overfeed

> ...neither side has anywhere near enough missiles to completely disable their opponents.

Try the US/Iran war for size then.

I'm not sure what you mean by "completely disable their opponents" - there may not be a country on earth with enough munitions to do this against a competent and resilient adversary - the Vietnam war comes to mind where the US still lost after dropping triple the bombs (by tonnage) of what the entire allied forces dropped during WWII across all theaters

> The future of warfare is robotic warfare, specifically large volumes of cheap attritionable autonomous munitions

The robots are made to kill people on the other side until you hopefully win, otherwise political disagreements could be settled via best of 3 CoD games - or chess if you're more traditional. Recruitment of humans is still required for fodder.

> Airbus proves the EU can do this

And Boeing's rampant carelessness proves European laws can be beneficial. "Hurr durr, how about them European laws" is a low-effort comment that adds nothing to the discussions.

The argument that a slack regulatory environment is sufficient was disproven when the US government subsidized new fabs via the CHIPS Act (a new law!), and then went further and partially nationalized a failing Intel to prop it up.

> Do you think this is a good practice?

For who? The more control you hand over to the AI and let it think for you with no supervision, the better it is for Anthropic

It's usually the same team. In addition to the sophomore slump, the team will also be squeezed for time as they have a tight deadline to deliver a finished product after they learn whether they have been renewed or not.

> Does that mean that civil rights activists in the US were internal enemies or that effective propaganda highlights legitimate grievances

It probably won't come as news to you that Hoover's FBI smeared the Civil Rights movement communist and subversive. The AI broligarchs are wrapping themselves in the flag and using an old playbook, this is a dumb sequel to COINTELPRO.

> CCP is pushing and amplifying AI opposition efforts, that’s a fact regardless of US politics

Should the Civil Rights movement have been proscribed on the basis of Nazis and Soviets making propaganda about the treatment of black people in the US of A?

So the first amendment is suspended for individuals whose opinion/public activity - according to the administration - "furthers the goals of a foreign power".

This rules out protesting any kind of war, tariffs, or even things the administration likes, like demonstrating in support of Israel. Obviously the plan is not to apply the rule evenly, its just an authoritarian lever to silence dissenting speech the government does not like.

> So, basically now merchandizers, auditors, compliance monitors, etc. have a tool using which they can quantify whether broadcaster complied with contractual requirements of showing their ads/merch/logos as per contract

Automated ad-monitoring tools existed for decades for TV and Radio using even older DSP techniques and imperceptible audio/visual watermarks.

I will not use any more of my time arguing with Claude via a meat puppet.

Your Claude may have been hallucinating - solar panels have no microcontrollers or microprocessors, and hence have no need for firmware. Battery Charge controllers -- that are downstream of panels do have firmware, but even if a booby-trapped firmware were to short-circuit the panels, they'd be undamaged.

You can find the pressure through destructive trial-and-error if money is no object - which it isn't for governments when the target hardware is juicy.

> I want to take a step back and observe that you're saying expensive specialists will continue to be required if two parties want to make an agreement.

A lot of contract-lawyering involves getting ahead of when things go south and the two previously agreeing parties find themselves in disagreement.

> The future we are looking at with the help of AI is full of abundance.

Why would you think that, when the gains of productivity increases haven't been distributed uniformly during the past several decades? What could disrupt the current trend towards more concentration?

> I suspect that geopolitics will leave US/China GPUs with largely non overlpping customer bases

That's not what's happening in the auto-industry, Chinese EVs are easily outselling American ones. Why would GPUs be any different?

Even the cheapest commodity encryption chips have had this capability for well over a decade now, Unlike Apple, Flock are not a hardware pioneer, not by a long shot.

The Android documentation has an example of how to use hardware keys, and a Chinese OEM (IIRC) was found using the example key provided by Android sample code - and yet that was more effort than Flock applied, since their ARM SoC support it.

Linux 3.x has a lot of CVEs filed against its Bluetooth implementation.

There are levels to defending against physical attacks, and Flock half-assed theirs by leaving the encryption key right on the file system, according to the reporting. Those more serious about security — like Apple — store keys in an "enclave" chip so it can't be easily extracted by an attacker doing the bare minimum

Getting persistent access to Flock's internal network is a high-priority item for every US adversary, who doesn't want free intel collection on the movements of persons of interest? Knowing who the FBI and local cops are monitoring in is the counter-counter-intelligence cherry on top of a self-inflicted dragnet surveillance cake.

