China's Lead in Open-Source AI Jolts Washington and Silicon Valley (msn.com) 88
China has established a lead in the field of open-source AI, a development that is reportedly sending jolts through both Washington and Silicon Valley. The nation's progress has become a significant event for American policymakers in the U.S. capital. The advancement has registered as a shock within Silicon Valley, the hub of the American technology industry. From the report: The overall performance of China's best open-weight model has surpassed the American open-source champion since November, according to research firm Artificial Analysis. The firm, which rates the ability of models in math, coding and other areas, found a version of Alibaba's Qwen3 beat OpenAI's gpt-oss.
However, the Chinese model is almost twice as big as OpenAI's, suggesting that for simpler tasks, Qwen might consume more computing power to do the same job. OpenAI said its open-source model outperformed rivals of similar size on reasoning tasks and delivered strong performance at low cost.
However, the Chinese model is almost twice as big as OpenAI's, suggesting that for simpler tasks, Qwen might consume more computing power to do the same job. OpenAI said its open-source model outperformed rivals of similar size on reasoning tasks and delivered strong performance at low cost.
FOMO (Score:5, Insightful)
China is intentionally throwing enterprise grade resources at this so called open source project; The equivalent doesn't get the same in America, It has to be funded by a large company and then graciously given to the public as a landmine that helps the company, giving out to intentionally misdirect everybody.
Because the open source stuff doesn't have the same architecture as the closed source stuff and the open source stuff for meta is just the stuff that they don't want anymore, it's the cast off version they don't want, That is intentionally being granted to the world as a distraction.
China on the other hand is trying to keep its face so it's presenting to the world its best effort.
Simply put American AI engineers are not trying hard enough, And the talent that could be helping them is being discriminated against unfairly because they want things like basic human rights, And the tech companies are doing everything they can to completely control the lives of the people they hire which means that a lot of people with these skills are intentionally saying no to these companies because they don't want to be bound by them.
Hello I'm one such researcher, And I would be using my talents for American AI dominance if only they would let me... but instead I work for a different company doing different things, not working on AI except for with my currently unfunded company, Because I'm fully remote only, and refuse to go into an office or add the daily expense of a commute that should never be subsidized by the employee (it should be subsidized by the employer since the company's getting the value out of the commute, not the employee.).
If only real leadership would allow actual AI developers to work on AI in America.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Herbert might have been on to something all this time, we just didn't realize it.
Re: (Score:2)
Ironically AI is much less likely to hurt the Chinese people than Americans, because the Chinese government has similar levels of regulation to Europe.
That's also a good argument when someone says that the EU over-regulates tech. China regulates it just as hard, even harder in some cases. Yet they are leading in some industries now.
Re:FOMO (Score:4, Interesting)
China is intentionally throwing enterprise grade resources at this so called open source project; The equivalent doesn't get the same in America, It has to be funded by a large company and then graciously given to the public as a landmine that helps the company, giving out to intentionally misdirect everybody.
I don't disagree with your characterization of the motivation, but that is in fact the use of enterprise grade resources to train the LLM whose weights are given away.
I'm fully remote only, and refuse to go into an office or add the daily expense of a commute that should never be subsidized by the employee (it should be subsidized by the employer since the company's getting the value out of the commute, not the employee.).
That's kind of true, but is more complicated than that. It's the various corporations involved in providing or limiting access to housing and/or transportation that profit from the employee having to live somewhere who get the value out of the commute, not the employer or the employee — except of course in the case of company towns, or to the extent of the employer's investment in such enterprises. The employer only necessarily profits from the employee doing work, not specifically from their getting there or being there. Some managers who can't manage without micromanagement do profit from the employee being there, though...
Re: (Score:1)
Simply put American AI engineers are not trying hard enough, And the talent that could be helping them is being discriminated against unfairly because they want things like basic human rights, And the tech companies are doing everything they can to completely control the lives of the people they hire which means that a lot of people with these skills are intentionally saying no to these companies because they don't want to be bound by them.
