Usually "true capitalism" means one of two things:
1. Capitalism where there is no government or regulatory interference, and the "invisible hand of the free market" produces some kind of utopian society based purely on every business abiding by rules enforced by no one, where somehow corporations don't take advantage of workers they way they do now despite there being no laws against it.
2. The same thing but sarcastically because it's obvious that that system would be demonstrably worse than the restricted version of capitalism that we have now.
The "invisible hand of the free market" works only, if you have many market participants competing one against another. When a participant wins the competition you get monopoly, when multiple participants collude you get oligopoly, or cartel. Market can not solve this.
Yes, which means that we can easily see that capitalism does not optimize for a better world or a more practical market or a better product, but instead optimizes for extracting the maximum wealth possible from the market and consolidating it as much as possible.
Where does capitalism mandate corruption? Yes, it is not realistic to assume there is no corruption, but capitalism in and by itself does not mandate corruption.
Obviously this all falls apart when capitalism can buy legislation. We are seeing how the USA is currently eroded by a few oligarchs.
They're not saying it 'mandates' it as law, but that the systematic incentives inevitably lead to corruption. The ability to buy government is irrelevant - this is just the easiest method right now of converting money into power. If there was no government to buy, private business would execute that conversion themselves by ruling over people and enforcing their wishes directly.
"capitalism" was meant to harness the greed in men- they're self-assembling groups on mostly level playing fields, and the people vote during every purchase. The more votes they get, the more opportunities to expand. Only when the people fail to choose wisely is a governmental body supposed to come in and help "regulate". The other option is the government decides from on-high how things should work, and you'd better hope that what got them to power was good. Then these people need to be wizards at allocating labor, research, and benefits.
And the amount of votes someone gets is proportional to the votes they previously received, so the best vote-getters end up having all of the votes to cast between each other, and everyone else ends up with zero votes.
Every single on of those answers I've seen _says_ they did decode it, but each and every one of them only found the decoy message without even realizing it.
Which is probably a case of the human prompting the AI only being able to see the decoy message, so they think the AI was able to read it because it matches what they can see.
But it does make sense. You probably looked up where you're going before entering the car on your phone. You probably want to hear the same music or podcasts as on you phone. Do you really want the car to have separate internet connection, and login for every app?
Also you need to connect the phone anyway if you want hands free calling.
The point they're making is that it's hard to find purely European alternatives. Part of the problem is that companies don't advertise when they somehow still depend on American infra.
Does it need to be infra only? Is there also a risk by using go/rust/java etc? Like some of those projects are hosted on US sites? During Iran conflict access to US sites was cut (GitHub/NPM/Maven etc is hosted on US entities). To be really independent would mean much more I guess. Even languages who were invented in Europe are mostly dependent on US entities.
Believe it or not, the eu is not one single entity with one undivided goal. As is perfectly well demonstrated by chatcontrol being proposed by one side and continually struck down by the other.
Nuclear is too expensive and takes to long. We can't afford to waste the resources that could go into a fully green grid in a couple of years taking decades building a fraction of that capacity as nuclear.
240W max is very little when it comes to hearing up water, and most powerbanks don't even do more than 100W output. That's more in the range of those swappable tool batteries.
