hunglee2

13 ms·

271.
by hunglee2 1y ago
What does this mean for companies who have actually paid the tariffs? Presumably they have the right to sue for reimbursement, as well as perhaps costs incurred as a result of the now illegal tariff from US Gov. Also presumably, a business
272.
by hunglee2 1y ago
the impulse of successive US governments is 'to hurt China', which manifest in policies which ostensibly appear to do this, but are more likely to the hurt the US. Chip sanctions might be a good example - banning GPU to slow down
273.
The EU Startup and Scaleup Strategy(research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu)
17 points by hunglee2 1y ago|1 comments
274.
by hunglee2 1y ago
What is good for capitalists is not good for national security. NVIDIA are doing what they can to stay within the letter of the regulations, but each time Chinese companies innovate around the limitations, US Gov shifts the goalpost in orde
275.
The State of AI in Enterprise 2025(cloud.app.box.com)
1 points by hunglee2 1y ago|0 comments
276.
by hunglee2 1y ago
I guess the irony of scanning social media posts for 'un-American' content is entirely lost here. Still, information control is essential for public order and national security.
277.
Are referred candidates more likely to get hired?(ashbyhq.com)
1 points by hunglee2 1y ago|1 comments
278.
by hunglee2 1y ago
We don't really have a solution here because incentives are misaligned at the level of company vs society. Companies have no inherent incentive to hire human beings - we are a means to the only end of maximising profit. Should a better
279.
by hunglee2 1y ago
Variable reward / penalties were practically impossible then, perfectly possible today. Right now democracy is 'voting without responsibility'. Btw I never said 'not giving Americans Trump' - what I am saying US sty
280.
by hunglee2 1y ago
agree in sentiment, but this is not what is actually happening. the optimal political system would variably reward / penalise voters based on their voting behaviour, not aggregate all voters (and non-voters for that matter) and apply t
281.
by hunglee2 1y ago
I'm not sure how this is news - Trump has put America up for sale, with himself as the gatekeeper to the goods. You can't really blame the foreign actors anymore, they would be negligent in their own national interests if they did
282.
by hunglee2 1y ago
if not, then we at least need indigenous social networks, rather than ones controlled by foreign states. Dependency on the US internet was cool for a long while but its national security priority for every country to run their own, walled o
283.
by hunglee2 1y ago
it's pretty clear that voting for leaders is a bad idea - Trump 2.0 should be laying this aspect of democracy fully to rest. What we need is a form of governance which is firstly competent, secondly aligned to the interests of the coun
284.
The Hollowing of Myth(warwickpowell.substack.com)
4 points by hunglee2 1y ago|0 comments
285.
by hunglee2 1y ago
yes - democrat failure to destroy Trump has now left them terrified to try again. That said, the ones who are failing to oppose are the Republicans, who can see equally well how damaging Trump 2.0 is to US institutions. It's all headin
286.
by hunglee2 1y ago
Trump is a classic bully so you basically need to face him down - any appeasement will simply earn his (justified) contempt, and he'll double down. China showed the way on Trump Tariff War 2.0 - no k1ssing 8ss, no call, no nonsense - j
287.
by hunglee2 1y ago
bamboo scaffolding might be one of those examples of where a superior local solution gets replaced by an inferior, yet more scalable generalisable solution. Bamboo is organic, therefore non-standard, therefore harder to track, measure, quan
288.
WTO IMF Tariff Tracker(ttd.wto.org)
3 points by hunglee2 1y ago|0 comments
289.
by hunglee2 1y ago
yes indeed, tomorrow's history already being written today. None of the words in the preceding sentence are metaphorical!
290.
by hunglee2 1y ago
controlling the information environment is essential for public order and national security - we are reaching global consensus on this, US in particular moving swiftly in the direction pioneered by the PRC
291.
Mobley vs. Workday Inc 2025 [pdf](s3.documentcloud.org)
1 points by hunglee2 1y ago|0 comments
292.
by hunglee2 1y ago
Great Firewall of Canada is essential for sovereignty
293.
by hunglee2 1y ago
a significant percentage of the US / China 'trade deficit' is actually from US multinationals who have set up shop in China to export into the US. 'China' isn't the one making the margin on this, it is the US M
294.
by hunglee2 1y ago
China doesn't have a leadership problem atm, though certainly has had its fair share of anti-intellectual leaders. Trump's actions are very familiar to Chinese people, especially ones who have been educated on the excesses of Maoi
295.
Robots, Small Models, and RL with DeepSeek Alumnus Zihan Wang [video](youtube.com)
1 points by hunglee2 1y ago|0 comments
296.
by hunglee2 1y ago
being smarter doesn't always lead to better decision making - many people overly intellectualise a problem and fail to move to action. Trump is definitely action oriented, a lot of it really dumb, but it does alter the external conditi
297.
by hunglee2 1y ago
fair observation
298.
by hunglee2 1y ago
banning Harvard from enrolling international students is a pretty clear signal to elite intellectual capital that the US is no longer the obvious place to study. Trump 2.0 is fascinating social experiment - can reducing aggregate brainpower
299.
Founders: Stop reimbursing your VC's legal fees(auren.substack.com)
2 points by hunglee2 1y ago|0 comments
300.
by hunglee2 1y ago
sad that you're being downvoted here, very clear that the US investment into society is low in relative terms. In fact, doing so in considered 'socialism' and widely condemned by almost all the political establishment.

More ›