I read your comment. You made assertions and presented no data to support them.

You are now making a point that China is "weaponising" the trade surplus "and turning it into the economic equivalent of an aircraft carrier by buying government bonds (e.g. the national debt) of countries that they may have a problem with in the future." I don't necessarily disagree with that, but that wasn't the point of the article we're discussing.

So, the revised version of your comment summarizes to "I don't believe it."

OK.

so, I take it you didn't read the article, which contradicts what you say. Here is their growth of exports compared to imports: https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fimg-s-msn-com.akamaize...

Not according to the article. According to the article, in the postwar era America was an export powerhouse, but used their economic power to raise the manufacturing capability of other nations, allowing them in turn to export to us.

China, on the other han, is buildimg themself to be an export powerhouse, but using their economic power to undermine the manufacturing capability of other nations, and stopping them from exporting to them,

No.

Thermal converters need a temperature difference to produce power.

(serious answer to a frivolous question).

Hallucinate is the word people have adopted. Sorry you don't like it, but I notice you don't cite a better term.

I object to calling LLMs "AI", but looks like that battle is lost as well.

We should introduce you to how language works. Words get adapted to fit the requirements. Sometimes new words are coined; sometimes words are borrowed from other languages... and sometimes existing words get used in new contexts.

Nobody kvetches when we use the word "aviation" to flying in an airplane ("Aves" means "bird." Airplanes aren't birds.) Nobody objects when we talk about a computer memory configured as a "stack" (nothing is piled up in a stack. It's all electronically-addressable electronic bits.) Nobody objects to "opening" a "file" in a new "window" on your "desktop".

Words get adapted.

Large language models hallucinate. Learn the word.

Worse. Oil companies are driving the lobbying (i.e., bribing politicians) because they make trillions from people burning as much gasoline as possible.

It's a pity; I loved Zipcar when I lived in Boston a decade or two back. I could live without a car for weeks, but if I wanted one for an hour or an afternoon, two clicks on the app and I got one.

Moved away, though, and haven't used them since.

You just made a statement and then immediately contradicted it.

Of course natural gas power plants can produce 24/7 electricity. The fact that natural gas has the advantage of being well adapted for load-following does not mean that it does not also have value for baseline power, and the natural gas companies will be happy to sell you natural gas for both applications. And natural gas plants are cheap and fast to build compared to nuclear.

Also, solar plus batteries is a strong contender in locations with abundant sunlight.

Plonk.

The tickets to the theme park had nothing to do with their trip to the restaurant. The restaurant was not at the theme park.

The point which you missed is that Disney claimed that agreeing to the terms of service of any Disney-branded product meant agreeing to arbitration even for products that had no relationship.

So, your reading comprehension doesn't distinguish between a park and a restaurant. You know that the restaurant was located in Disney Springs, a couple of miles away from the Disney World park.

The Apollo capsules were made by North American Rockwell, which was renamed Rockwell International in 1973, then sold to Boeing in 1996.

So, actually Boeing was the company that had designs that used to work.

Unless you have a citation for that, I will continue to believe the facts as stated in the article we are discussing and not the "facts" that you just made up.

Oh, and you don't need to "purchase a ticket" to eat at a restaurant in Disney Springs. I'm trying to think of any restaurant in which you sign on to terms of service before dining, and can't think of one.