economics is far from a simple competition… things like game theory lead to monopolies being bad for everyone, and that’s what china wants in a lot of cases. the chinese government subsidises some of its industries dramatically so they can take over a global market and then slowly backs off the subsidies when they’ve killed their competition
it’s similar to microsoft’s embrace, extend, extinguish strategy
normalising words is still problematic - you never know who around will take it as “oh it’s okay to say then”
okay, but the US is kiiiinda terrible, but if the US loses here then china/russia/iran win…
so its not like the US just goes away; the US is replaced by full autocratic
do you have supermarket monopolies in the US though? it seems like you have heaps of choices
like there’s some big companies for sure, but they’re not really monopolies are they?
heck in australia we have a duopoly: cole’s and woolworths… we also have aldi and some independents, but they don’t really move the needle… point being we’re much closer to monopoly and still call it a duopoly
i think the term is important, because the solutions are different
and in the same way, perhaps stop saying “westerners”
many us had the same thought that it’s xenophobic bullshit… perhaps we all should stop arbitrarily grouping people into geographic groups and making sweeping generalisations
and saying that the USA is dumber than a donkey and implying that china is not is just fucking laughable… i’m aussie, so i have no horse in either race: our economy is almost entirely reliant on china and we rely on the USA for basically everything else, including protection from china… and yknow what? all cultures are fucking weird… stop being so god damn condescending. the only thing it proves is that you’ve never travelled enough, or that “different” makes you uncomfortable which makes you an incurable bigot
no; they all have trade-offs and that’s different… you can have trust less proof amongst semi-trusted parties like a consortium of banks: they don’t entirely trust each other, but trust each other enough to keep an eye on the other members of the consortium
there are plenty of situations like this that are non-public
i don’t think you understand how IT works… there will always be vulnerabilities… even the NSA probably has vulnerabilities… when found, these vulnerabilities need to be patched. i’m sure they’ll get their devices back; they just need to implement a fix
none of this is perfect, but shit happens and all we can aim to do is minimise the damage when it does happen
that’s not an alternative. i agree that’d be preferable, but given where the situation stands, what’s the concrete action to take to remedy the situation?
though i’m not an american so idk all your 40 whatever it is presidents but all the ones i recognise there are republicans and im pretty sure that if the ones there are real old then well… it’s a totally different party to what it was? it’s not a team - its politics after all; things change