The same thing is occurring in YouTube too. Someone posts a video with a clickbait title. It's an AI voice reading an AI script showing video that's only tangentially related to the script. Overall, the video isn't outright bad. But, it's not particularly good either. They're just poor quality. They all just seem to ramble on for a pre-determined amount of time and then stop.

The problem is that the shear number of these videos and channels is unreal. Someone's automated the creation of these channels and videos. This someone is pumping out these videos faster than you can block whole channels.

Further, it's impossible to tell which channel has human-generated content and which is all-AI. YouTube doesn't help at all since Google is promoting the usage of AI. So, the service is getting flooded with poor-quality AI content. As a YouTube user, you either deal with this AI enshittification or you stop using YouTube.

Amazon lost 6.3 million orders because of the use of AI coding tools.
https://www.digitaltrends.com/...

Iranian and Venezuelan oil was on the market before the conflicts started by Trump. We still had $5/gallon gas back then due to Trump's shitty economic policies.

I've driven EVs since 2016. I've only plugged my car into the wall with no special charger. I plug in when I get home. My car completely charges overnight. When I leave in the morning, it's completely charged. My office is only about 10 miles away. So, I never use a full charge during the day driving to work.

It's clear you've never owned an EV and simply want to demonize a technology it's obvious you know little about.

Just wait until OpenAI or Anthropic include that source code as training data. Soon, you'll see Copilot ads all over ChatGPT and Claude.

China heavily subsidizes its steel industry, providing roughly ten times more support per unit of revenue than OECD countries.

China is aggressively subsidizing its power grid infrastructure to support electric vehicles (EVs), focusing on building widespread charging networks and advanced, two-way Vehicle-to-Grid (V2G) systems.

China is heavily subsidizing electricity costs by up to 50%.

https://www.csis.org/blogs/tru...

No, US cars are not heavily subsidized unlike China. American auto regulations favor manufacture in America, but not American auto manufacturers. That's why foreign automakers such as Honda, Toyota, Hyundai, Kia, BMW, Volkswagen, Mercedes, Mazda, Nissan, Subaru, and Volvo make cars in America for the American market.

The fact that so many auto manufacturers make cars in the US shows your "make the world reliant on a small handful of corporations and subject to the whims of the US Government" statement to be nonsense. The rest of your statement is BS. Comparing China to the US is a joke.

Corporations aren't governments. They support their products because they want repeat customers. Yes, they're greedy. They also want repeat business. Due to that, they generally try not to screw over customers too much and ruin repeat business.

Governments are different. Authoritarian governments such as the CCP are the worst of all. They don't give a fuck about anyone outside their country. Hell, it's arguable how much the CCP cares about Chinese citizens. If subsidizing electric cars means screwing over America, Americans, Europe, Europeans, or anyone else in the whole world for the benefit of China or Chinese companies, you bet your ass the CCP will do it without question.

These vehicles have been heavily subsidized by the Chinese government to win market share in markets long dominated by other countries.

Just like everything else from China, it's meant to kill domestic manufacturers and make the world reliant on China and subject to the whims of the CCP.

It's not in the interest of anyone living outside of China to buy these cars. China doesn't care about you. The CCP doesn't care about you. It doesn't care about making a good product. They only want your money. The CCP is perfectly happy to lie, cheat, steal, and fuck over your country to make money, obtain, and hold power.

Given the growth of the overall population, the US economy needs to add 145,000 jobs per month to hold the unemployment rate steady and absorb the flow of new workers into the labor force.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/B...

If the 85,000 H1-b workers were replacing existing workers (and that hasn't been established), the fact that they were taking any jobs in the US economy means they added to the US unemployment rate. The 181,000 new jobs for the year already wasn't enough to absorb the 145,000 new workers US added every month.

Not sure where you got the idea that I'm a "small government type" from my comment. It's quite possible to be a progressive, liberal Democrat and criticize the H1-b program.

Also, I'm not sure how attacking me personally is any kind of relevant remark.

The total H1-B hires were 65,000 plus the 20,000 for individuals with master's degrees.

That means 85,000 of the 181,000 new jobs last year went to foreign workers brought in by companies such as Amazon, Meta, Microsoft, and Google.

That's 47% of new jobs created in America in 2025 going to non-Americans.

But yeah, fuck us for bringing it up.

Employers hit the 65,000 cap in 2025.

Employers are legally required to hire Americans for American jobs before considering H1-B hires.

Looks like that didn't happen. Employers are breaking the law.

But sure, fuck that guy. For what? Stating the obvious? American engineers are getting screwed by American tech companies who can't stop hiring foreign workers in the middle of a jobs recession.

Damn near every one of the problems we face as a society are made worse by adding extra population. Housing prices are up because we've got too many people. Inflation is up because all those people are competing for the same products. Pollution is up because all those people generate trash and drive cars and heat their homes with fossil fuels. Medical costs are up because we need more nurses and doctors to care for all the additional people.

They're looking to spend over a trillion dollars while earning $20 billion per year.

Going from earning $0 in ad revenue to a trillion in ad revenue seems a bit... optimistic.

Ads aren't going to be enough to save them.