Trump wants to increase tariffs On china again .

a reply to: luthier

The next administration won't use the same policies and it will all be pointless

I don't believe other politicians making decisions on behalf of MNC donors in the future is not a justification to continue doing wrong things or not trying to fix fundamental problems in the economy.

originally posted by: RadioRobert
a reply to: luthier

The next administration won't use the same policies and it will all be pointless

I don't believe other politicians making decisions on behalf of MNC donors in the future is not a justification to continue doing wrong things or not trying to fix fundamental problems in the economy.

We just have different beliefs. I believe Congress is supposed to do monetary policy since they represent the local districts effected by the tariffs.

I dont believe the president should set pricing.

I dont believe there is ever a case for a person in government making radical short term movements in the economy.

There is no reality where politicians making massive moves in the economy has not had unintended consequences that cancel out any benefit.

Your words sound good. They just have zero evidence to support government can set prices and make large changes in the economy without unintended consequences.


And i disagree about making long term real goals to effect trade imbalance. They aren't done in two terms which is why the president shouldn't be making radical movements.

I simply dont think the government can make positive changes in the economy when they are radically different then the current operating market. And history is on my side.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Aazadan

Process improvements are sometimes better by AI. This is especially true in agriculture. We aren't at the point of design fro m scratch but AI is helping efficiency in process in several fields. More every week.

Healthcare and advertising the most obvious process advancement by AI.

I think you misunderstand. I'm talking about writing software that is able to find inefficiencies in the system, and then build improvements to fix that. That can be done to an extent (though, the best system for that, which are genetic algorithms aren't ultra reliable), but it's usually not through AI, but rather through collecting metrics and analyzing data.

a reply to: midnightstar

a reply to: xpert11

If we move forward doing nothing on the rationale that China is a strategic enemy to ourselves and/or allies, why would we fund their military build -up with a giant trade imbalance? Aren't we essentially paying tribute under that mindset?

originally posted by: RadioRobert
a reply to: xpert11

If we move forward doing nothing on the rationale that China is a strategic enemy to ourselves and/or allies, why would we fund their military build -up with a giant trade imbalance? Aren't we essentially paying tribute under that mindset?

a reply to: xpert11

If we're going to have a war, trade or otherwise, to satisfy national interests or the inevitable clash between strategic interests, we're better off having it now. If we can solve the enormous imbalance without that, even better. But doing nothing and staying the course because action is dangerous is, imo, even more hazardous. We have to try to fix it.

a reply to: RadioRobert

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Aazadan

Process improvements are sometimes better by AI. This is especially true in agriculture. We aren't at the point of design fro m scratch but AI is helping efficiency in process in several fields. More every week.

Healthcare and advertising the most obvious process advancement by AI.

I think you misunderstand. I'm talking about writing software that is able to find inefficiencies in the system, and then build improvements to fix that. That can be done to an extent (though, the best system for that, which are genetic algorithms aren't ultra reliable), but it's usually not through AI, but rather through collecting metrics and analyzing data.

Usually not by AI is changing every second. In fact the balance is trending toward AI. Deep learning and AGI research are happening pretty quickly.

But perhaps I misundersrand. I am not sure what you are saying. My response was AI is far more equipt at gathering data than any human is. Unless humans connect to larger neural networks that can gather data quickly we are at a severe disadvantage. Particularly as AI gets better a coding solutions with software on what humans would consider instant level.

I dont think most people understand what is already beginning. AI's talking to each other, paying each other in crypto through blockchain for services is already starting. The economy is going to be radically different in 25 years. Yet we have a let's get back to the good old days way of looking at the future.

Profit search is advancing AI very quickly. Pretty soon the market will be completely useless as far as speculation with the algorithms people like Eric Weisnstein write.

originally posted by: RadioRobert
a reply to: xpert11

If we move forward doing nothing on the rationale that China is a strategic enemy to ourselves and/or allies, why would we fund their military build -up with a giant trade imbalance? Aren't we essentially paying tribute under that mindset?

Trade imbalance happens when a country is much poorer and a wealthy country uses the currency differences in labor to benefit consumers.

The trade imbalance is not nearly the problem you seem to think it is. China is communist. The way to fight them is through innovation not by creating an economy that looks more like communism.


Also I am unaware of the theory of using abrupt new tariffs beyond the early 1800's working anywhere in the world for long term economic health.

Just to emphasize that Trump is clueless. He thinks if a company builds in the US there will be no tariffs. Literally this is his tweet today.

Either he is dumb or a liar.

a reply to: luthier

Not really. AI is proving itself to be more and more of a joke with each week. A large part of the AI systems out there right now are just complex if checks that go down pre defined decision trees. Not all of it, but that’s a lot of what is used commercially.

a reply to: luthier

The problem is large companies like working with China and having IP stolen because large companies research new products to stay ahead of the theft while smaller companies are pushed out of the market.

a reply to: Aazadan

This is a problem for some but blockchain is a pretty good tool against it. Most smart tech companies looked at what ethereum did and repurposed.

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: luthier

Not really. AI is proving itself to be more and more of a joke with each week. A large part of the AI systems out there right now are just complex if checks that go down pre defined decision trees. Not all of it, but that’s a lot of what is used commercially.