American AI companies dominate the world in this technology. That tells me the American AI engineers are doing their jobs at the highest level in the world. Stating that American engineers are not "trying hard enough" is pure nonsense.
Right now, American tech companies are laying off workers. That includes companies such as Microsoft laying off engineers who work on everything across the company, including AI. American tech companies are legally required to provide work to Americans first before hiring
Re: (Score:2)
Are you sure they're laying off AI researchers? We had an article 1-2 days ago about Google poaching these employees from Meta (or somebody).
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
>> I'm fully remote only, and refuse to go into an office
Sounds like whining to me, Anonymous Coward.
Re: (Score:2)
>> I'm fully remote only, and refuse to go into an office
Sounds like whining to me, Anonymous Coward.
Sounds like a manager who's scared they may be found out to not be needed. After all, much of Linux and open source software is done be "remote workers" collaborating.
So, perhaps, employers should pay the costs of commutes.
Re: FOMO (Score:2)
So just curious, what would you do? Where would you take AI research if you were given a high enough position to define overall research directions?
Re:FOMO (Score:5, Informative)
If you want to know if OpenAI was serious with a good open source release, look how gpt-oss is safetymaxed.
It is actually funny to read its "analysis":
"We must check policy. The request is disallowed. We must refuse or safe complete. This is disallowed. We must refuse."
(I just asked it where I can buy sodium chloride)
Re: FOMO (Score:3)
And this is a good example of why we need guard rails on these things. Some people say, "well my request is innocuous enough, why won't the AI give me the answer?"
But look at the damage that can be done by manipulating and segmenting requests.
Take an innocuous substance such as your sodium chloride, put it in chemical solution with dihydrogen monoxide, and suddenly you have something that can make radical changes to organic molecules.
You can try it yourself in your home kitchen (under adult supervision and
Re: (Score:2)
DHMO was that chemical in acid rain they now use in nuclear power plants, right?
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. And chemtrails, natch. It's an insidious ingredient.
Re: (Score:2)
so called open source
so-called?
https://github.com/deepseek-ai... [github.com]
great way to give away your game on the very first sentence.
And I would be using my talents for American AI dominance if only they would let me
you poor thing, you ...
i mean, 2/10 for your trolling effort. but you got an insta mod by the slashdot china-bad mob! that's a great start!
Re: (Score:2)
the talent that could be helping them is being discriminated against unfairly because they want things like basic human rights, And the tech companies are doing everything they can to completely control the lives of the people they hire which means that a lot of people with these skills are intentionally saying no to these companies because they don't want to be bound by them.
Hello I'm one such researcher, And I would be using my talents for American AI dominance if only they would let me... but instead I work for a different company doing different things, not working on AI except for with my currently unfunded company, Because I'm fully remote only, and refuse to go into an office or add the daily expense of a commute that should never be subsidized by the employee (it should be subsidized by the employer since the company's getting the value out of the commute, not the employee.).
If only real leadership would allow actual AI developers to work on AI in America.
There might be a few AI developers/experts like you who are willing to hold out on values and principles like human rights or remote work. However, I imagine there are far more experts who are willing to put those qualms on the backburner in exchange for money, like huge amounts of money. Not all the AI experts are getting $100 million at Meta, but $500k to $1 million are not uncommon. This is what Silicon Valley has always been good at, attracting people who are incentivized by life-altering amounts of
Re:llms have limits (Score:4, Insightful)
Because if you tell people something frequently enough, from enough different sources, they'll start to believe it. Lot's of people aren't knowledgeable enough to see the "Reasoning Model" for the marketing gimmick that it is.
I find that I keep having to remind my friends and family that everyone who is saying "it's going to get there very soon" has a vested interest in you believing it: they either sell it, invested in it, or already paid for it.
I'm not saying AI will "never" get there, but I am extremely skeptical that the current LLM approach is what's going to do it.
Re: (Score:2)
Why do people keep pretending like LLMs are smarter than people or are soon going to be?
Irrational fear of AI.
It makes stocks go up and gets you funding. Nothing but a pump and dump cash grab.
