A few weeks ago China would rather shut it down than relinquish control. I wonder what they are being offered now to change their minds?

> China would rather shut it down than relinquish control

That's what I meant when I said 'Americans see Chinese as NPCs'

Chinese gov only forbidden ByteDance to export(sell) its algorithm, and pressure it due to nationalism

You guys say this like ByteDance is a department of CPC, it's not work like this

And, sincerely, Americans do need to think about what changed that made TikTok no longer a 'national security threat' now

12h ealier, it's a national security threat with votes by Democrats and Republicans, 12h later, it's just fine.

what changed?

They added a lot of censorship because there was too much wrong think happening there.

I don't know how much can be inferred from that VS brinkmanship. The louder and longer you protest that you are happy to pack up and leave, the higher the price to get you to stay.

>ByteDance, would retain a stake in the company, but data collection and software updates would be overseen by Oracle

A reasonable JV arrangement (like what PRC offers US platforms) - Trump wants TikTok US to be 50% US owned. 50% US owned =/= 0% PRC owned, which was what Biden and other PRC hawks previously wanted - to basically denationalize a PRC company from PRC.

Which frankly was retarded tier hubris that only US lawmakers makers high on American exceptionalism can make, and delulu Americans think is reasonable. That was never going to fly geopolitically because PRC would never let US normalize that kind of leverage - it's not about relinquishing control. PRC perfectly happy for US to censor the shit out of US TikTok because it only validates their internet model.

Trump as bad as business man as he is just made a not utterly stupid deal. US gets 50% with golden shares to turn TikTok into domestic US propaganda machine like other US platforms (same deal PRC offers to western platforms), PRC/Douyin gets whatever they currnetly have - it's still going to be fundamentally a PRC run company with local US office doing the filtering (censorship) and day to day in US market, despite eventual US propaganda that TikTok got "sold" to US - it's just under US version of PRC JV arrangement.

Are they really anti-china? Or are they just trying to shake down China for some cash?

There is now a broad consensus across the national security establishment and the leadership of both major political parties that China must be treated as an adversary. Attempts at constructive engagement failed so now we have to pivot to containment in Cold War 2. This is a strategic issue that transcends money.

Agreed. But the president's sudden 180 on the tiktok ban leaves me questioning his motives.

Depression is a common co-morbidity also.

probably as a result of all the systemic issues surrounding ADHD.

It's much simpler and more biomechanical than that.

ADHD at its core is a dopamine disorder. Effort without dopamine is extremely difficult in anyone, and ADHD makes it tough for these dopamine mechanisms to get going. Once that dopamine effect does get going, you're off to the races. That's the ADHD Hyperfocus effect you see.

But when you add in the modern quick dopamine fixes we've surrounded ourselves with—media, social media, processed foods, pornography, etc.—you've built a situation where ADHD individuals are prioritizing those activities over productive ones. This leads to a downward spiral: less productive action means fewer opportunities for future productive actions.

Lock into that mode for weeks at a time and you've got both situationally-supported and biochemical depression.

Not necessarily true.

They did studies and it turns out the kind of ADHD abilities would’ve been useful back in our berry finding days. ADHDers would pick all the berries they could see and then go off to find another bush, not bothering to finish picking all the berries. The neurotypicals would follow along, picking the berries the ADHDers didn’t care about.

All this made berry gathering more efficient.

> ADHD at its core is a dopamine disorder.

This is still merely hypothetical is it not? I have noticed people home in on dopamine, but no one ever mentions serotonin, glutamate, gaba, and all the other neurochemical systems.

I also thought the biochemical basis for depression has been completely thrown out, is that also not true?

Yeah, we don't understand nearly enough about the brain to have a very mechanistic view of ADHD. With so many different types on a spectrum, and sometimes symptoms being caused by things like physical trauma or infection, it is likely there are different possible mechanisms. However, it certainly appears like dopamine is highly involved, but noepinephrine also seems to be involved as well.

Medically, it is defined symptomatically, and not mechanistically.

It’s not that simple. The brain is a very complex system and once you get other components of your brain to a neurotypical baseline or even better ADHD is a gift.

Those regions being sensory motor cortex and prefrontal cortex. But simply its a system of networks and attention regulation.

Those networks can be trained and I have experienced it first hand by reversing engineering my own brain and training it beyond normal baseline. This training is called neurofeedback and it transformed my ADHD into a super power.

During my evaluation my ability to focus(was measured) was worse than the average ADHD person. Afterwards it was above even normal people.

