If it was only to raise money why did he resign, where he will have zero control of said money and all the glory, if successful, will go to his successor?
News on China's scientific and technological development.
- Thread starter Quickie
- Start date
If it was only to raise money why did he resign, where he will have zero control of said money and all the glory, if successful, will go to his successor?
Agree! The "missile gap" has become "AI gap," but it is all about tricks to get more money into pockets of big firms' CEOs.
Did those who brought up the missile gap resign from their commands?
And the US is invincible so long as big firms' CEOs fleece more money from taxpayers?
Its entirely possible that the guy is resigning to take up a board position on one of the companies that would benefit from an "AI gap" funding spree.
They'd give him a board position so soon at 37 when he's not a venture capitalist or a founder and not a penny has been allocated? Just for a few words? Silicon Valley is a charity now?
Yes? Quite often they put people on the board not because of their money but because of their connections and their name recognition. That he was first chief software officer for the USAF gives him some pretty big name recognition. He's also planning to testify before congress. That gives him at least some "street cred" too, at least in the boardrooms and corner offices of the US cybersecurity industry.
And his article is pretty "clickbaity" too, and him writing to it now, it all points to him trying to "build his brand" and try and a piece of the MIC money, not try to raise any actual warning about US cyberwarfare capabilities.
As an aside, he's apparently the founder and sole employee of "Prevent Breach",
a cybersecurity company. So it could be that he's putting this "China Scary!" thing out there to drum up business for his company too.
Last edited:
We'll see. I find the accusations that any admission of weakness as being insincere and actually means they're super strong to be a funny way of worshipping them, as if you believed them to be omnipotent and only lacking in narrative.
No-one suggested that and I think its best to avoid such emotionally-charged language.
You say that any admission of weakness is insincere in order to gain funding. An insincere statement is false. Therefore, the weakness does not exist.
But if all statements of weaknesses are false, then there are no weaknesses. There is only all aspect strength. That is essentially omnipotence. But belief in omnipotence is unlikely to be logical, as omnipotence is unlikely to exist. Therefore, it is a faith based belief.
This is why I used the words I did. Correct me if my logic is wrong. Thanks.