tnt128

In the demo, you didn’t show the process of cleaning and labeling data, does your product do that somehow, or do you still expect the user to provide that after connecting the data source.

Would these money be returned to the victims?

Negotiation leverage. Had they prevent the purchase in the first place, they won’t have anythings to negotiate now.

A lot of people here focus on the political side of this topic, so I want to share an engineering perspective instead. At the core, solving any problem really follows the same pattern: first you figure out what the problem is, then you set up a way to measure it, come up with a possible solution, and test it against your measurement. If it works, keep going. If it doesn’t, try something else. The key is just running this loop quickly enough. This process applies no matter what kind of problem you’re tackling—engineering, politics, or social issues.

The U.S. has this loop at the company level. China has this loop at the local government level.

In China, the central government decides what the goals are and how they are measured, and then the local governments carry out the implementation. Local officials who perform well against those measures get promoted; those who don’t are demoted.

If the U.S. really wants to build this kind of feedback loop at the government level, voters need to judge election candidates based on their track record, not just campaign rhetoric. And for that to happen, the country needs a well-educated population with strong critical thinking skills.

I should also add that China has been operating this way for thousands of years. It’s not without problems, though—like the old saying goes: when a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure.

For example, GDP used to be the main measure of success. That pushed local governments to chase higher GDP numbers at all costs—regardless of whether the projects were actually practical or useful. This led to overbuilding, unnecessary construction, and even ghost towns.

Would you care to elaborate? Why does it have to follow the leader in manufacturing? shouldnt the world reserve currency also be the most available? If it’s not dollar then what’s the alternative? Yuan isn’t an open currency, impossible for it to replace dollars as the world reserve currency.

My advice: It’s probably not that you’ve lost interest in your project — it’s more likely that you don’t know what to do next and you’re defaulting to your comfort zone: building the product.

Here’s an easy way to test this: imagine your product suddenly takes off — it gets picked up on Reddit or Hacker News, you start getting lots of users and feedback. Would you still feel uninterested? Or would you find yourself energized, working late into the night to improve it?

That thought experiment reveals something important: there’s a gap between building a product and getting people to use it. You haven’t figured out how to bridge that gap yet, so you stay in “builder mode” — because it feels safe and familiar.

No. Tax is on the cost. If the good sells for $100 and cost $10. Then 10% additional tax increase the cost to $11. If the vendor decides to keep the same profit, then the price goes up by $1, which is 1%

I don’t buy the blanket statement that the consumer always pays the tariff. It depends on what alternative companies have. If a company can purchase the same clothing from Chinese, Vietnamese, or Mexican vendors, a tax on China only could make the Chinese vendors lower the price or risk losing the business.

However, a blanket tax on every country, regardless of available alternatives, would leave businesses with fewer options and make it more likely that the cost is passed on to consumers.

Why in 4 years they will go away? Is that assuming the new administration will reverse course? It’s my understanding that generally country don’t lower tariffs voluntarily. They are usually bargaining chips.

The idea that the US protects Taiwan from a possible Chinese invasion over chips is one of those things that sounds believable but really isn't going to happen.

From China’s perspective, the cost of war is much higher than the cost of developing these chips themselves. In the worst-case scenario, they would be 2-3 years behind the cutting edge, which is not mission-critical. Most electronics (civilian or military) don’t really need cutting-edge chips, and China has already proven that they don’t need the latest chips to be a significant AI competitor.

From the US’s perspective, if a war with China were to break out now, there are only three possible scenarios: 1. China takes Taiwan quickly. In this case, there would be nothing for US to defend, and the US would have to try to take Taiwan back militarily—unlikely to happen. 2. Stalemate. Taiwanese people fight bravely, and Chinese forces turn out to be weaker than expected. In this case, the US would be in a comfortable position to send aid and weapons to help Taiwan, prolonging the war to weaken China. With some luck, a regime change could happen without firing a shot. 3. Taiwan successfully defends itself, repels the Chinese invasion, and possibly even takes back some territory—an unlikely scenario, but this is the only one where the US would send troops to help defend Taiwan. If the US gets involved at this stage, it secures a sure win, puts a military base on the island, and further cements its role as the protector of taiwan.

If you believe the US will or should only act in its own interest, then its interest is to remain the only superpower. Rushing into a war on foreign turf and losing is the quickest way to cede the Asia-Pacific region to China. So, despite what politicians might have you believe, the US is not going to help defend Taiwan, no matter who is in the White House.

Their licenses are pretty expensive. Any good free open source alternatives?

This is so painful to watch. This kind of discussion should absolutely be behind closed doors to avoid the theatrics.

