'll only take a small bribe to get Trump to back off. He's genuinely fond of dictators like Xi.

sroussey 2mo ago
Or… war with China is inevitable if only to keep the gap in military capabilities. There is a thinking to mow down their military while we still can in some circles. Like those in power currently. Scary.

Tyrubias 2mo ago

Our biggest geopolitical rival is also the only thing standing in the way of a potential duopoly on LLMs using closed weight models. I would not say I’m a fan of the PRC by any means, but I also do not want to see closed weight models controlled by two big companies dominating what I can use. Especially since said companies arbitrarily restrict model usage and can ban users for no reason.