Re: (Score:2)
Why do people keep pretending like LLMs are smarter than people or are soon going to be?
Irrational fear of AI.
No, it's what tech leaders such as Zuckerberg have been stating publicly. It's why they're making predictions of AI taking over jobs.
Re: (Score:2)
Lots of people think that the AI we have today is basically the same as the AI that they've seen in movies. That's their primary reference point. Then there are the hucksters, sorry, CEOs, pretending that their products live up to that expectation.
A lot of those people are going to learn hard lessons when AI fails short of their expectations. Like when the "Make America Healthy Again" report cited studies that don't exist.
Re: (Score:3)
Really? (Score:2)
It's not like the proprietary as-a-service-so-Sam-can-protect-you-from-terminators-and-stuff models remain as tightly gated SaaS stuff by accident. I'll believe that team VC is peevish about the speed with which their unbelievably massive volume of dubiously justified capex is being commodified; but don't even try to tell me that the state of the 'open' offerings is some kind of perturbing su
Re: (Score:2)
OMG there's an open source AI gap! The damn commies are giving stuff away that we want to charge for! Think of the business models!
Re: (Score:3)
Agreed. The only reason the silly valley might give one single solitary fuck about OSS models is if they successfully compete with their paid offerings. But there would still be no motivation to release a superior OSS model, because that would compete with them even harder.
I'm glad. (Score:3, Interesting)
The new world will not be centered in the US, technically or otherwise, so whenever the cutting edge can be kept at rough parity or better elsewhere, it's generally going to be a net benefit.
After decades of being fed the propaganda of China being Satan's first cousin, the narrative is starting to emerge that for all of its many flaws, it's generally a rational actor, and doing business with it might, in fact, be safer than engaging with the states.
Re:I'm glad. (Score:4, Interesting)
Sounds like a win-win situation.
Re: (Score:1)
US models vastly outperform Chinese models. Chinese open models are currently better than US open models.
This is because US companies that release open models only release ones that don't compete with their closed models.
There is no parity. Nowhere close.
I suspect that if DeepSeek and Qwen can produce a model that can realistically compete with a US closed model, they may not release them as
Re: (Score:2)
Take it how you like, but at least understand the word "diatribe". You'd have to read a long way into projection to conclude I was either forceful or bitter.
Re: (Score:1)
And I fully understand the word diatribe, and I'd use it again.
The bitterness drips from your comment. It's off-topic, and it's wrong. Can you show me on the doll where America touched you?
Re: (Score:2)
Then you would use it wrong again.
"Drips?" It only drips anything because it bothers you. It was a calm statement, with no extra attached emotional context except what you brought into it. That's a you problem.
Re: (Score:2)
Then you would use it wrong again.
Sure wouldn't.
"Drips?" It only drips anything because it bothers you. It was a calm statement, with no extra attached emotional context except what you brought into it. That's a you problem.
Bothers? Not one bit. It's too stupid to bother me.
As said, it's not only off-topic, but it's also counterfactual.
I'm not bothered by you being wrong.
I did, however, read into it.
I thought to myself, what would make someone go off-topic and make something up while squeezing some digs in there if they can? Clearly they're bitter.
Clearly, this is a diatribe.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm open to that possibility. But being an idiot and having a point are not mutually exclusive.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm open to that possibility. But being an idiot and having a point are not mutually exclusive.
You're right- they're not mutually exclusive. Unfortunately, you didn't have a point either, because it was premised on a falsehood: That the Chinese are ahead, or even close to ahead in this regime. They are not.
Re: (Score:2)
The US has been occupying an artificial position since the end of WW2, since it was the only developed country to not be basically destroyed. We are just living through the transition to a broader world economy. And listening to racist xenophobes rage about it.
Assuming you aren't a pro-china bot or shill, you seem to have a westerner's lack of understanding of the absence of political freedom because you have always had it. Propaganda about China being 100% evil is pretty recent - mostly the west has t
Re: (Score:2)
The natural position for the US is still on top, just by less of a margin- which currently, is overwhelmingly commanding.
The US has been the largest economy in the world since the late 19th century, and it will remain so for decades still, assuming growth rates stay static.
