• 27 Posts
  • 1.59K Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 5th, 2023

help-circle
rss





  • Reading this quote from wiki:

    After the XX Congress, in an ultra-narrow circle of our closest friends and associates, we often discussed the problems of democratization of the country and society. We chose a simple – like a sledgehammer – method of propagating the “ideas” of late Lenin. A group of true, not imaginary reformers developed (of course, orally) the following plan: to strike with the authority of Lenin at Stalin, at Stalinism. And then, if successful, – to strike with Plekhanov and Social Democracy – at Lenin, and then – with liberalism and “moral socialism” – at revolutionarism in general … The Soviet totalitarian regime could be destroyed only through glasnost and totalitarian party discipline, while hiding behind the interests of improving socialism. […] Looking back, I can proudly say that a clever, but very simple tactic – the mechanisms of totalitarianism against the system of totalitarianism – has worked.

    Especially this part - “and then – with liberalism and ‘moral socialism’ – at revolutionarism in general” - it makes it sound like at least this guy (Yakovlev) wanted to move away from economic socialism altogether. Am I reading this right? Is it taken out of some context in which it has a different meaning? I’m asking in case you’ve read more about the topic. If you haven’t, that’s alright.





  • AI can absolutely increase productivity in manufacturing. Not the generative AI bullshit, but computer vision for any processes that require visual inspection, AI models for some optimization problems like optimally packing hardware IPs on a silicon die, and so on. Specific tasks that can be solved by purpose-built models.

    If AI software, hardware and developers are abundant enough, you’d see a lot of integration done by factories all over the place. It seems like China is trying to create this abundance.



  • I get what you’re saying but to me this act seems completely consistent with the standard Democrat mo of not taking action when it really matters, while acting when it doesn’t. The mo that creates the impression of doing things by only doing an insufficient amount. Case in point - Booker’s action did not take place a week ago during the CR vote. Doing it then would have really mattered. If it did, I’d have been shocked. We discussed this with some friends when the rumor came down that Chuck is going to vote for the bill. So now I can’t shake the feeling this act is just meant to paper over that inaction which got many Democrat voters very angry at the party.