No it means that perhaps the US should finally start looking at itself instead of just asserting that it doesn't need to because China.
That doesn't mean China should not be criticized. But to me it's clear that the China blame game is not about a genuine concern for Chinese people or its neighbors, it's about trying to keep it down because China should never dared to rise in the first place.
Anglo Saxons and maybe the French should be in charge and the rest should be resource colonies. It very much feels like that Western mentality is still there.
> No it means that perhaps the US should finally start looking at itself instead of just asserting that it doesn't need to because China.
Agreed, the US definitely needs to do some introspection to sort out its own shit (and stop spraying it on everyone else).
However, that does not mean that China gets a pass. Fundamentally, the Chinese model of governance does not protect the individual. For all its faults, the US model is based upon the idea of individual liberty, which acts as a touchstone and allows it to self-correct whenever it goes to far in the wrong direction. That's something the Chinese model does not do, and means that, short of a revolution, it will continue to be an authoritarian state with all of the malignant features that entails.
> Fundamentally, the Chinese model of governance does not protect the individual. For all its faults, the US model is based upon the idea of individual liberty
Look, am not here to defend the Chinese model but I find it interesting how convinced you seem that individualism is the right model for everyone.
While I would generally agree with you, I have spoken to many from poorer countries who say that they prefer to trade some individualism for a steady hand of economic development and lifting the population from poverty. That is the Chinese model.
These people would argue that they can reclaim more and more individual freedom as the country gets richer and more self confident.
I am not saying they are right, but looking at a nominal democracy like India and a nominal autocracy like China, I know which government works better as far as raising the living standards of its population and it's not the Indian one.
My hope is that China will continue to liberalize on its own. Forcing it will likely only reverse the gains.
Individualism also leads to the sort of healthcare system the US had or Skid Row. So it's not all roses.
The best managers I've seen would turn this situation into a headcount request.
The problem is leadership has priorities 1-5. Your team works on 1-3, but the PM keeps getting hassled about 4 and 5, so they look for levers to get them to happen.
In this situation, the PM scrounged up headcount from elsewhere, but if you present the option of adding headcount to the existing team, then you create a more harmonious option of getting these lower priorities accomplished.
Of course, this guy was taken fully by surprise by the suggestion. It's much harder to present a better option after the fact, and I agree that letting leadership feel the consequences of its decisions is a reasonable thing to do in this case.
Is there something mass-produced that's flexible and consistent like gridfinity? As a non 3d printer owner, I've been looking for something I can just buy that would work.
Have you tried it in a private window? Search temu, amazon, aliexpress etc for the term I mentioned above. There are several Chinese vendors, so I won't give a brand. They are a set of boxes, a small square, one twice as long etc
Maybe it's time to do pair agentic engineering? Have two engineers at the screen, writing the prompts together, and deciding how to verify the results.
In MCP setups you do give the agent the full description of what the tool can do, but I don't see why you couldn't do the same for executables. Something like injecting `tool_exe --agent-usage` into the prompt at startup.
Great article otherwise. I've been wondering why people are so zealous about MCP vs executable tools, and it looks like it's just tradeoffs between implementation differences to me.
Yes, sites should support a NoAds header that agents can provide, which ensures that the site doesn't provide any ads that the agent could accidentally click on.
The site would then be providing information to the AI, without and means of generating revenue to keep going. Where is the incentive for commercial sites to play this game?
This came up years ago with the Google Answer Box. People were pretty upset that Google wasn’t sending people to the actual websites anymore and just scraping the relevant content. It was seen stealing potential ad revenue from the author who did the work to put the information out on the internet.
I haven’t heard a lot of talk about out about this with LLM, even though they are like the Google Answer Box on steroids. What I’ve heard more is the general talk of IP theft during training.
When people complain about housing prices being too high, this is what I usually point them to. There are _a lot_ of boxes to tick, some of those boxes are critical, some are not so much. Some are severely punished, some are not so much. Some have extremely high costs and are a PITA, some not so much.
reply