Ramping up production didn’t reduce demand. Demand reduced due to a softening Chinese economy, mainly due to debt and housing.

I agree, it’s not excess supply when you can sell it overseas. However, its also not central planning when you wanted to Ramp up supply for domestic consumption but end up using capitalism to keep efficiencies.

Companies ramp down production all the time. What do you think redundancies and factory closures are for? They react to market conditions or seek new markets (as happened in this case).

I thinknyouve got it backwards. Central planning can efficiently produce anything. As in, it can make as much of a product at the cheapest price as possible. The problem is central planning is less efficient at deciding how much is needed. It will often over or undershoot. Thats what happened here. Tonsaybthey can still sell overseas, so its still central planning being efficient is incorrect. Central planning didn’t work to produce the needed amount so trade through capitalism is being used to improve efficiency of the capital used.

They tend to be more efficient. However central planning in China which ramped up production yet has reduced demand, means an excess supply.

So, selling to Europe or USA makes sense to offload that supply. In a capitalist, closed system, they would have ramped down production, but also wouldn’t have had the capital to ramp up production so quickly.

If they weren’t seen as a strategic asset, then Europe and USA wouldn’t care that China is subsidizing cheaper products. They dont want their car industries dead as then they are dependent on China.

Well, Facebook, google spring to mind. They are both cheap for the consumer and undermine local competition. Digital goods can be dumped too.

Lol, if you mean facebooks AI will skew more towards the views of American Facebook users, I’d say that’s a win for Europe. It will make the AI less valuable, creating a gap in the market for a better AI that can reflect European values or american or both.

AI does not need infinite data. They can easily licence that amount of content. They are just trying to do it cheaply with user content.

I gully expect use for AI training to become a standardized part of locencing for media and content going forwards. For a band or singer, or author, it may be they ibky get a small amoint for using their content but it won’t be stolen. There is minimal value in any one part of the content. There is value in the aggregate of lots of data.

Digitized books out of copyright have more archaic language but I expect we will see lots of media out of copyright being used also. Media organization that make movies, TV shows and publish newspapers and magazines also have a trove of content.

I’m a business owner. I use Linux at home but use windows at work as specialty software requires it. As things move more and more to docker and the like, windows is doomed. We already have an old PC in a high usage area, that does not need power. Its just for checking in on what’s happening elsewhere in the building, mainly through cloud software. Its not suitable for windows 11. It will go lonix first. That will start a trickle.

In imagine it will be similar elsewhere. Microsoft are no fools. They know that the is is dead as a concept. They are trying to monetise the is before its obsolete. If even a small portion of users stay, they win.

Depending on private companies for free speech is bad for free speech in and of itself. So either course has negatives, which means the course with leqsr negative outcomes is best. If they over moderate, they lose users. If they undermoderate they face fines. I’m sure the market force will mean they do whatever is most profitable.

Holding social media companies responsible for the content they host is a better solution in my view. We hold newspapers responsible. Why not social media? Yes, moderation is expensive but they are wildly profitable, musk aside.

They don’t need to moderate everything, as the content volume is high, but they certainly could manually moderate all content that reaches a certain threshd. They choose not to and hide behind their users sharing as a reason.

I agree, but I think it is more complex than that. There are limits to free speech already. I agree that no one country should be able to censor others, but what about content that is illegally produced in that country.

So if terrorist training videos were made in Australia, could banning them from distribution mean they could prosecute fitter for distributing them? How about csam? How about China prosecutes for ibfro about Tiananmen. What about CSAM?

So objectively there are things some countries would want banned, but not all. Some that all might agree to ban. Classifying it might help but might that be more of an invasion of privacy? The web is built on lots of open protocols that assume good actors and no malicious intent. We are now adding protocols that increase privacy and security on top. Even something like the fediverse is a good example of the trade off between being public and being anonymous and being private. You can’t have it all.

Owned it by forcing everyone to manually install google maps, which they were already using happily? Or owned it by giving a pr spin after the fact? Group messaging via mms still doesn’t work correctly due to iMessage.

Like Apple Maps? Or mms messaging?

I’d gonwoth steam. I’ve just changed my laptop to Linux because of all the MS crap and nagware. Likely due to other Lemmy communities. I have a steam account that is locked for years from changed security requirements. This might be the push to switch from console to PC gaming.

I ownder if its a tactic to get people, or mainly businesses to upgrade no so they are still in the windows ecosystem. They won’t want to pay for windows, so making it seem like their computer is outdated and should be upgraded is not a bad strategy. If a movement of converting to Linux starts, many users might leave. For good.

Haha, me too. I tried opensuse first but switched to mint.

I’ve heard of people having success.eiyh setting up an account for the family pet and friending their kids and friends before they are old enough to understand the concept of sharing online.allows you to keep tabs on them unobtrusively and can obviously deactivate or defined as appropriate when they age.

Hopefully though, I stead, you’ll teach them how to use privacy controls to not allow you to see, when they are old enough that it’s appropriate.

Yep, I just switched yesterday.

Then a custom rom, like graphene is allows you to de google your phone. Although google have embedded themselves deeply into android, the pixels are quite open about unlocking boot loader etc.

Yes, probabky, but also might be possible to now find.

Yes, but it didn’t. Has it made it through on closed software? Who knows?

If they were conpromised, being paid by a company wouldn’t helo. Likely companies would keep it in house, not FOSS. So I think it grows t show how ODD is less open to corruotion. It gets spotted. If this is a state actor that made it haooen, do you really think they have not compromised closed software too? We just have no idea about it not any means to find out.

With a police file number and her address and possibly name being used, she might be able to get the company to give her the ip address. Its not a privacy breach of she’s the customer.

Then that ip address can be matched to an isp to find the user, police would need to do that. Talking to her current lawyer would help.

Edit: :up to ip