There’s actually a typo, i wrote “relies or bullshit” instead of " on bullshit"

I disagree with you, links are not that long to share. It is a bit more time consuming obviously, but everyone can choose whether to read quickly or really dive in the sources. I see a lot of people doing it today on internet. I see a lot of people doing it in casual conversation (opening a book or internet to check smthg). It’s not evidence, it’s hints to avoid launching a whole discussion that entirely lies or bullshit (or not).

Here are some links I found about smuggled chips.

• Reuters : Deepseek said they used legally imported old and new nvidia chips (H800 and H20s). There are suspicions and investigations about illegal smuggling of banned from export nvidia chips, targeting directly Deepseek. One CEO of an american AI startup said it is likely Deepseek used smuggled chips.
• The Diplomat : exactly the same, citing directly Reuters. Adds that H800 (now banned from export) and H20s were designed by Nvidia specially for the chinese market. Adds that smuggling could go through Singapore, which leaped from 9% to 22% of Nvidia revenues in 2 years. Nvidia and Singapore representatives deny.
• Foxbusiness : same.

So it is likely there are smuggled chips in china if we believe this. Now to say they have been used by Deepseek and even more, that they have been decisive is still very unclear.

Youre talking about countries. I do not care abouy contries. Bombs do not protect people, guns do not protect people.

Killing peoples with guns in third world country to avoid killing with bombs in eu/na is not a win. Getting bombs or guns just temporarily deflects the violence on someone else. The day everyone has bombs, wars wont stop.

You cannot want a safe world for people and want bombs at the same time. It is only viable if you think abouy nations instead of people, but who cares?

I cannot agree with you more, and i’m very sad to see so much upvotes in favor of nuclear intensification Bombs do not protect from bombs, guns do not protect from guns

Im no expert at all, but I think it might be hallucination/coincidence, skew of training data, or more arbitrary options even : either the devs enforced that behaviour somewhere in prompts, either the user asked for something like “give me the answer as if you were a chinese official protecting national interests” and this ends up in the chain of thoughts.

That’s interesting, I thought there already were judgments in this direction.

For more details, french law has an article that says spouses mutually compel to live in partnership. (don’t know how to translate it best, “les époux s’obligent mutuellement à une communauté de vie”). This is a very unclear sentence, which has been considered by judges to imply that it requires spouses to live under the same roof and to have sex. I think i remember hearing of a ruling stating that in the case of a lesbian lady and an asexual man that got together to have a social facade and live their sexual lives separately, they still were “living in partnership” and that the absence of sex could not cancel their union, but maybe it was only stated once.

That was one part that disgusted me a lot when learning about french law, glad it’s changing for the better, hope it will change faster.

There is a pyramidal conception of rules in the france legal system, something like local regulation < regional regulation < decree < law < international law < constitution. So judgements in courts created by international laws are technically stronger than national judgments.

Also, the decisions of judges have no imperative power, but they are used by judges to solve future cases, and have a de facto big impact on the interpretation of laws. It’s called jurisprudence : to say it quickly, when a judge does not know how to handle an unclear law, they look at what other judges said before.

Another option I see is them being staying a long time in labs/hospitals, both for being helped getting back on tracks and being studied by scientists as this is a very rare and interesting case

From what I know and what Wikipedia tells, reactionary means ‘who wants to return to a previous social/political situation’. I’ve also seen it used a lot in anarchist and communist discussions, mainly as a word to describe people that want to bring back the system a revolution changed, or something that changed in society.

I see it as the other side of the ‘conservative’ coin : you are conservative until the society changes, then you are a reactionary if you want it to be ‘like it was before’

In my experience in France, the word mostly describes right wingers who fight against social progress : inclusivity, diversity, etc.

Upvoted cuz I like people who try to avoid manicheism.

To add to the nuances, some thinkers (mostly left libertarians) qualify leninism/maoism as State Capitalism . In this regard, the meme kinda works as “capitalism is the cause of these things” if you consider capitalism as a very broad term.

What if we switch the ‘economic impact of Treaty of Versailles’ for ‘economic impact of the Great Depression’ ? Then wouldn’t have a crisis in capitalism triggered a rise in fascism?

Plus, as we see today, many business owners join hard right to far right movement when they fear crisis might push people toward revolutionary left. I think that’s what is meant when saying nazism build upon capitalism defeat.

Well I mean it may depend. Where I worked one third of the crew was the vinemakers themselves, another third was their close family, and the last third was minimum wage workers. It was of course smaller vineyards than what the article is speaking about but for some cases it is indeed middle class vinemakers hand picking grapes.

Nonetheless, this does not make your conclusion false, worlds indeed runs on poverty labor.

Sent as a message !

I’ll send you both codes in a message so you can compare ;)

Sent as a message :D

Code sent as a private message ;)

I’ll send it to you as a message :)

Okay thanks for sharing your experience, it seems indeed a very good example of how bad it can be Thanks also for the explanation about the instance in the answer

For people saying it’s a weakness because it causes or is caused by censorship from the mods, are you directly experiencing it? If yes, on which instance?

I got involved in a few heated discussions with members, but I was never bothered by any moderator/admin. I’m not sure if this is due to my views (anarchism / libertarian communism) but I don’t think so since they are not the ones of the main instances I roam (.world which seems quite soc-dem to me and all the tankies one).

To me all of this seems like an overall positive thing : the lack of hardcore far right dudes is a big plus, and I don’t think the political views can really influence the quality and quantity of content you can propose otherwise (which is to my eyes why there is not that much people here). Like I don’t think rightwing people will flee from Lemmy because of the political thing, but like i think most people do: mostly because there is not that many people and therefore that many content to begin with. But there again, I never directly experienced or witnessed political censorship or exclusion, and it seems a common experience so i might not have the best point of view.

That’s an interesting posts succession