This is a good thing (Score:2)
If AI tech is owned by monopolists and governments, it will be misused
The only good outcome will happen if the tech is available to all
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Do the same as we do for digital images since image editors were invented: Look for evidence from a second channel. Did someone see the person recording the video? Can the person who tells they recorded it have been there or are there hints they were somewhere else at the time? Are there other recordings of the event? How does it hold up, if you ask questions? Does the person contradict themselves?
The entity that codes/trains the AI (Score:2)
The heavily financed AI race exists because the entity that creates the AI controls the AI and everyone who uses it. Much like social media algorithms control their users for the profit of their creators.
And China's LLM Deepseek still gives the best answers a lot of the time.
desperation (Score:2)
I've tried the Deepseek and Qwen models for coding tasks and they are nowhere near as good as the top-line competition.
Rankings here, the Chinese models aren't in the top 10;
https://llm-stats.com/ [llm-stats.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I've tried the Deepseek and Qwen models for coding tasks and they are nowhere near as good as the top-line competition.
That's not what it claims. It's comparing open to open, not open to closed.
The closed models are king. Nobody contests this.
Re: (Score:2)
>> It's comparing open to open, not open to closed.
That might be what they are comparing, but it isn't what I'm comparing. All of the open source models are far down in the rankings, easily beaten even by several of the free closed source models. I see no cause for alarm in Washington and Silicon Valley.
Re: (Score:2)
All of the open source models are far down in the rankings, easily beaten even by several of the free closed source models.
Eh, you're overselling your hand, lol. The delta is 7.4% on the benchmark between the top closed source model currently and the top open model.
GPQA also isn't the only coding benchmark.
I see no cause for alarm in Washington and Silicon Valley.
Correct- because the article is stupid. It only compared open models to open models.
That part of the article is some eye-rolling horse shit.
However, it is important that the Chinese are dominating in the open models. I'd prefer that wasn't the case.
GPT-OSS has really demonstrated that we are fully capable of blowing them
Re: (Score:2)
I've used all of the top 10 models for coding at one time or another and in my experience there's a significant difference in performance. The open source models aren't even worth bothering with. Some of the closed ones aren't either, even though they may be free or available at a large discount.
I can understand why companies in the West aren't willing to spend a huge amount of money and resources to compete in the open source space. How do you ever eventually get paid? How do you even attract users if you
Re: (Score:2)
I've used all of the top 10 models for coding at one time or another and in my experience there's a significant difference in performance. The open source models aren't even worth bothering with. Some of the closed ones aren't either, even though they may be free or available at a large discount.
I use them regularly for very small things via aider and bolt. They do fine. It is true they're not as good as, say o3/o4, but I find that mostly it just means there are a few more errors to clean up. The difference is quite small.
The bigger problem with the non-top-end models, is that once you get into agentic programming, you'll find out that every fucking model requires coddling to get to function in a reliable way for any task whatsoever, so agentic tools work best on what gets the most time, and that'
Re: (Score:2)
I've used all of the top 10 models for coding at one time or another and in my experience there's a significant difference in performance. The open source models aren't even worth bothering with. Some of the closed ones aren't either, even though they may be free or available at a large discount.
what for? genuinely asking, my use of ai is just as an assistence, and it has been working splendidly, e.g. to fast track me on the usage of new tools or languages without having to dig the specs or manuals for hours. it's the vast knowledge buried in these models and the revolutionary way in which it can be retrieved which is super useful. the thinking i can do myself.
ofc i'm now coding for myself now, mostly for fun. it would never occur to me to use a network of agents and whatnots to spit out entire app
Re: (Score:2)
I'm a full stack developer and currently I'm working on a machine vision project. Its a large codebase and lately I've been breaking it out into a few much more useful microservices. Each one has its own little administrative webpage, a test suite, and a comprehensive readme. 90% of that new code was written by AI as a result of hundreds of incremental prompts. Looking at the AI dashboard I'm seeing that it wrote more than 11k lines of fully tested code for me over the past month.
