I mean, literally the first link in my reply is saying that household savings in China are at record high levels. 🤷

When the cost of hosing, the basic necessity for living, drops that is in fact a very good thing. And the record high savings number clearly demonstrates that housing is not a primary investment vehicle for majority of the population. As Xi put it, hosing is for living. This was an intentional policy choice and a correct one.

If you think that Chinese society has been financialized then you’re utterly clueless on the subject and have no business discussing it.

Chinese household savings hit a record high in 2024 https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/stock-market-today-dow-jones-bank-earnings-01-12-2024/card/chinese-household-savings-hit-another-record-high-xqyky00IsIe357rtJb4j

90% of families in the country own their home giving China one of the highest home ownership rates in the world. What’s more is that 80% of these homes are owned outright, without mortgages or any other leans. https://www.forbes.com/sites/wadeshepard/2016/03/30/how-people-in-china-afford-their-outrageously-expensive-homes

Student debt in China is virtually non-existent. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jlim/2016/08/29/why-china-doesnt-have-a-student-debt-problem/

It’s pretty clear that there is very little negative impact from housing prices falling on the vast majority of the population. And it’s great news for young people who are moving from countryside to the cities and can now afford cheap housing.

The key reason why 2008 was a clusterfuck was because Obama decided to bail out the bankers and fuck the working class in the process.

It’s a lot cheaper to use hosted models and it’s open source so you can run them in house and customize them any way you like. And in terms of quality, there’s no significant difference. So, everybody is naturally using cheap and open models.

I don’t see any reason why their asset bubble will be crippling. The reason it’s crippling in capitalist economies of the west is cause the government is expected to bail out the investors. In China, they just let these companies fail and then nationalize their assets if needed. If you look at the whole real estate bubble, there was never any crash there precisely because it was a handful of rich investors who ended up eating the loss instead of it being socialized.

and closed source

looking forward to finally having cheap ram and chips

Then people who want to make art will continue making art because they have something to communicate, as opposed to with the intent of selling it.

Right, hence there’s no rational reason for Iran not to get nukes now.

Most of it is not all of it, and the fact that there is an actual fork needed shows just how problematic the project is.

It’s also worth noting that Iran could create an atomic weapon (fission based) similar to what the US used on Japan very quickly with their current levels of enrichment. That could be done in around a week, and it does not require being tested ahead of time. It’s a well understood process. With the amounts of uranium Iran is known to have, they could make around 10 atomic weapons. Around three would be enough to annihilate all the major population centres in Israel.

Some of this stuff is hardcoded in as I understand.

I do not believe so.

Well they killed Khamenei who was the one opposed to Iran getting nukes, so I don’t imagine there’s anybody else particularly opposed at this point.

I think it’s safe to say that by 2025 there was compromise on the 8xxx or 9xxx Kirin chips out there at that time.

No, it’s not to safe that at all. You’re making a really wild jump here. It’s like saying that if old version of chips iPhone uses were vulnerable we could say that current ones are. You are firmly into speculation territory here. I don’t know why it’s so hard for you to just admit that your thesis is not supported by evidence.

Remember though that I’m not claiming these leaks represent the extent of le capability today, but the extent of their capability then. Over time we can expect (and can see based n the expansion of their claims and the capabilities asserted in their leaks over time!) that they would get access to new methods of compromising phones, we just can’t know the exact extent until something leaks.

Except this equally applies to American phones, and in addition to that, there is a risk of intentional backdoors. So, to reiterate for the tenth time now, American phones are just as likely to be vulnerable to malicious attackers, and on top of that they are produced by companies directly working with US and Israel making it likely they would have intentional backdoors. That’s a strictly worse scenario.

Again, the evidence speaks directly against your analysis. You’re trying to contort the evidence here to fit your narrative instead of looking at it objectively.

Phone security with burgerland characterisitcs lol.

So, to recap, you have not provided any source that suggests modern Chinese devices that are in production today are vulnerable, or any less secure than ios or android. The brute force support is not for the new devices according to your link. It’s for the older devices. I specifically screenshotted the relevant text in the last reply. The fact that a old device could be brute forced does not extend to the argument that new device can. There is no logical reason to suggest that.

Your assertion that pixels, graphene and iphones are safest against the hardware/software tools the police have is not backed by facts. The capabilities of these toolkits DO NOT back up your assertion because they do not show that CURRENT devices are more vulnerable.

There is nothing that would convince me of your point because your point is not based on facts available to us. It’s based on your assertion that android and ios are more secure which is not supported by evidence available. If you were to provide concrete proof that these devices that are currently on sale are vulnerable, then we could have a discussion about that https://consumer.huawei.com/en/phones/

And given that there is no evidence available to suggest that Chinese devices are more vulnerable, then the next question to ask is which vendor is more likely to be compromised. The answer there is obviously that it would be the American vendor.

Seems like it would’ve been best for all involved if his community did stay at a 100 users. 🤣

indeed

The trade off is that you end up giving up on a huge chunk of the fediverse at the whims of the developer.

What’s really funny to me is that liberals consistently preach one thing and then do another in practice. Open debate and the whole market of ideas is at the core of liberal ideology. Yet, whenever liberals don’t have the dominant position, they immediately reach for censorship breaking precisely the principle they claim differentiates them from their ideological adversaries.

Very well put, the fact that they have to go to such length to lock people into their bubble shows that deep down they know their ideology has no staying power, and can only be sustained through coercive measures.

In terms of developing an alternative, I don’t really see that of itself as a negative necessarily though. You might want to just play around to learn how this stuff works, use a different technology stack, or try out some new ideas in terms of UX. The real issue in my opinion is with all the dark patterns in piefed.