Any entity with access to flock servers can virtually stake-out anyone/everyone driving past Flock camera to monitor their movements. In a hot war, this would provide actionable data to support assassination via road-side bomb/drone strikes.

I could have been more clear in my writing, but I was adding to your point of things that trap the left. The "Sir/Ma'am" was addressing a hypothetical left-ish "moderate" who gets trapped into criticizing other on the left by conservative talking points - not accusing you personally. I have no idea what your politics are.

> The left gets trapped...

Nevermind the wedge driven when moderates who think of themselves as being on the left agree with the idea that past weak attempts to nudge things leftward "went too far", or that there actually is an issue with "government waste". Sir/Ma'am - you are complicit in moving the Overton window to the right.

What in the enlightened centrism?! All 3 branches of government are controlled by conservatives, as is the fourth estate.

> Right now, the vast majority of office jobs are bullshit jobs, because the director who holds the budget is incentivized to maximize headcount

This may have been briefly true during the Zero-Interest regime. The economy isn't doing so hot right now, outside of AI. If squeezed companies doing multiple rounds of layoffs keep those "bullshit jobs", maybe they are not bullshit. Perhaps coordinating people, and keeping up with bureaucratic demands like paying taxes, not breaking the law and growing the business requires warm bodies.

> What do the remaining 100% of unemployed people do? Start trading their skills for old-fashioned analog currency.

History books suggest a different outcome. Firing 100% of employees in a growth-based, consumer economy only works when you're the only one using that strategy. If a critical mass of companies do the same, then you're staring at a managed decline at best.

> Meanwhile, actual humans go fuck off to raise their kids while being paid by AI finance and HR departments

I was able to suspend my disbelief until this line. Unless Capitalism has been upended by 2029, AI companies will continue to have capitalist goals like maximizing value for their shareholders. AI HR won't pay humans that don't positively move the needle on the P&L

> She does have a track record of achieving things she probably did not attend: e.g. ensuring total Chinese dominance of US household robotics.

Why should the FTC consider the policy of another sovereign when investigating domestic anti-trust violations? Either you have the rule of law that binds everyone equally, or you have the rule of man who chooses which parties are allowed to break the law for outcomes in random market slices, like avoiding the dominance of US household robotics.Where would that end?

on the other hand, Rust is memory safe!

> humans on call for robots isn't the future I want.

Disposable reverse-centaurs are the key to unlocking trillions in shareholder value, you may not want it, but capital demands it on the basis of getting returns on the supersized AI investments.

> But if you are a professional who expects to earn a living salary on these things, your intellect will suddenly be outcompeted by orders of magnitude

Which organizations do the most math research? What are their budgets, droves and culture? You may be falling victim to the pre-IPO PR razzle-dazzle by AI companies expending unreasonable resources on problems they know will get them good press and make their models appear superhuman.

A university math department will not spend $20M in one summer to solve 1 problem when it can hire 10 human mathematicians for 10 years.

> Note that China itself is a protectionist economy. So in some sense protectionism is recognizing that China has a pretty good industrial policy and copying it.

China's protectionism is emplaced to support long-term goals. Amodei's policy suggestion is explicitly in support of short term goals (1-5 years), a time window he claims to be "critical" without evidence. A cynic may link that window to forthcoming AI IPO's, and allowing current CEOs to secure ridiculous golden parachutes before leaving the mess of how to deal with the unpaced Chinese frontier models to their successors and future US legislature.

Letting AI companies set your foreign policy (voluntarily ceding global primacy to maximize domestic[1] profits) may have awful higher-order effects for the US. What's hilarious is the shameless about-face: for years, the same companies have been declaring that it is vital American AI innovation not be encumbered by new laws. Until the Chinese models glided to the frontier.

1. Maybe they hope to browbeat Europe too, like how they pushed out Huawei equipment from Euro telecoms. An alternative reading is that the loss of primacy is involuntary, so they may as well spin the reality, and salvage a win by colluding to eliminate better, open-weight models from the markets in "democracies" with the excuse that they are unpaced and therefore dangerous. What will predictibly happen is there will be `Qwen-8.1` for RoW, and a lobotomized `Qwen-8.1-paced` for Americans.

> This kind of argument is always dangerous, because it essentially resorts to moving goalposts.

Nope, introspecting motivation is useful. There have been similar posts made about people using bots in PvP competitive online gaming: some people play to enjoy the game, and hopefully get better until they reach their skill ceiling. Others play (just)to win, and are open to buying aimbot hardware and software