You could make so many military datacenters with that. Then they could make their own AI and call it PatriotGPT, it'd be a very strong & powerful use of funds.
Prob bc they're not Palestinian yeah? I'm sure you'd see lots of Palestinian libs if Gaza had the socio-material conditions for it (i.e not being bombed by Zionists every 5s).
To be clear I'm mainly referring to African countries, though there are others too. Any country that isn't presently industrialised will be prevented from developing their own industrial capacity by their Chinese competition (assuming the prices are correctly fixed). In general I think it's bad because the lack of internationally dispersed manufacturing ownership contributes to unequal power relations between nations (i.e. imperialism and neocolonialism). A highly protected world-factory in China seems to present a viable model for world hegemony that could replace the financialist model of the United States. Both are bad.
The IMF says whatever random shit benefits their consituents. Sometimes that's also morally right, but usually not. If you're gonna take a braindead position against them for signalling reasons then fair enough, but the fact that you can't even come up with a basic reason why they're wrong should clue you in.
This is a pretty standard orphan-crushing manuever and I think both sides are kinda cringe. It is what it is.
This is a really interesting point. It seems to suggest that the self-organising property of markets isn't just from supply & demand, but also requires some other conditions (that demand is widely distributed politically? or in space & time?) and that any market with a sufficiently wealthy actor loses its predictive power, because they can destroy those conditions whenever it benefits them.
Doesn't even seem to be related to the fact that they had exclusive purchase rights. Lacking that, you could buy far in the future after everyone else has put in their orders.
the porn guy