Most probably what went on was…
DoW decided to go with OpenAI for military stuff and Anthropic for covert surveillance.
So they are now giving a PR boost to Anthropic, to increase market permeation and increase their short term effectiveness.

???
Of course they do.
I don’t see your point.

Except that they neither identify as socialists, nor do they care about the other’s *-ism.
So you see, one neither needs to be any *-ist nor requires to accept all terms of any group, to be able to have +ive interactions with them. The only time that is required, is when it is an extremist group.

They made high quality software…
Until they got a profit incentive.

Problem is, you are not my colleague or my boss or similar people. You are someone I might not even end up interacting IRL.

Most people will just ignore the people slowly amassing power because they tend to be discreet enough to not raise too many alarms and the same thing might look like just incompetence unless one is looking closely enough.
Then there will be people who just find it easier to de-escalate situations, no matter what the outcome, that end up helping the malicious ones get out unscathed. Cover-ups follow.

And the power-hungry will mostly be found in places of power. Whether you interact with them directly, depends upon where you end up working.

The most hard working and benevolent people I have seen, are coincidentally also those who tell you to care about yourself.
They won’t preach teamwork or communality, but that comes naturally to them. They won’t ask you to help others, but will help with what they are good at and not treat it as a favour. They don’t bid you to be helpful, but enable you to get to a place where you can be helpful. Also, they won’t act like they overtly care about you.

It was very hard to get them to bend the knee.
They were terrible at giving US free stuff.

I suppose that’s what they meant by “liberation”.

It’s what the init system goes to, to do the real work.

For example, a Copper mine owner neither physically mines the copper, and (living thousands of miles away) likely delegates day-to-day operations to a hired manager.

And while they try validating their position with, “I take all the risks”, they would also, transfer all the damage to the workers at the drop of a hat, then lobby the Government to undo their losses at the cost of everyone else giving power to the Government.

you find yourself in the latter, well then you’re probably a bootlicker

Considering how I have seen people claiming to be from the former camp expecting bootlickers, I’d say that assumption doesn’t work out well in real life.

Those who try preaching “We are stronger together” and “according to their ability” are most of the times the same who would damn everyone when they find the perfect time, while also using the same words to make others give them a hierarchical position.
And in the end, you still have the players get power while the workers get exploited and their voices shut down.

Like, socialism is, and should be a constant revolutionary project, not just a static position.

If you try to put it that way, that then again opens it for others to add/remove as they feel like.
While I understand that socialism is not some hard program that can exactly apply to every scenario, there has to be some tenets of it that are defended well, to prevent a malicious actor from uprooting its base.

My personal solution is simply that I don’t subscribe to any *-ism and don’t group myself with anything even if it tends to provide similar solutions in the current scenario, simply because in some other one, the group’s solution might end up greatly differing from what I would consider acceptable.

no.
I can use some GIMP, if I required that.

And China will only call it “resolvable” as long as the resolution ends up with them getting more area.

a few hundred acres

It started with a few metres in some cases and has been going on at multiple fronts.
Perhaps PRC needs to stop expecting people to forget the past and start noticing how they contradict their own self.
The tensions have been created by PRC’s “an inch a day” tactics, which I honestly see as nothing more than petty (and I am saying this, knowing full well than PRC would want to call India “petty”, to help them get more fake points).

For Nepal

And if it really was just about a “few hundred acres” and PRC really worked with a Socialist philosophy, then they would:
a) Not really need to worry about Nepal (a pretty small country with hardly any military power) being any sort of a threat that would require putting effort to take a small amount of land. b) Consider how the small amount of land would hardly make a difference to the people of China, while it would make a big difference to a country with was lesser land than China.

And that is where the inconsistency I talk about, comes in place.

Nepal is an otherwise docile country and I am pretty confident they would have been happy to have partial open borders with some kind of trade treaties in that area.

As such, while you try to play it down by calling it “contentious”, Nepal was trying to hide any such transfer or annexation, fearing what exactly? If it were really fairly claimed, there wouldn’t be a real reason for that, no?

developmental terms

No, I am not at all calling China’s capabilities low in terms of creating a war machine.

I am talking in terms of how quality of life has been affected by either of them in places which both countries are calling as their own (see my points in the above comment). While China tries to call Arunachal Pradesh and parts of J&K and its people as under itself, India is what sends the disaster relief resources, whereas China considers blocking natural resources to try and increase discontent of the people living in those areas.

China took longer than India to even admit the increasing air-quality problems in high pollution states,^[1] which shows me that the govt. doesn’t like admitting facts. And personally, I am fine working with people who fail a lot, as long as they are consistent in communication and don’t try mixing lies into reports. Because trustability is an important part of any relationship, which also applies to governments.^[2]

And I am not even going to point out the actual quality of buildings that you might have been a part of your metrics, simply because I expect enough people to have pointed those (and other similar conditions out to you).
While Indian buildings aren’t particularly great either, I am in a 10+ year old building which was not designed for earthquakes and has still not cracked (much less collapsed into a death trap) despite multiple of those.

Then comes the destruction of values over the years. China has had a rich culture of thousands of years and any such civilisation develops values and traditions that are conductive to longevity.
But the recent values shown by adults (not even children) from China has indicated an erosion of older values that were developed over the centuries in China. This is not something that happens easily without intervention from higher powers (and I am inclined to think it was the govt, unless you know of any other power that might have to gain from activities that cause this side-effect).
While there has been quite a lot of food adulteration problems in India, there are some lines that people would not cross. Specially the working class (who actually care about values unlike the business class) would never. But the normal people that seem to come out of China to set examples, don’t seem to be doing any good for its reputation.

I don’t have a solution for others.
Only one that I decided for myself and then applied it.
You gotta find your own balance point for how much you care about correctness and how much you are fine being led astray by “leaders” in turn for likeability and easy conversations.

I understand that that is not what Socialism actually means.
People who thought of the system weren’t idiots.

a way of smearing socialism

That’s the problem.
It is pretty easy to smear any *-ism or honestly any buzzword.

See what’s happening with the word AI.
Some scientists use a very specialised model to make an actual +ive impact and everyone says “AI is great!” and use that to drive funding for destabilising the technology industry/market.

Those who like to irresponsibly control people, will use buzzwords to attract people into groups and then use them to further an unrelated agenda by slowly drifting away from everything the word once stood for.
This is essentially the history we know of: under the names of gods of religions, of languages, and then ideologies and regimes.
In the end, all of them go to help those who will control people without caring about how they use them.

Hi, I added to my comment. Please check

Nepal

Why did the British not colonise Nepal

Detaining citizen in Shanghai, if it’s Chinese citizen, why need VISA? If it’s an Indian citizen, why detain?

Forget British, forget military occupation. What decides who is worthy of controlling a place?
I believe, one that is there during hard times 2 3. PDF

And considering how China tried to cut off downstream from Tsang Po, even if I were to assume China controlled all of Indian territory, that act doesn’t make Chinese government particularly desirable. And if we consider that China doesn’t control said territory, then that makes China a bad neighbour at best and an incompetent governor at worst.

See, I am not very patriotic. I am fine with whatever the name of my country is. But the difference between how the land resources are controlled and distributed over the years, make me seem like China will end up being a worse Central Govt. than India (which isn’t particularly great already), for the given territory.