Oh no! Anyway…

American companies exist to maximize shareholder value. Remember that. There is no company, doing anything, for the better of the world or humanity. At least not as the primary motivation.

They don’t need any government assistance, they just need to take the millions they pay out to stakeholders, and invest them into automation. The money is there, just being handed out to a few people. Why should the government pay for something that sits on tons of cash but won’t use it?

Expensive is not a problem it it’s followed by the appropriate quality. Also, US should be far more able to use tech to automate and make efficient, same as China can use cheap labour. In the end, a robot is a one-time fee, doesn’t get sick, and can work 24/7, easy and fast to learn new processes. Long term a robot will always outpeform a human.

Yes, but nobody ever expected Germany to be quick and adapt. Germany does not do that in general. It takes something that exists, perfects it, and then sells the perfection of the existing thing, ideally until really not a single person on the world needs it anymore. US on the other hand, has the reputation where innovation begins and does wonders. I am asking myself, where is the innovation in their autoindustry? Last thing was actually Tesla itself, when they started producing first electric cars.

It is the same situation, but the expectation is completely opposite.

American manufacturing seems very incapable of change. If things worked this way for decades, why change it? Meanwhile the world moved on and they ask themselves why doesn’t anyone wanna buy american…?

This only shows that AI can’t be trusted because the same AI can five you different answers to the same question, depending on the owner and how it’s instructed. It doesn’t give answers, it goves narratives and opinions. Classic search was at least simple keyword matching, it was either a hit or a miss, but the user decides in the end, what will his takeaway be from the results.

Because it doesn’t have encryption by default, and encryption is not a setting in many public providers + if security works, then only within a single provider, not between them.

Because how many attackers are actually interested in attacking fax? Like… have you ever heard of hackers hacking physical mail? It’s to old for people to care, and “people not caring” is implicitely secure by ignorance.

If you filter out only what you like, you are left with perhaps 1% of music.

Fax, still in official use in Germany.

I understand, but the shift in user behaviour is significant and I think websites are not taking it into account. If the users move more and more to AI, and since Google introduced AI mode it’s only a question of time until it becomes the default, we will see more and more of what we thing are AI crawlers and less and less organic users.

AI seems to be the new middleman between you and the user, and if you block the middleman, you block the user. For people with hobby websites or established sites it may make sense because people either know of them, or getting more exposure is not a wish or requirement, but for everyone else, it will be painful.

I just realized an interesting thing - if I use Gemini, and tell it to do deep research, it actually goes to the websites it knows/finds, and looks up the content to provide up-to-date answers. So, some of those AI crawlers are actually not crawlers, but actual users who just use AI instead of coming directly to the site.

Soo… blocking AI completely could also potentially reduce exposure, especially as more and more people use AI to basically do searches instead of browsing themselves. That would also explain the amount of requests daily - could be simply different users using AI to research for some topic.

Point is, you should evaluate if the AI requests are just proxies of real users, and blocking AI blocks real users from knowing your site exists.

Anubis is the name of the tool. Also, Cloudflare just announced they have something against AI scrapers.

But… Samsung also needs twice as many charges because for whatever reason, their batteries simply don’t last as long. Timewise, you get the same lifetime, from both. What good does a larger charging count bring, if you need to charge it twice as much? Misleading spec.

However, China has since grown significantly, and Taiwan no longer claims to be the government of mainland China, so that reason goes away.

The thing that we call “Taiwan” is an island, not a country, the country is “Republic of China” (ROC). We call it mostly Taiwan, because there is the People’s Republic of China (PRC) which is the mainland China. So you still have 2 countries, next to each other, both claiming to have the name “China”.

You claim the name, you claim the country.

Could be, but in the end, no risk no reward. People who do risk, are the ones who get rewarded.

Turn off internet access, or throttle it to the minimal usable speed.

That’s corruption, and it’s totally something else, but nevertheless there might be others who had no idea, but had the stock at the right moment, and sold as it was high. So, even in cases where the powerful play, the small ones, if lucky, could massively win.

On the other hand, you had the worlds wealthiest man, being second hand to the most powerful man on the planet, and he lost billions. So… I wouldn’t call those that much significant. I bet there are tons of smaller examples where CEO’s manipulate the stock of their own company that fly under the radar. But overall, in general, especially if you invest into ETFs (groups of stocks) you will barely notice anything and life goes on as usual. And the usual is 6-8% win per year on average.

Pardon my expression, everyone can have a lot of money.

A man who doesn’t want anything is rich, even if he doesn’t have money. I adjusted my comment accordingly.