Good observation. If they are able to keep foreign AI out and stifle small startups with big regulatory upfront costs, they only compete with each other. And if they are all smart, they can keep their prices high and don't compete each other to death.
They certainly seem to be implying it. And not only that, disinformation narratives often to to emphasize domestic political troubles that fan the flames of skepticism against mainstream institutions, and their reply to a topic about Russia was to go straight to that particular well.
When the mainstream institutions are obviously divorced from reality ( Nordstream - "Russians did it themselves", or every mainstream news segment in spring 2022 starting with "unprovoked full scale invasion of Ukraine" where even a casual glance at numbers involved (~ 180000) pales in comparison with what US used in Iraq I or II), you don't need disinformation narratives to elicit skepticism against mainstream institutions. A bit of common sense is entirely sufficient.
One could even argue the mainstream institutions were involved in disinformation narratives (e.g., in the case of 40 beheaded babies or widespread systematic rape on Oct 7th: did not bother to check the facts before spreading it wide).
> Do you claim that Russia doesn't invest in disinformation campaigns against the West?
Maybe it do invest. But that has about zero effect. If Russian disinformation campaigns were working, they would work in Russia as well, but that's not happening.
My kids follow STEM here in Belgium, and there were multiple times when I thought "If only I could do those things when I was young".
At 12 years old, they get an Arduino and start programming in C. Then over the years they do all kinds of interesting things with it: build a car with controlled acceleration, build a tiny house with all kinds of sensors and controllers, monitor algae breeding.
When my son was 16, they brewed their own beer (Hey, it's Belgium and they can legally drink at 16 :D)
Now in the final year, they can propose their own projects. I heard previous years did things like create their own windmill and analyse the efficiency, electric generators in rain drainpipe, etc.
"On 24 May 1940, Leopold, having assumed command of the Belgian Army, met with his ministers for the final time. The ministers urged the king to leave the country with the government. Prime Minister Hubert Pierlot reminded him that capitulation was a decision for the Belgian government, not for the king, to make. The king indicated that he had decided to remain in Belgium with his troops, whatever the outcome. The ministers took this to mean that he would establish a new government under the direction of Hitler, potentially a treasonous act. Leopold thought that he might be seen as a deserter if he were to leave the country: "He was resolved to remain with his army and amidst his people so as to share their fate."[6] Leopold had long had a difficult and contentious relationship with his ministers, acting independently of government influence whenever possible, and seeking to circumvent and even limit the ministers' powers, while expanding his own."
Rewriting something from one language to another is not really the height of software development.
When you have an extensive testing suite, I would claim it's the ideal scenario for LLM's, next to crunching out small tools and MVP's.
Let's first see how it handles the architecture in a 1 year old project of 3 developers, before we make such claims as "the end of programming".
I love LLM's, they save me a lot of time and effort. But their autonomy degrades quickly when you keep adding context and complexity, which a medium codebase clearly has.
A prime minister visiting Russia on victory day, sure sounds like pro-Russia to me.
I know plenty of Slovaks, and you can divide them into 2 groups:
First group are disgusted that their government is pro-Russia.
Second group claims the Ukrainian government was "bombing the Donbas", and finds it normal that "Russia went to defend the Russian speaking population".
But sure, the second group probably consider themselves "neutral" and not "pro-Russia". That doesn't mean we all have to consider them as neutral, since they are deep into the Russian disinfo.
In the case of Slovakia, it's purely Russian misinformation that was able to capture a large part of the population, mainly older people. First anti-EU, then anti-vax, and now anti-Ukraine and anti-EU.
> Russian misinformation that was able to capture a large part of the population, mainly older people.
'Capturing' the population is worthless. Anti-immigration sentiment has 'captured' the UK, to the point that in every election since 1964, the public voted against immigration [1]. Yet every time they got increased immigration instead.
reply