The risk of China taking Taiwan by force, unprovoked, in the near future is vastly overblown, in my opinion. Everyone involved, including China, prefers the status quo. If there’s one thing to know about war, it’s that it’s unpredictable. China hasn’t been involved in a war for decades, and while its military looks good on paper, its actual performance in a real war still unknown. Failing to win or even losing a war with Taiwan would mean saying goodbye to its global dominance ambitions, and weaken Xi's leadership.

The Chinese are strategic and patient. They just need to wait a few more years until they are able to blockade the entire island for long period of time. Then they can potentially take the island without firing a single shot. they don’t need to take on this kind of risk right now.

We spent so much time worrying about foreign adversaries. But if a collapse were to come, it won’t be because we are invaded by a foreign power, it would be because half of the people can’t stand the other half.

An AI arms race will be how we make sky net a reality.

If an enemy state gives AI autonomous control and gains massive combat effectiveness, it puts the pressure to other countries to do the same.

No one wants sky net. But if we continue the current path, painting the world as we vs them. I m fearful sky net will be what we get

or young folks are passionate, idealistic, lack real-world experience, and idolize heroes, which makes them perfect foot soldiers for carrying out tasks without questions.

nice work. i saw sometimes you break down long messages into multiple parts, is that a protocol thing(max characters)? Or did you do that purposely to troll spammers?

Ah. Thx for the break down.

Haven’t tried Trae. Is it objectively better than cursor? I felt this statement might be premature. US is still leading in software and AI space.

China didn’t ban U.S. apps. it maintains a policy that sets a high bar for foreign operators, such as requiring domestic servers, domestic partners legally responsible for operations, content access and moderation to meet local standards, etc.

U.S. apps and websites simply choose not to operate there due to these requirements.

The U.S. has been complaining about this for years, advocating for a free internet without censorship in the Chinese market. But now that Chinese apps have access to American data, we’ve begun implementing the same measures.

Data sovereignty — the idea that every country should protect and prevent its citizens’ data from foreign entities.

We never discussed this seriously before because we held a monopoly on it. For decades, other countries provided us with a direct feed of their data. Only recently have they begun to grasp the ramifications of that.

China never bought into that narrative. They have consistently upheld their data sovereignty policy, requiring foreign entities to host servers within their borders to operate, and that looks like the direction the rest of the world is heading.

I wish for an open world where data & communication flows freely, but it's unclear who can be trusted to wield that power.

Let’s be clear about one thing: it’s never about protecting the privacy of private citizens—that’s just the justification.

Social networking platforms are among the most effective tools for mass influence, second only to religion.

The U.S. has held a monopoly on this power, leveraging it to gather data on citizens worldwide and projecting our value systems onto others.

Banning TikTok is simply an effort by us to maintain that monopoly, and making sure a foreign adversary do not wield such power.

Look, when you do business in a country, you obey that countries law. If you think the law is backwards and incompatible with your business, you don’t operate there, this is what google, fb did. They CHOOSE to not operate in china because they are not able to meet the requirements.

TikTok has met all requirements to operate based on the us law. It still got banned.

That’s a big difference. If data security is a concern the country should have rules regulate how foreign companies handle its citizens data, and it should apply to all companies.

Constitution gives you the rights for these speech. Doesn’t make you immune to the consequences of these speech.

Here is the logic, if you allow tracking, we would show your more relevant ads, if you don’t allow, we will spam the shit out of you. Either way, you see tons of ads, but allow tracking, you see ads more relevant.

Of course that’s not how they word this. They framed it as a benefit,

Notice how it’s worded - allowing for better personalized ad experience - I bet when worded this way, a good percentage of people will think, of course I want the ads to be more related to me and click allow.

Curious is this using imagemagik for backend image generation? What about videos?

First of all, fb ad policy explicitly doesn’t allow selling fire arms.

https://m.facebook.com/policies/ads/prohibited_content/weapo...

If you are selling related stuff(belts, holster, vest, gun case etc), be prepared to have your fb ad account banned often(as the algo will likely (mis)-categorize you into selling weapons).

Advertisers in this space generally are very good at 1) cloaking, 2) renting or purchasing ad accounts.

both are against fb policy.

But in the end, as long as there is a positive ROI, and there is a way to circumventing the system, people will continue to do that. I don’t see how that’s fbs fault.

Incorrect, and that’s a common misconception. There are countries with way cheaper labor. China now has the manufacturing knowhow and eco system no other countries can compete. That’s it’s power

This is the same playbook amazon did - give investors a vision, convince them short term profit are less important than the eventual goal. Get the capital at a really really low cost, and then use these capital to build hard things, and crush competition.

Just because the ad placement is low quality (eg audience network) doesn’t mean they can’t produce a positive ROI. Keep in mind, Lower quality comes with a lower price, so it makes sense for some brands, and some products. The reason people dont get a positive return on low quality ad placement is that they often use the same ad, or adverse the same product as for the higher quality ad placement. These ads and product often needs to be tailored for that specific placement.