But according to Paul Heer, “Both sides are playing hard to get, presumably waiting for the other to admit the error of its ways, or at least to be the first to offer a meaningful concession that breaks the ice.”??
Washington has worked diligently to create the impression that China has abused the USA so that US abuses can be framed as self-protection or retaliation.
This is 100% false. China has played by the rules, has never lied to, cheated or defamed us. There is literally no symmetry between the cases.
China successfully turned the Internet into a state surveillance apparatus. I wonder if they think they can do the same with AI, leveraging it to solidify their state power, supercharge their surveillance systems, and simultaneously limit its access to citizens.
Thanks for the link! The book, Surveillance State, "tells the gripping, startling, and detailed story of how China’s Communist Party is building a new kind of political control: shaping the will of the people through the sophisticated—and often brutal—harnessing of data”.
Shaping the will of the people by harnessing data? The horror!
C'mon, Jurgen, that's what all organizations do when they can, and our governments are world leaders in it. They have harnessed, for example, Angela Merkel's data – electronic and analog communications – since she entered Federal politics. Once they'd slipped the bridle on Angela, she was permitted to become Chancellor, where she wrecked the economy, betrayed Germany's most important trade partner, and started a war.
Americans rarely bother with regular folks' data. They just need to harness the leaders and they've got everyone.
China's government is the most trusted on earth, and people are therefore willing to trust it with more data than we are. but even so, their personal data protection laws are more like the EU's than America's.
Let’s just say I’d much rather be a citizen in Europe than in the People’s Replublic of China. I’m not going to engage in any further discussion as I don’t get the the impression you argue in good faith.
What do you think of this N.S. Lyons guy? He says the US and China as far more similar than different, and this is a BAD thing. Would collaborating officially - as opposed to techno-evolutionarily converging on the same "lifeworld" - make things even worse if you care about democracy and managerial subversion of it?
(I get the sense the professional class in general finds populist fears of both technology and foreign nations to be ignorant.)
To quote Art Berman on WaPo article "Can vacuums slow global warming? Administration bets $1.2 billion on it." << This is a technology to vacuum money from taxpayers' pockets & transfer it into the accounts of the companies that make these stupid carbon-sucking machines. >> Btw, Nate Hagens would be an interesting interview.
As Always, giving me something to think about. As always, reminding me to think in non-zero sum terms, and strive for cognitive empathy. Thank you.
But according to Paul Heer, “Both sides are playing hard to get, presumably waiting for the other to admit the error of its ways, or at least to be the first to offer a meaningful concession that breaks the ice.”??
Washington has worked diligently to create the impression that China has abused the USA so that US abuses can be framed as self-protection or retaliation.
This is 100% false. China has played by the rules, has never lied to, cheated or defamed us. There is literally no symmetry between the cases.
China successfully turned the Internet into a state surveillance apparatus. I wonder if they think they can do the same with AI, leveraging it to solidify their state power, supercharge their surveillance systems, and simultaneously limit its access to citizens.
In what significant ways does China's Internet surveillance differ from our own? With a substantiating link, please.
A good read on this would be: https://us.macmillan.com/books/9781250249302/surveillancestate
Thanks for the link! The book, Surveillance State, "tells the gripping, startling, and detailed story of how China’s Communist Party is building a new kind of political control: shaping the will of the people through the sophisticated—and often brutal—harnessing of data”.
Shaping the will of the people by harnessing data? The horror!
C'mon, Jurgen, that's what all organizations do when they can, and our governments are world leaders in it. They have harnessed, for example, Angela Merkel's data – electronic and analog communications – since she entered Federal politics. Once they'd slipped the bridle on Angela, she was permitted to become Chancellor, where she wrecked the economy, betrayed Germany's most important trade partner, and started a war.
Americans rarely bother with regular folks' data. They just need to harness the leaders and they've got everyone.
China's government is the most trusted on earth, and people are therefore willing to trust it with more data than we are. but even so, their personal data protection laws are more like the EU's than America's.
Let’s just say I’d much rather be a citizen in Europe than in the People’s Replublic of China. I’m not going to engage in any further discussion as I don’t get the the impression you argue in good faith.
Your preference is understandable, given our media's grotesque coverage of China.
If you lived in China for a few years and spoke the language as fluently as you speak German, you would change your mind.
https://substack.com/notes/post/p-135685825?selection=eca93918-faae-4e5c-98b8-b307420b043f#:~:text=%20Dematerialization%20makes%20property%20more%20easily%20tradable
What do you think of this N.S. Lyons guy? He says the US and China as far more similar than different, and this is a BAD thing. Would collaborating officially - as opposed to techno-evolutionarily converging on the same "lifeworld" - make things even worse if you care about democracy and managerial subversion of it?
(I get the sense the professional class in general finds populist fears of both technology and foreign nations to be ignorant.)
To quote Art Berman on WaPo article "Can vacuums slow global warming? Administration bets $1.2 billion on it." << This is a technology to vacuum money from taxpayers' pockets & transfer it into the accounts of the companies that make these stupid carbon-sucking machines. >> Btw, Nate Hagens would be an interesting interview.