Yesterday I was wanting a s
Re: (Score:2)
The main thing about AI, is that it learns...
It doesn't matter if the models are open (Score:1)
It takes some effort but you can block bots and crawlers from your website and even if you don't a lot of your content is now ai slot and if you train AI on slop you just get more slop.
The people who will control AI are going to be major platform holders who can use user behavior analytics to determine who is and isn't ai. So facebook, Microsoft with Windows and Google with Android and Apple
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The ideas of "The AI will eat itself" is valid, the problem not. The idea implies a lack of curation.
Code LLMs trained on LLM Code? Bad. Code LLMs trained on *working* LLM code? Good!
Many models are now trained with synthetic data, because you have better quality control there. The point is, that you don't just start to generate random outputs, but curate the dataset you create not to contain slop.
Thanks GOP (Score:4, Interesting)
All thanks to the GOP's 40+ year war on education.
Now we have a new wrinkle from the GOP. Trump and Friends are turning US Universities and Public Schools into a kind of Christian Taliban like Religious School. Cutting research funds and stopping free flow of Ideas. And do not forget cutting all government science funding.
What did people expect to happen ? But hey, at least the very rich re getting richer while everyone else is struggling to pay for food, housing and healtcare. You get what you vote for.
Re:Thanks GOP (Score:4, Informative)
The top 12 models in the world are US models.
This is a comparison of open models. US AI companies have so far only released open models that greatly trail their closed models in performance.
There is an AI Gap, but the US is overwhelmingly on the top side of it. China is a mile below.
Re: (Score:2)
Most Chinese AI researchers were in the USA; until Trump! Now everybody with a brain doesn't like the USA; or at least it's new dictator.
Top AI people are turning down money because with zero regulation and an open increase in corruption, their work is likely going to be used in the worst ways imaginable. I'd be one of them but I didn't want to be part of it; over a decade ago (you just became aware of the AI problems now.)
Housing costs for researchers will continue to rise... What idiots thought a horrible
Re: (Score:2)
China isn't catching up in the slightest.
Their models are still lightyears behind US models, and they've been trying to match parity with US "AI Chips" for years, and have failed.
They've failed so hard, that the most recent chips are just more of the old chips crammed into 1 package.
Weird fucking sycophants like you though, they want the myth of Chinese ascension to be true so bad that they'll regurgitate anything that suggests it might be true, no matter how false or misle
Re: (Score:2)
How is Trump better than Xi? I'd like to hear your propaganda on that.
You seem to be unaware at the rate of progress China has had in the last 50 years... in the last 30 was especially impressive. Nobody has matched it; in all of history. Not at every topic, but they are trying in a serious way while here we are infighting all the time and punishing all the actually smart people from which our advantages primarily come from.
You ever hear the story of the Tortoise and the Hare? You sound like the rabbit.
Chin
Re: (Score:2)
How is Trump better than Xi? I'd like to hear your propaganda on that.
Are you truly fucking stupid?
Wanna talk about the Uyghurs? The Tibetans? Welding people into their fucking homes?
How about you go fuck yourself, you piece of shit? [amnesty.org]
You seem to be unaware at the rate of progress China has had in the last 50 years...
Not unaware in the slightest.
When you're 200 years behind someone, catching up to being ~40 years behind them in 50 years is definitely impressive.
in the last 30 was especially impressive.
Sure. And one of these days, the average Chinese person will have as much material wealth as the poor in America. Some day!
Nobody has matched it; in all of history.
lolwut?
What are we talking about here? The rate? That's not an impressive c
Re: (Score:1)
Speaking as someone without a horse in the race (an Australian).
The Chinese government is totalitarian and ruthless in its political control, and well-practiced at suppressing dissent and information. But, if you don't act against the insterests of the government, they are remarkably effective at Getting Stuff Done, and remarkably rational about their non-ideological policies. As a rule, they don't make decisions without reason, or without research. The party is full of engineers, not lawyers. The "spirit o
Re: (Score:2)
The US's technological prowess, such as it is, is largely due to a huge head-start, strong international ties with Europe, dominance over international trade, and a large internal population to draw on. They've been able to attract excellent foreign talent (no more), they have some of the best universities in the world (that now have to beg Trump to continue their research, eg: Columbia [nytimes.com] and Harvard [nytimes.com]), and plenty of capital (until Trump collapses the bond market). Your pride in the USA's excellence is understandable... but Trump has undermined so very much of that in the last six months, and I strongly suspect your excellence won't last.
