But if they subsidize it to gain market share against western tech they are still distorting prices.

That's FoxGPT

How do you know those aren't subsidized also?

> and the Chinese are always ready with a cheaper product.

Chinese gov't is likely subsidizing those also to gain market-share. So it's in the same boat, perhaps at a different pace though, as they don't have to care what Wallstreet wants

> Open Source AI thingies

Running on in-premises hardware? If cloud-based, the subsidization time-bomb may still play out.

It's a success if you observe the right cats.

The smart-phone boom saved many techies from the wrath of the mortgage bubble econ crash. Even if a dev didn't work on phones, other devs moving to phones kept general dev demand up.

Investor funds and market-share-fights have been subsidizing the cost of AI for end-users. Even if the predictions in the article are exaggerated, the Day(s) of Reckoning will eventually arrive and there will be lots of WTFs.

but to be fair it'll take at least $5 billion to examine it.

But they have a blank-et copyright on such.

He said it at least twice, not a fluke.

Perp just needs to moisten the gun, wet magnets don't work.

"Warning from the Star Visitors: don't entrust society with mechanized thinking devices."

I only saw bunches of Marco Rubio's, and they were doing everyone else's job.

"Kept out" is poorly worded on my part. A tariff was added as a dissuasion.

I notice you have dropped your other argument without acknowledging it.

And no, I do not have reading comprehension problems. "I made a mistake" puts the blame on you. "[something] made me make a mistake" puts the blame on [something].

Given that English is not your first language (my presumption being based on a reference to German news sources in 1986) I think it's fair to say that this is an understandable error. English is a fucked up amalgamation often jokingly referred to as "three other languages in a trench coat" so a simple grammatical error like this is easily explained by the language barrier. I have a bunch of German colleagues that all have some word and grammatical choices when speaking English (saying things like "unpossible" rather than "impossible," for example) that probably make perfect sense as a direct translation and I would think this falls into that category, wouldn't you say?