Saline9515

I don't think so Anthropic models are not used to distribute fake copies of books. Excerpts, maybe, but that's fair use.

Jail for copying bits... come on, no one was hurt here.

Fast fashion importers such as Zara already do JIT delivery to the stores and very short series. They can adapt easily because they have the capital, but this will hurt smaller brands that can't.

It looks like a great opportunity for mafia networks to get paid by clothing brands in order to dispose of the stocks.

I think that it's quite clear in the digital era that you can't steal bits that are free to copy.

France had to reduce nuclear maintenance for a long time to pay for the EU rules that forces it to give discounted nuclear electricity to private producers, which led to the situation you mentioned. Besides, french nuclear is important in stabilizing the german grid by adding/removing up to 20% power with a short delay. This leads however to increased wear on the reactors and maintenance needs.

And interestingly, you mentioned gas: in 2022 the EU went through a major energy crisis as Germany was counting on Russian gas to produce electricity. Pumped storage is finite and already maximized in Europe, same as hydro. Batteries are still unproven economically at scale.

One can accept climate change but be sceptic about the solutions pushed by the various lobbies, which led to the downfall of German's industry.

Sand used to make concrete is a finite ressource, and extremely polluting to extract. Why wouldn't we save it and build lasting buildings?

You don't really own a latrine, but just look for it for the next generation.

The Chinese are quite open about their efforts regarding intellectual espionage and the desire for control of other countries' supply chains. It's not sinophobia to be cautious about it. It doesn't mean that the US companies are angels either.

Any discussion about the Chinese Communist Party is censored on Deepseek.

Solar panels and wind turbines are useful, but don't provide the base power a network needs to be stable, and on-demand capacity to give some flexibility. Ironically, fossil fuel electricity plants have to be built as part of renewables projects to make them viable.

This is why after having spent a trillion of euros in renewables, Germany still has the highest cost of electricity and still relies on French nuclear to stabilize their network. Same goes with Spain, that had a major blackout caused by a renewable shortfall.

Cumulative radioactivity emitted by German coal as a result of the ban on nuclear is likely higher than the amount of radioactivity spread by the Fukushima disaster. We can also add lung issues and other pollution of the environment caused by soot.

China still uses a massive amount of coal, and has a lot of southern idle land. Germany has been doing what you say for the last 15 years, it didn't seem to work out so well.

Crusades were 900 years ago, at a time most people didn't know how to read. Now people don't need leaders to interpret texts. Do you have more recent examples?

All modern societies are multiethnic societies.

No? Most European societies weren't multiethnic 50 years ago. Poland doesn't have Islamic terrorism, because it has very few muslims. Guess we found the solution for avoiding Islamic terrorism?

Once white supremacy is done with the obviously foreign-looking people, it will start to eliminate those who are not white enough, resulting in an existential and violent battle over determination of the "volk".

You are using an American definition here. In Europe you don't have "white" people, but French, Germans, Swedish and so on. White people are not inherently bad and what you describe applies better to muslims who have genocided or expelled non-muslim minorities of their countries. See Armenians for instance, or Christians. Or Jews. Or Yezidis. And so on.

"white person in a historically white country" and what happens when you are a minority and you are asked to pay the Jizya? Will you pay? Will you veil your daughter?

The difference is that white supremacist who do domestic terrorism usually don't blow up in a concert hall crying "Jesus is great".

Violent white supremacism is a symptom of multiethnic societies. There is no reason to be one otherwise.

Neither Muslims, nor Jews, nor white people, nor any broad group of people ever acts as a united bloc.

You don't understand. Quran says that you have to convert everyone to Islamic faith (and chariah law), and use force if necessary. It is forbidden to try to interpret what is written : the text is sacred.

This is why you have islamic terrorism in every muslim country, and countries with a large minority of muslims. White people in Thailand and other countries don't commit domestic terrorism because they don't have a proper reason to and do not share a common ideology or religion.

Again: most people just want to live in peace and ensure a good future for their children.

Big fallacy here. I open a box of chocolate, and poison 10% of them. Then you have to eat 5 of them. Would you do it? After all, most are totally safe, I don't see why you are being such a bigot!

Overall the solution is simple: muslims can have their own countries where they can do what they want, and other people can have their own countries with their own rules. It's hardly painful for anyone. I don't see why we should absolutely mix everyone everywhere.

The parent comment is right about 99.9...% of Muslims not being in any way related to terrorism.

Yet there are no country with a majority of muslims where the minorities were not pushed out in the 20th and 21st century. Turkey, Egypt, Syria, Irak, Iran, and so on. Have you read the Quran?

If course, I guess that Iran mullahs and their supporters are not representative of Islam. Not are Talibans (widely supported). Nor are Daesh. Nor are Saudis (who pushed salafism). Nor are Hamas members. Nor ar Al-Qaida. Nor are Boko Haram. Nor are Philippinos islamic groups (>400 deaths between 2000 and 2007). Nor are Jemaah Islamiyah. C'mon this is ridiculous.

I grew up in beautiful and prosperous village in the Alps, the town next to us had a mosque that sent jihadists to Syria. I guess they were not real muslims?

A large country with 10% of Muslims being a large minority in a small terrorist force is not surprising.

There are many Portuguese in France, you don't hear about the behadings by Portuguese people. Same with Italians, Germans, Spaniards, and so on.

