Not exactly misfired, the title is somewhat clickbaity, 5 diplomats pointed to several aspects of difficulties with Ceta - nobody really "rebuffed" anything. The article is also somewhat hostile to the EU in general, is that a common notion on the FT?
Because Iran is a member of BRICS and BRICS establishes its own payment system as an alternative to SWIFT: https://observerdiplomat.com/brics-officially-announces-fina... on top of which they have digital payment systems with globally the most users - all of that bypassing US banks, so that the US no longer has a means to control/sanction trade and payments.
TL;DR the world is leaving the premises where the US unilaterally decides which population should starve.
You say that, but then when you look around in reality it's not true. Nobody is using an alternative payment system, nor does it have the most users. Even if it did, having the most users isn't the same as having the most money.
> TL;DR the world is leaving the premises where the US unilaterally decides which population should starve.
They're not. The US doesn't unilaterally decide to starve a population. Dream on.
The Chinese government does not concern itself with American AI, they have just reached an agreement with the BRICS members:
the BRICS countries have been developing initiatives focused on the ethical governance of this technology, joint industrial development, and the formation of independent technological alliances.
you will face criminal and financial penalties for damages caused.
No you won't. The US president, yesterday:
U.S. President Donald Trump on Sunday likened critics of artificial intelligence to "very negative forces" bringing up scenarios that will not happen, and said he wanted to make sure that the U.S. remains the industry leader.
"We're leading China in AI. We're the most sophisticated country in the world, and frankly I want to keep it that way because whoever wins AI wins," Trump told reporters at his Ireland golf course, when asked if the AI industry should slow down or be more regulated.
He's right and I don't even like the guy. More importantly tho, painting China as "The Bad Guy" who has to be supressed at all cost until Dario feels he has a save advantage is a surefire way to minimise Chinese willingness to cooperation. Meanwhile, at the BRICS summit in Delhi, Xi Jinping proposed a cooperation and accompanying regulation on AI among the BRICS states and it was unanimously accepted.
the only dangers with the current technology is a) massive loss of employment, b) deployment by humans to control critical infrastructure that LLMs shouldn’t be in control of.
Can we look at a possible economic disaster scenario for a brief second?
Bankers for OpenAI and Anthropic are reportedly seeking an investment-grade credit rating after their potential initial public offerings (IPOs) to cut down borrowing costs for their ambitious AI projects.
The companies' bankers from Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs have been in talks with credit rating agencies. The goal is to tap into the $11.7 trillion corporate bond market post-IPO, the Financial Times reported on Tuesday.
Yes, but I don't feel that counts as a danger of the technology - that's a danger of these escalating, unicorn based investments that have to make bigger and bigger bets to survive until the bets as big as the US whole economy. The issues with our financial markets are a whole other set of concerns, but it's not inherently "about" AI. AI is just a vehicle for these smash and grab shenanigans.
Example 8: like in this comment https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49619884 but isolate synchronised megahack on banking that adds one more zero to the US debt and all dependent systems and banking during runtime. Let the world's financial system take it from there.
There has been a big problem with migrants in the syrian civil war, most of which are gone again.
Without immigrants the ageing German population has no chance to keep their social safety net and as we see in the US, even when the social safety net is significantly reduced, the immigrant scarecrow will still have the desired effect for the populists because the immigrants are not the problem, they make, however a phenomenal scapegoat and will always appeal to the general populace. In consequence, focussing solely on immigration won't solve the fundamental problems and certainly won't help when the first waves of hungry climate refugees march north.
The consequences are border tightening and rearming and repopulating the military and marching confidently in the completely wrong direction. Dialog is dead and so is diplomacy.
Re-establish communication, not twitter. Collaborate on a wide front, analyse the data, compile potential solutions, discuss them, etablish them. Talk to Russia, talk to Ukraine, Defang NATO or abolish it. Talk to Iran. Stop the US propagating pseudo diplomacy via Kushner and send real diplomats. Look to invest in R&D for recycling techniques, carbon sequestering, substitutes for plastics, redirect military funding to massively expand renewable energy. Close all European borders the next time the US starts a war. There is so much to do.
They want to deport undocumented migrants and remigrate certain refugee groups, such as Ukrainians.
No. They want an ethnical homogeneous country, hence their remigration institute. Feel free to educate yourself on the institutes own website: https://www.remigration-institute.com/
Anyways here's an archived link https://archive.is/RtfFb
reply