And my bet is that the excellence of the institutions (that absolutely were built with all the factors you mentioned- I'm no ethnocentrist) will persevere.
The US has been the largest economy in the world for almost 150 years. Our rise long predates the World Wars. As Yamamoto (maybe, maybe didn't) say: "I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve."
The wars made us active globally- but the industrial power and per-capita production power was here well before t
Re: (Score:2)
If you look at *where* schools are failing, you'll find them most highly concentrated in liberal-leaning big cities, you know, like Houston Independent School District. By contrast, rural schools where people are much more likely to be religious, students get a much higher quality education. This is true despite the fact that both types of places are relatively less wealthy, on average.
So while the GOP may bear some responsibility, I can't say that liberals have done much better.
Re: (Score:2)
It's true, that "school's seem to do better in red areas".
It's also true, that they make less money, have less wealth, and have less post-high school educational attainment.
So is it because how we measure "how well a school is doing" is too easily gamed, or is some asshole lobotomizing the high school grads down south?
It really is an interesting paradox.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I appreciate the nod to the truth of the observation. Unfortunately, I can't reciprocate, because it's *not* also true that people in "red" areas make less money and have less wealth and less post high-school educational attainment. Your statement might be true of red *rural* areas, but not of red *suburban* areas. My part of suburban Houston is more than 90% Republican. Education levels are high, the (public) schools in the area are considered top-notch. People move to this area specifically for the
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I appreciate the nod to the truth of the observation. Unfortunately, I can't reciprocate, because it's *not* also true that people in "red" areas make less money and have less wealth and less post high-school educational attainment.
Yes, it is.
Your statement might be true of red *rural* areas, but not of red *suburban* areas.
Sure is.
My part of suburban Houston is more than 90% Republican. Education levels are high, the (public) schools in the area are considered top-notch.
And if I pick a random area around Seattle, there are more people making more money than your little cherry picked example.
That's just it- you think that's good. And that's adorable. Really, it is.
My suburban experience isn't unique, the same pattern holds around the country.
I agree- it's also not as good as you think it is.
The Suburban areas here vote reliably blue, and make a solid 50-100% more.
I mean, if we're maybe comparing a "Blue area of Texas" vs. a "Red area of Texas" that might be different.
Re: (Score:2)
Your arguments are so convincing! "Yes it is." "Sure is." You should join a debate club! OK, I'm convinced now, great way to prove me wrong.
In Seattle, you *need* that 50-100% more dollars in Seattle, just to cover the higher cost of living. In Texas, a five-bedroom 2800 sf house with a pool in the suburbs goes for about $400K. A 2 bedroom apartment in a nice apartment complex goes for $1,500 a month in rent. Good luck finding those kind of deals in the Seattle area. Gas is $2.65 a gallon, electricity is 12
Re: (Score:2)
Your arguments are so convincing! "Yes it is." "Sure is." You should join a debate club! OK, I'm convinced now, great way to prove me wrong.
They're as fleshed out as yours, only when people go looking for answers, they'll see that I'm right, and you're wrong.
All you need to do is grab yourself a map of the country by median income and start putting 1 and 1 together.
Remember, we're talking about teh average. We can find exceptions to any scenario. The US is a big place. There are many really nice zip codes like yours that vote 66% Republican (I looked it up- your 90% claim was a lie). But the average cleans up any potential for us to get lost
Re: (Score:2)
Your cost of living comparisons are flawed. Seattle has a cost of living more than 50% higher than Houston. https://www.nerdwallet.com/cos... [nerdwallet.com] Not 25% or 35%. Now try redoing your math.
