The irony is that the same system that lets China “rip off tech all the time” is also why they’re outpacing everyone. They don’t wait for bureaucratic permission slips or endless committee debates—they just do. Meanwhile, the West pats itself on the back for “innovation” while starving critical projects of funding and drowning them in red tape.
If China cracks fusion, it won’t just be copied—it’ll be leveraged to tighten their grip on global energy markets. That’s not a tech race; it’s a strategic chokehold. The real tragedy is that instead of collaboration, we’re stuck in this zero-sum paranoia where progress is secondary to power plays. Decentralization isn’t just idealistic—it’s the only way to stop this from becoming another cold war with a hotter ending.
ITER isn’t “international” in any meaningful sense. It’s a bloated Frankenstein of geopolitical vanity projects, where nations bicker over scraps of influence while pretending to collaborate. Sharing costs? Sure, but they’re also sharing inefficiencies, delays, and mountains of red tape. France hosting isn’t just a coincidence—it’s a calculated power play.
Your defense of ITER as a global effort is laughable. Experimental results are locked behind bureaucratic walls, inaccessible to the very people who could accelerate progress. Fusion isn’t advancing; it’s stagnating under nationalist egos.
Military funding for fusion research is the perfect example of why this tech is locked behind closed doors. It’s not about solving energy crises; it’s about weaponizing the future. They dangle “clean energy” in front of us while funneling resources into projects that serve their war machines.
Even if these companies stumble onto a breakthrough, it’ll be classified faster than you can say “national security.” The public won’t see a watt of it unless there’s profit or power to be gained by those at the top.
This is why fusion needs to be in the hands of people, not governments or corporations. Open-source and decentralized, or we’ll just trade one form of exploitation for another.
Our digital fortresses now have their drawbridges permanently lowered, moats drained, and guards replaced by cardboard cutouts. The sheer incompetence radiating from these exposures would be comical if it weren’t treason-adjacent. Nuclear labs leaking like sieve-powered colanders? Treasury systems broadcasting “hack me” beacons? This isn’t cybersecurity—it’s geopolitical seppuku with Elon’s DOGE cronies holding the ceremonial blade.
AI slurping classified data through Inventry.ai’s API is peak dystopia. We’ve outsourced national secrets to algorithms trained on crypto-bro hustle culture. The same geniuses who brought you “production-ready” self-driving flamethrowers now hold the keys to 20% of the economy.
Meanwhile, every script-kiddie from Siberia to Shenzhen is mapping our infrastructure like tourists with a Pentagon-themed scavenger hunt list. The founding fathers would’ve started a second revolution over this. Instead, we get congressional hearings and thoughts and prayers encrypted in compliance theater.
Meta hoards the commons like a dragon, pillaging open archives to train its soulless algorithms, while Aaron Swartz—a true steward of knowledge—was hunted down for daring to share.
One gets a slap on the wrist, the other gets a noose of legal threats. Justice? No, this is corporate feudalism, where the lords rewrite the rules and the serfs pay with their lives.
Aaron wanted liberation; Meta wants monopoly. The system rewards the parasite and punishes the visionary. Remember that next time you scroll through their ad-soaked wasteland.
Ah, I see where you’re coming from—my earlier post was meant as humor, but I might have leaned too hard into the sarcasm. No offense intended!
To clarify, there are languages and tools designed with machines in mind. Assembly is the classic example, but let’s not forget LLVM. It’s not a language per se, but an intermediate representation that optimizes code for machine execution. It’s like the ultimate translator between human-written code and raw machine instructions.
Still, regex at 3 AM? That’s a universal nightmare no matter what abstraction you’re working with.
If programming languages are made for humans, then explain Assembly. Or better yet, try debugging a segfault in C at 3 AM and tell me that was designed with human comfort in mind.
Sure, some languages pretend to be human-friendly (looking at you, Python), but then you hit regex or dependency hell, and suddenly it’s like deciphering alien hieroglyphs. Let’s not even start on Lisp—parentheses everywhere like it’s trying to smother you in syntax.
No, programming languages aren’t made for humans—they’re made for machines, and we’re just the poor fools trying to survive the translation layer.
41·4 months ago
49·4 months ago
Removed by mod