That’s from a European perspective. To me, they all smoke a lot. Shockingly so when one is used to the US. There are regional differences, but it’s more like comparing the size of Lake Constance to Lake Superior: both are huge.

Yeah… Maybe ask the good folks of Okinawa whether they have ever agreed to American military bases.

Japan’s F-15 would be no match to the Chinese J-15, which is like half a generation more advanced. The outcome of tit-for-tat would be highly one sided. The F-15 couldn’t lock on to the Chinese jet as far as the J-15, nor could its missiles shoot as far.

Let’s not lose our heads here. This did not occur over Japanese airspace. No need to escalate directly to kinetic action.

I feel bad for Taiwanese politicians. They can’t afford to provoke a major tantrum from Trump. They still need to purchase American arms, even if the US can’t be counted on to help in an invasion. Some performative flattery and groveling might be in order. If it was me, I’d swallow my pride and cite the impossibility of moving entire chip production chains instead.

Russian soldiers come from poor regions: Siberia, the Far East, Kalmykia, etc. To many poor recruits the pay far exceeds anything they could get in civilian life. It’s the same strategy as the US military: go to impoverished states and get those desperate poor schmucks to fight and die for you.

Russia has expanded the draft and seemingly can’t count on volunteers as much as before. So the situation may change in the future.

North Korea was aligned with the Soviet Union after the Sino-Soviet split. All China needs is a buffer state with the United States and its forces stationed in SK, but it wasn’t interested in turning NK into a vassal state after the Soviet collapse. In short, it doesn’t have as much pull as people might assume, and it’s none too interested in intervention.

In practice, it’s impossible to determine the purpose of purchases. If someone talks about their experience of buying from a dealer without further context, you’d have to narc. Or, you open yourself up to legal liabilities.

Besides, people buy on behalf of others all the time. People share with others. Substance use is often not a solitary activity. This law would create a situation where it’s risky for you if you do not narc every time.

WTF? We’re gonna be required to narc on people struggling with addiction now, even if they’re trying to quit? That’s bad for everyone involved. I sure won’t be hosting nothing in the US again if this passes.

More flexibility on flight stopovers in China. If you are going somewhere else, China would probably like for you to spend some of your money in a Chinese city. I’m guessing 10 days is the duration because flights occasionally get canceled or delayed. A lot more people would need to apply to extend their visas on stopovers if it was only like 3 days.

Edit: spelling

IBM profiting from a genocide?? Say it ain’t so!

I considered it, but the specs were too low. Ended up choosing a Google Pixel instead.

Not to cause any “offence”, but I think that “manoeuvre” would cause misspellings for you if you need to write something in American English, say a paper or a formal document. Best double check your spell checker locale, and make sure your words aren’t incorrectly “labelled” as you “centre” your text.

Having the default spell check as en_ca would be a problem through. I’d have an “axe” to grind in this case, as I challenge the “honour” of hunspell. I usually just manually choose metric units and a 24 hour clock on top of en_US.

Chinese phonology doesn’t allow for the pronunciation of “app”, for example. I see a lot of Chinese people spelling it as “APP”, and pronouncing it accordingly. It’s kinda funny to me, since the Mandarin word “yingyong” is only two syllables. “APP” just seems more cumbersome by all account, yet it has become inexplicably popular.

The paper was published by IEEE and with professors as co-authors. Only the second author is a student. And I wouldn’t dismiss it out of hand like that because of a magazine article. Students come up with breakthroughs all the time. The paper itself says it disproves Yao’s conjecture. I personally plan to implement and benchmark this because the results seem so good. It could be another fibonacci heap situation, but maybe not. Hash tables are so widely used, that it might even be worthwhile to make special hardware to use this on servers, if our current computer architecture is only thing that holds back the performance.

Edit: author sequence

Some commenters on this post are clearly not aware of PTX being a part of the CUDA environment. If you know this, you aren’t who I’m trying to inform.

There seems to be some confusion here on what PTX is – it does not bypass the CUDA platform at all. Nor does this diminish NVIDIA’s monopoly here. CUDA is a programming environment for NVIDIA GPUs, but many say CUDA to mean the C/C++ extension in CUDA (CUDA can be thought of as a C/C++ dialect here.) PTX is NVIDIA specific, and sits at a similar level as LLVM’s IR. If anything, DeepSeek is more dependent on NVIDIA than everyone else, since PTX is tightly dependent on their specific GPUs. Things like ZLUDA (effort to run CUDA code on AMD GPUs) won’t work. This is not a feel good story here.

The term “rice burner” originated in the Anglo-American context, and the word “ricing” cannot be divorced from the way people use “rice” as a versatile and generic racial epithet in varied context outside of the software world. As in people going, “haha, rice” something when being racist against Asians. It’s a long and ignominious American tradition to demean racial minorities with food. As in insulting Mexicans with “bean”. Anecdotally, some older Italians still remember being made to feel bad for eating pasta, when Italians weren’t white yet. The term “ricing” will certainly remain racist due to the way anti-Asian racism continues to work. Hence my point that the term must be abandoned, if one wishes to not be racist. Just find a different word for it. it ain’t that hard. It is certainly not possible to use an American word with racist origins without divorcing it from the cultural context from which it came.

It is clearly racist. “Ricing” comes from a derogatory term for Asian racing vehicles. You cannot excuse the racism inherent to it by personal ignorance. It’s the same logic as black face being racist, whether you’re personally aware of the history behind it or not.

Though I no longer live in the US, as an Asian computer scientist, I am quite aware of how it is clearly perceived as a racist term by many Asian Americans. To me, it will also never stop being offensive. So, please, stop with this “ricing” stuff.

I don’t see a fundamental difference, only that “reactionary” is favored more by leftists, and “regressive” more so by liberals. I myself would use the two interchangeably, depending on the preference of the person I’m talking to.