This isn’t an external directive; Anthropic was founded with the mission of creating safe, reliable AI systems. You wouldn’t see the same people working at the company if the company didn’t stand by its acceptable use policy and other internal standards
I'm saying the capability to reason about novel situations is in tension with guaranteeing it never produces harmful outputs. We are talking about contradictory design constraints.
While I think Trump political appointees have set the stage for these kinds of incidents generally by cutting back on training for DHS law enforcement officers (though I’m not sure if CBP has been impacted to the same degree as ICE), I’m not convinced that this kind of communication failure at the tactical level couldn’t have happened under previous administrations
The story of the El Paso airspace closure seems to have involved multiple chances to properly coordinate but they chose not to. Folks at the pentagon have claimed their use of lasers pose no risk and seem to be skirting or ignoring the law as far as their coordination with the FAA goes.
> I’m not convinced that this kind of communication failure at the tactical level couldn’t have happened under previous administrations
What examples do you have? There was a Chinese spy balloon that was monitored for a whole week before it got shot down - the exact opposite of what’s happened twice (!!) this month in the current administration.
Sure, like most things it's possible and yet it didn't and it's on top of a list of compounding failures of a similar nature: e.g. firing live artillery over an in use highway (while insisting it was safe, and then damaging the vice presidential motorcade) [1].
It's worth noting this screw up happened on the back of the FAA basically hitting the panic button when they realized the military was going to shoot at air targets with high power lasers near an active civilian airport.
600 million people live in North America. 1 billion people live in the Americas. Another billion live on the Pacific rim in non-Chinese countries.
Establishing regulatory harmony across all those countries is obviously not possible in the same way it is in a single authoritarian state, but if the US made it a priority to create a trade bloc capable of replicating China’s manufacturing capacity, it probably could.
Establishing regulatory harmony is not only not possible but the current regime is working in exactly the opposite direction.
If the US wants to take on China, and actually needs Canada's help to do it -- I can assure you they just set themselves back 10-20 years from achieving that. We no longer have any interest.
The labour forces of Mexico and Canada are not at the US's disposal for these kind of games anymore. For several decades we have been exploited by the US for low wages and cheap resources -- and now there's a regime that's making cheap political points by accusing us of the opposite while trying to emmiserate our populace. So, yeah, no thanks.
There was an APAC trade treaty called the TPP that Rodham-Clinton/Obama pulled out of which would have done exactly that. They were forced to withdraw because of pressure from unions, ie labor not capital.
Now it's the CPTPP and doesn't include the US.
Canada is looking to the Pacific and EU for trade now (and China as well), so is Mexico.
It's likely that the EU/UK trade bloc will connect with the CPTPP via both the UK and Canada, which connects them to the APAC/ASEAN nations.
Everyone is aware of the power of the Chinese economy and the idea of the CPTPP is precisely to build up a trade economy that can compete and co-operate with China on an equal basis.
In the meantime, China is using its Belt & Road Initiative as a sort of "Marshall Plan" to extend its influence by building infrastructure like ports and rail.
These trade initiatives are at least focused on increasing trade, as opposed to the US "trade policy" which is to use tariffs as a crude form of protectionism and extortion to "bring manufacturing back".
>Many of the most mundane decisions made in municipal councils go completely unnoticed yet they can destroy whole communities in the long run.
They go unnoticed because of scaling issues, not because people are per se less interested in local politics than national politics. If you write a story about a decision on the local city council, it is of interest to maybe a few hundred thousand, whereas a story about Congress is of interest to tens of millions. Even if people were ten times as interested in local news (as measured by their willingness to subscribe or the amount of ads they are willing to be exposed to), it would still make more sense to send a reporter to the Capitol before City Hall.
I think a lot of our issues today are because people are too engaged in federal politics. It's turned into a massive spectacle on the same level as the NFL.
> Everyone has the same and equal meaningless vote.
There is one vote that is not meaningless: the primaries. A lot of the issues y'all have is that Democrats and Republicans alike don't bother to vote in the primaries. That is how you got people like MTG or Trump, that is how you get people like Chuck Schumer stuck in office for far too long.
AOC/The Squad and Mamdani both proved that it is possible to succeed in a primary and offer voters an actual alternative to the corporate owned shills.
> not because people are per se less interested in local politics than national politics
Actually I believe this is exactly the issue. Most people are interested more in national politics than county or even state politics. Of the people I know who vote in national elections, very few vote in local ones or even go to city council meetings.
Second anecdote, I take between 10 and 15 grams. I don’t experience cognitive effects at lower doses (though my weightlifting endurance is still higher on lower doses). I also don’t eat meat so don’t have any incidental consumption
One of her creatine videos mentions that your muscles will take up ingested creatine faster than the brain. So for any creatine to make its way to the brain, your muscular creatine stores must be topped up first.
I think dosage would depend on the amount of daily physical activity. If you work out a lot, you'd have to replenish your muscular creatine stores before the brain could access any/much.
She also mentions boosting creatine dosage after bouts of mental exertion.
To add another data point, a 2024 study [1] on the mental effects of single doses of creatine was using 0.35g/kg of creatinemonohydrate, or about 28g for a typical adult male. Though obviously high doses are safer if you just do them once
And an earlier 2018 article [2] argued that "Evidence suggests that the
blood–brain barrier is an obstacle for circulating cre-
atine, which may require larger doses and/or longer
protocols to increase brain creatine as compared to
muscle. In fact, the broad spectrum of creatine sup
plementation studies that span different dosing pr-
tocols (e.g. high-dose short-term, low dose longer-
term), co-ingestion of other nutrients/compounds
(e.g. carbohydrate, protein, insulin), different popu
lations (e.g. vegetarians, elderly, patients, athletes)
is unavailable for brain creatine adaptations"
Meat is one of the primary sources of dietary creatine, but still provides overall very little (~2g/pound of uncooked red meat). There isn't much to make up for in a non-meat eater and the 5g should still be fine.
https://youtu.be/IIbeFgaYTNs
reply