

As fiction exists but describes things that may not exist, I think the answer is also yes.


As fiction exists but describes things that may not exist, I think the answer is also yes.


Don’t worry about it, most Liberals (note Conservatives are also Liberals) have been fed lies their entire lives to demonize countries like China, and also many people (not just Liberals) have a hard time separating the misuse of a tool from the tool itself (Capitalists use AI against humanity) and so for these two reasons I was already expecting to get down voted, but it is perfectly fine as I do not take it personally, when a challenge comes to a persons world view, a common defensive reaction is to lash out in some way.


That is why I’ve started using Deepseek as a replacement for searches, the proven tract record and successes of the Communist Party of China to improve people’s lives make tech out of China OVERWHELMINGLY more trust worthy then tech out of the blood soaked Capitalist Imperialist threat to all humanity that is the US ruling class (and those who currently serve them) (and the US itself for as long as it hasn’t yet overthrown the Capitalists (basically the Billionaires, and now also a F**king Trillionare.)) (it’s almost like I’m writing code lol, I should try to make my writing style more consistent or something)


While that might help at first, it cannot bring victory on it’s own, the tech will keep getting better, and even poisoning it provides training data that can be used to make it more resistant to poisoning in the future, for victory you must organize (such as with the PSL) learn theory that explains the nature of Capitalism such that how to defeat it can be understood (such as Marxism Leninism, which is how the People’s Republic of China manages to achieve so much against all odds) and prepare for a needed revolution (as the system was designed to keep Capitalists in power, making Reformist paths a useless sand trap AKA “if voting worked it’d be illegal”)
I think me and Ahmed gave the same answer, but with mine being indirect using an example, and Ahmed’s answer being direct, so maybe people had a harder time understanding Ahmed’s answer.