I need don't even consider myself someone with ADHD and everything just seems to come together naturally. ( Deadlines, managing details, time management and planning- all prefrontal cortex) The networks in my brain have been training to switch normally, and hyper focusing is just focusing but on anything I really want.

It was the cure I’d been searching for my whole life and it actually worked.

I completely agree with this. It's hard to not feel like a failure, you don't belong, low motivation, etc. when other people constantly reinforce this idea with both their words and their actions.

I think a lot of this fuels the substance abuse issues in ADHD as well. I have always spent too much time playing video games, doom scrolling, etc.. It's all just an escape. But I think many do not understand -- I, and perhaps many others, escape from this world because I do not belong.

Treatments for ADHD are cute and all, but nothing I have tried has really moved the needle much. At least not for long. There is always a reversion to the mean, and this condition always wins in the end.

Does the 14th amendment count? Or only the first ten?

Anchor babies should not be a thing, so no I don't care if an illegal immigrant family with an anchor baby is deported. There is some debate as to whether the popular interpretation of the 14th Amendment is even correct to begin with, as it was obviously intended to grant citizenship to ex-slaves and not criminal aliens.

There is no debate, and framing it as such is disingenuous. The interpretation not “popular”, it’s been adjudicated in courts time and time again, for well over a hundred years, and there are basically no exceptions to the birthright clause of the amendment. Of course this doesn’t strictly guarantee the current Supreme Court will follow precedent, but given the fact it’s part of the constitution and not just a law, and that it’s been in multiple court cases with a lot of precedent, I assume they would reject that interpretation and make it clear to change it requires another amendment, which is extremely unlikely in the current government.

A child born in the USA is not a "criminal alien" regardless of the circumstances of their birth. There is no federal criminal law against being born. The parents could be legally classified as criminal aliens in some cases but that has no bearing on the child as a legally separate person.

And people wonder why the birth rate is down when children are demonized this much.

Was there a rise in sexual abuse in the 20th century? Or did we just shine more light on an ongoing problem?

Yeah this is a major issue. The first study that reports a link between some specific thing and health pollutes the data for all follow-up studies, because the folks that care the most about their health are going to change their behavior based on it. So after that you will always see a correlation with all the other things that have been reported to be healthy.

It might be useful information for other researchers to try to figure it what is actually going on, but probably not. And it is not at all useful for you and I trying to make sense of what we should eat.

But finding correlations is only the first and easiest step in determining causation. And almost nobody continues with the hard work that follows. So we have tons of studies showing correlations one way or the other, and tons of conflicting studies. And we are apparently satisfied with this. The state of nutrition research is abysmal.

Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. The courts will decide.

> Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. The courts will decide.

This offhandedly seems to dismiss the cost of achieving legal clarity for using a book - a cost that will far eclipse the cost of the book itself.

In that light, it seems like an underweighted statement.

What they will decide is that it is simultaneously not piracy because it is not read by a human and not copyright infringement because its just like a human learning by reading a book

Those are both copyright infringement, sice we already have MAI Systems Corp. v. Peak Computer, Inc.

I'd like to see them try to argue Cartoon Network, LP v. CSC Holdings, Inc. applies to their corpus.

I really hope you'll be right -

But the first one is a human using things. Its big guy vs little guy.

The prescident is there, google already "reads" every page in the internet and injests it into its systems and has for decades and has survived lawsuits to do so.

How does MAI Systems Corp v. Peak Computer, InC c apply here, at all?

Peak was using MAI operating system directly by live booting it without their permission.

Antivirus and security companies don't need licenses to scan copyrighted materials to look for threats or vulnerabilities.

AI similarly is not executing, deploying, reselling or redistributing the copyrighted material. It's using the data to build a model. Security software distills the down data more, but it's still the same principle.

Yes but... the externalities are really expensive, and are going to be paid by somebody. It's a hidden cost

Agreed, but you only tend to accept that when the other needs in that famous pyramid are taken care of.

Regulation that increases cost of living is only going to cause resentment and we already see where that leads to.

Can't do it with feel good statements, you need the authorities to support/push towards cheaper electricity. Like the Denmark poster said elsewhere on this thread. Is this going to happen globally? I somehow don't think so...

China is pushing hard; EU is pushing less hard but a little; only the US (says) they're going to lag behind these next few years.

America has vast natural gas reserves there's no need to invest.

If your country has to import oil and gas there is a financial reason to change.

What about in the case of a township offering "natural gas"/methane that would ordinarily be lost to the atmosphere anyway? Isn't it better to burn it rather than leave it as is? Methane is pretty awful stuff in terms of the greenhouse effect.