The drawings of Muhammad were objectively haram, as you say, but almost none of the people who'd agree to that would also agree that murder was the right answer.

A teacher was beheaded 10 years after because he showed them in class. "Almost none" is doing a lot of work here. If that was true, every year teachers would show it as a way to discuss about religion and french laicity. But they don't because they know that there is a real risk to get a terrorist attack.

And everywhere in Europe it's the same. Theo Von Gogh was murdered for the same reason in 2004. Recently a guy burning a Quran in Sweden got stabbed by a bystander in the street. At which point are we allowed to say "enough"? It's obvious how it will end, in France for instance left-wing islamists open talk about taking power. Even after all of those bloody crimes.

I told you that it was an intro. Here is the more serious book, by the same authors:

https://direct.mit.edu/books/monograph/2425/The-Logic-of-Pol...

And there is nothing wrong with vulgarization, aside from comments from pedantic HNers.

The UK is historically not a notion of immigrants. The recent immigration carried massive problems (mass rapes among them), and a brutal authoritarian repression of free speech. The anti-weapon laws are systematically directed against the immigrants - I doubt that white british people threaten their neighbors with "ninja swords" or throw acid at the women who marry outside of their community.

Because they have been told that immigrants are bad, that immigrants take their jobs, that immigrants sponge off the state[0], that immigrants are eating their pets, etc. All easily fact-checked and debunked but people, alas, are easily lead by media-driven bigotry.[1]

The fact that it applies too to black people, who are not really immigrants show that your argument is false. Besides, your point 1) is easy to refute, as the State can subsidize migrants to allow them to accept lower wages than the natives. By giving them free housing, for instance.

How many british girls will need to be raped so that you will start to see the reality? The only biggot here is you, along with the ones who allowed Henry Nowak's murder to happen. You are just an enabler for the british elite, who hates its native proles and has no problem replacing them with more obedient ones.

What do the Bataclan terrorists have to do with 99.9999% of the Muslim population?

They share the same religion and ethnicity. French muslims were actually a large contingent in Daesh forces. This is a classic "no true scotsman" fallacy. Every muslim will tell you that the Charlie Hebdo covers about Muhammad were "haram" - because that's exactly what their religion says.

Not that they are all bad people, just like you had nice soviets, or I'm sure that there a nice North Korean Juche party members, too.

You seem to be acting like an ostrich, putting your head in the sand to avoid problems. Face reality and read about Islam, which is inherently a political religion. Read also about the Muslim Brotherhood (or similar orgs).

US armed communities.

How about latino gangs? Are they operating with nerf guns? Besides, the safest places in the US are those that are monoethnic, such as New Hampshire.

If the nation of immigrants is so great, why are so many people protecting themselves with guns and why are there so many lawyers to compensate for the absence of social trust?

And why are so many people still talking and being unhappy about race and ethnicity if that's a total success?

Having a good cultural distribution channel doesn't mean that it's inherently good. Japan has a great cultural soft power too, however I don't know if many people would tolerate life in Japan (for real). On the other side most people can't locate Denmark on a map but would love the life there.

This is a good intro by recognized researchers:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dictator%27s_Handbook

If you want me to be more precise, I would say that clientelism and tribalism are especially rewarded for politicians in a multi-ethnic society.

Also a good definition: https://www.cambridge.org/core/elements/clientelism/E23ABE88...

Why is "civil war" the default situation here? How about domestic terrorism for instance?

Will you be on the side of the muslim terrorists who beheaded teachers and priests (among others), and killed 132 concert-goers (and injured 413 others) at the Bataclan in 2015? Will you tell the french people who were slaughtered that it was the price to live in a multicultural society?Damn.

Even if you don't go as far as terrorism, it's simple: multi-ethnic societies favor either identity politics (aka clientelism) or authoritarianism (only way to avoid it). The USA is a great example for this: the previous administration played identity politics to the maximum, and the new one used it to impose authoritarianism. It's very hard, if not impossible to escape this loop once you are in a minority-only society.

And of course you have to deal with collapsing social trust. The USA isn't the ultimate lawyer society, and the most armed one by pure chance. It's a logical consequence.

There are many flavors of national socialism, in reality nazis should be called hitlerians because of this.

This is actually very far left, just not the current wealthy-urban-lgbtq far left. USSR marxists and Maoists held the same views, where the individual's main function was to work and refusal to work or low productivity required either reformation (aka often, Gulag) or hunger.

"Those how do not work, do not eat" - Mao

Interestingly, psychoanalysis in the USSR was aimed at helping the patient to go back to work, for instance.

What happens when they start to see their ethnicity or culture as political and fight to impose it, including using violence? Because at some point it will happen - democracy incentivizes clientelism and tribalism.

The USA, which is often touted as a "successful" melting pot model, is rife with similar problems.

IP theft doesn't exist, if I copy a Disney movie, Disney still has their movies. If I steal someone's bike, they can't use their bike. You deprive Disney of nothing by "stealing" their movies since it is just a copy.

Because it's a classic NIMBY move, where you pay others for the negative externalities of your consumption.

If you burn waste, you have waste heat.

Which country? Did they also ban AI use to be coherent?

The main problem is how they accessed the IP, but then using it to train a model is fair use. But yeah, IP theft doesn't exist because nothing is stolen really: Hollywood studios still have their movies.