This statement is totally false.

a reply to: Aazadan

A deep learning model is able to accurately assess breast tissue density—an independent risk factor for breast cancer—in mammograms.

This is a perfect response to what you are saying.

“That is an understandable reaction from a practicing radiologist, but it is like looking at a kindergartener and believing that, because she cannot add or subtract very well, she will obviously never be able to read an abdominal ultrasound,” he wrote. “It assumes limits to computer intelligence that might not exist.”

NHS hospitals join with NVIDIA, using AI to interpret radiology scans

Farmwave, an app using artificial intelligence that was released in beta in July, allows a farmer in the field to take a photo of a suspect crop and receive a diagnosis in seconds rather than days. Armed with this information, farmers can combat diseases and pests quicker, addressing the issue before it spreads and saving more money

In physics AI is incredible. It is going to advance things very quickly. Each algorithm is not separate. They build what will become a more AGI like neural network for data analytics.

Just to reiterate your statement is false that every week AI is more of a joke. This is not true in any way.

You essentially said because delta airlines used tandy computers from 1989 computers are becoming more of a joke.

Its utterly false.

originally posted by: luthier
In physics AI is incredible. It is going to advance things very quickly. Each algorithm is not separate. They build what will become a more AGI like neural network for data analytics.

Just to reiterate your statement is false that every week AI is more of a joke. This is not true in any way.

You essentially said because delta airlines used tandy computers from 1989 computers are becoming more of a joke.

Its utterly false.

So you completely missed the point. For example, in radiology AI is improving reading the outputs that are already given, it's enhancing what the doctor can do. Those are good applications of AI, however those are not process improvements. Process improvements are things like redesigning an entire manufacturing line in a cost effective way such that it is more efficient (such as Phage's example, of a person making a small tweak). AI cannot do that. AI cannot teach the computer to take better ultrasounds, it can only read existing ones better.

In short, AI is good at giving better outputs from the same input. It is very bad at changing the inputs to give better outputs.

And yes, most commercial implementations of AI are basically just smoke and mirrors. They can still offer some value, but that doesn't mean it's AI driving that value, in terms of what people think of as AI. The most commercially successful real AI utilizes Naive Bayes, while the vast majority instead uses Markov Chains and most often Hidden Markov Models which can look like AI but really aren't (though because the results are often sold as AI, the technique is often included under the AI classification).

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: RadioRobert
a reply to: xpert11

If we move forward doing nothing on the rationale that China is a strategic enemy to ourselves and/or allies, why would we fund their military build -up with a giant trade imbalance? Aren't we essentially paying tribute under that mindset?

Trade imbalance happens when a country is much poorer and a wealthy country uses the currency differences in labor to benefit consumers.

The trade imbalance is not nearly the problem you seem to think it is. China is communist. The way to fight them is through innovation not by creating an economy that looks more like communism.

One issue is a large portion of the trade balance exists because we do not enforce IP rights and China does not recognize them, and from unfair practices like dumping.
A second issue is that we've allowed those practices to put our strategic industries in jeopardy. We have an economic and security interest on protecting domestic industrial capability.
A third issue is the couple hundred billion of hard currency we fork over in the imbalance, is more than enough to find their entire military budget and have money left over. This is not insignificant in light of the fact one of your strongest argument for maintaining the status quo is "they could attack us if we don't keep giving us money to buy things from them or buy somewhere else". Perhaps we could buy our mountains of consumer "stuff" from nations not openly antagonistic? Maybe some countries who don't practice unfair trade practices to bankrupt foreign metal industries and steal intellectual property might love to sell us stuff and take our money? I didn't know that was commie-talk now...

Just to emphasize that Trump is clueless.

I'm already on the record in other threads saying the implementation and structure of several of the tariffs seemed arbitrary and pointless. That doesn't mean the answer is zero tariffs.

originally posted by: RadioRobert
One issue is a large portion of the trade balance exists because we do not enforce IP rights and China does not recognize them, and from unfair practices like dumping.

Large companies actually like this. Companies that can afford to always be researching, will deliberately work with China for their products, knowing it will leak. This pushes smaller companies that can't research as fast out of the market and reduces overall competition. Every fortune 500 in the US uses this strategy, as well as some that aren't on that list.

It's not going to change.

I don't believe the tariffs are meant to be a bandaid or any type of fix to amend the trade imbalance between China and the United States. I think they are negotiating tactic to get China to bend the knee. But they aren't going to bend the knee because it would be suicide for Xi. While they may have a long term strategy, I think the patience to see it through is beginning to wane. Their hubris fueled by faux growth and the lust for power from those behind the curtain are starting to show through, which is why last year was so significant RE: Xi assuming more authoritarian power.

With that said, I believe the "Trade Deal" is just a facade, one that was expected to fail, in order to justify more legislation and economic practices to combat China's rise because the US is more than likely laying down requests that China will never be able to meet if they want to continue towards their China 2050 goal. In that regard, they are then able to paint China negatively since they are "unwilling" to work with the US, and that can be used as tool to build negative sentiment towards them on behalf of the American public as well.