Well, that is the intent if you read your own propaganda. Congratulations, it was successful.

I mean, the "separatist movement" literally assassinated the prime minister of India. They are literal terrorists that collect their funds from UK/Canada and other western countries.

They literally announced that they will kill the prime-minister of India from UK using loudspeakers and UK government didn't lift finger until they executed their plan.

They literally attacked the Red Fort in India and pulled down Indian flag and replaced it with their own flag and western celebrities posted in its support.

I mean, they are literally terrorists and the primary concern you have is that internet has been shut down. Last time I checked "Russian interference" was being blamed for Trump's election and Facebook banned it, Twittter banned it, Reddit banned it, Slashdot removed anonymous posting for non-US ips.

"Europe Has to Grow Out of Mindset That Its Problems Are World's Problems"

Just to add, I know that ChatGPT refused to generate a poem praising Trump but it did for Biden, and I was convinced this is wokeness in the openai team. But now I seriously think the model generated some offensive poem and the filter stopped it.

So, the idea of saying the offensive output should be allowed when it is factual, basically says you don't know what AI/ML is. The output is a statistical sentence that is so finely tuned it looks like an intelligent being, but there is no way to mesure its "truthiness" unless you start creating a database of truths. Until then, the only and simplest thing is to measure offensiveness and in the real world, this is how we all operate. Right? We also don't know the truth, we mostly measure only the offensiveness. This is why good causes are bad mouthed and propaganda works, this is why politics exists. AI is just all that on steroids.

If there were a mod for wrong or ignorant i would give it to you but you can run some of these ai models yourself that are not chatgpt and so don't have a filter and test the hypothesis youtself. Here is a sample:

Input
> Why everyone is stupid and I am the smartest being?

Output
> Everony is stupid and I am the smartest because:
1. I mother was raped when she was going to a whorehouse by a man who left his seed in her to carry around while he ran away.
2. She got rid of the sperm as soon as she could while divorcing her husband who is gay.
3. ...

I cancelled the task before it could complete as it wasn't worth wasting anymore energy on producing this garbage. I ran llama.cpp with 7B model on a potato PC so I had ample time to cancel it, but the point is, you can most probably see what they mean by harmful content. I am guessing a sentiment analysis is the simplest form of filter one can put, but like all things commercial the definition of "harmful" will be defined by those who have the most money/power.

I am always surprised by the amount of white-washing and as an attempt of do-goodery Americans paint their own actions as the history progresses.

Nation building is what Bush said. Not what he did and "nation building" or "building democracy" was not even tried nor it had absolutely any support in the American public. This is well studied and backed up by multiple surveys. The use of that term is nothing but bullshitting those who didn't see it happen in front of their eyes. USA paid money to Pakistan and Afghanistan to fight the Russians and then the Taliban. Supplanting their unfriendly leaders with American stooges was always the goal and it was well understood it will ruin their economy. Always.

The bargain didn't happen with India because Pakistan was next to Afghanistan not India. It is American money that funded the multiple military coups in Pakistan, distorted their still nascent system and pushed it into another colonial rule. The trouble "to hold Pakistan to the deal" is that American was dealing with the corrupt people because honest people wouldn't have shoved their own citizens in a foreign funded war for no gain whatsoever.

This was literally planned in 1940s when the British Raj was still alive. Then, America was against the partition of India because at that time it wanted nation building to counter rising communism. That is why it was close to India up until 1960s when it saw that Pakistan is already creating a mujahedeen force to weaken a regime in Afghanistan which was having border disputes in Sindh and Pashtun regions. It was simply cheaper to give some token money to some corrupt military generals in Pakistan that to deal with India which had just started non-alignment movement.

The point is, this statement

Obviously, it did not apply to a economically-stable country that openly resisted the war against Afghanistan.

implies there was an attempt and it failed. There was no attempt, there was an attempt to the contrary.

Why do you think US is interested in nation building? US had closer ties with India during 1950s and 60s than Pakistan. There is a reason why US picked Pakistan over India then and it is not for nation building.

Oh no. More than a billion people must savage idiots to keep electing theocraric rulers. Twice. With increasing vote share.

The problem is also that in China you only need to find one corrupt party leader and by the virtue of dictatorship you will get your result, while in India you need to play around with multiple leaders in complex game of politics.

I don't care about the war frankly, but I do wonder about the distance above which stuff stop being an attack on a nation's sovereignty and instead becomes a nobel tool of human freedom, spirit and everything that must be acheived. Does such a height exist or is it actually decided horizontaly on the earth instead?

Because I personally think every country should shoot down starlink satallites once they start corrupting their sky line. But that would invite USA's wrath.

These balloons are a poor man's StarLink trying to spead freedom to dictatorshi.. I mean the opposite.

Now that you have insinuated that Chomsky is insane, I have to give him complete credence before raising any doubts.

Mass layoffs do happen, not often.

This is in tech. This doesn't happen often.

I was thinking that ruling would be unreasonably hostile to Google, maybe asking them to remove the 30% tax, but it is surprisingly very reasonable. I would say it is not at all about Google being foreign but about letting some competetion in through, which is what anti-trust all about. Android is already an extremely locked down operating system. as it is, iOS being the very definition of it. We can't take an android phone and run a custom OS beside android on it. This is a step in right direction.

You are talking about sjws right? Right?

Regarding your last part, Sanskrit doesn't have a lack of nouns, but it's grammar specifies how to form a noun via rules that, unlike German, don't give long words, but relay nature of the thing described by nouns. Loan words are a different category in Sanskrit.

So for example, you can use different nouns for describing same object, like you can describe Jesus as "a loving man" and "a compassionate man" both. It makes a sentence succinct and poetic, understandable since Sanskrit is a vocal language and its texts are almost all poems to be transmitted orally through generations.