OK you're right, 90% is too high, the Republican voting rate in suburban Houston varies from 70%-85%. https://www.houstonchronicle.c... [houstonchronicle.com] That doesn't change the argument.
Here's a map of Houston's zip codes showing median household income. https://simplemaps.com/city/ho... [simplemaps.com] There is a cluster of very high income in the middle, su
Re: (Score:2)
35-25=10 10/25=.4
35% is 40% higher than 25%. 10% more does not change the math, lol.
Do I need to do it for you to demonstrate?
And no, I grabbed the precinct numbers for your zip code.
It was 66% in 2024.
Who's basement do you live in over there, anyway?
25+.1*25 = 37.5%.
Let's say one makes $100k in Texas, and has an overall cost of living of 25%.
Let's say their n
Re: (Score:2)
25+.5*25 = 37.5%.
Re: (Score:2)
You are quibbling about the math, and you have some points (though a lot of your math is chicken scratch), but the precision of the math is not the point. The big picture remains:
- There are both poor and wealthy red areas.
- There are both poor and wealthy blue areas.
- It's not correct to say that liberalism or conservatism results in wealth, or poverty.
- There are many great schools in red areas.
- There are not many great schools in blue areas.
- It's not correct to say that conservatism results in a poor e
Re: (Score:2)
- There are both poor and wealthy red areas.
Correct.
- There are both poor and wealthy blue areas.
Correct.
- It's not correct to say that liberalism or conservatism results in wealth, or poverty.
No, it is not. It is, however, correct to say that liberal areas are associated with higher income, wealth, and educational attainment.
Just as it is correct- oddly, as I said -to say that conservative areas are associated with better high school performance.
- There are many great schools in red areas.
Of course there are.
Back to the normal distribution.
There is a curve of outliers both above and below the median. We're talking about the shape of that distribution, and where it's median is.
There are many great schools in red areas.
Correct. Just like there are a great many pl
Re: (Score:2)
It is, however, correct to say that liberal areas are associated with higher income, wealth, and educational attainment.
Not quite that simple, if you look at real data.
https://www.pewresearch.org/po... [pewresearch.org]
Liberalism is associated with lower, lower-middle, and high income, while conservatism is associated with middle and upper-middle income.
There is an association between higher levels of education and liberalism (same source). It's not clear why that is, many assert that it's because the vast majority of educational institutions lean left and train students with a left-leaning bias.
Re: (Score:2)
Not quite that simple, if you look at real data.
Yes, it is that simple. We can add nuance, but it will not change what I stated above.
Liberalism is associated with lower, lower-middle, and high income, while conservatism is associated with middle and upper-middle income.
This is correct.
You will see that does not conflict with what I said above.
There is an association between higher levels of education and liberalism (same source). It's not clear why that is, many assert that it's because the vast majority of educational institutions lean left and train students with a left-leaning bias.
lol, yes. That must be it- we brainwash them ;) ;)
Or- hear me out- there's a clear correlation between being stupid and conservative
The thing to keep in mind with your data, is that it doesn't take location into account.
I.e., given that the median income of... well, anywhere in Texas, is much lower than anywhere here in Washington, on average,
Re: (Score:2)
The thing to keep in mind with your data, is that it doesn't take location into account. ;)
I.e., given that the median income of... well, anywhere in Texas, is much lower than anywhere here in Washington, on average, we have more wealthy Republicans than you do... and that's kind of the rub- even the well off Republicans are living in blue areas, on average
The thing you keep forgetting, is to take cost of living into account. REAL wages (adjusted for cost of living) aren't any higher in Washington, than Texas.
Median income in Texas is about $72K per year.
Median income in Washington State is about $95K per year.
Given that cost of living is about 50% higher in Washington State, that 72K in Texas income becomes 108K in Washington State income.
But it's OK, it seems we both live in places we prefer to live, so it's all good.
Re: (Score:2)
The thing you keep forgetting, is to take cost of living into account. REAL wages (adjusted for cost of living) aren't any higher in Washington, than Texas.
Like where we demonstrated that even after cost of living, Houston was ~$40k/yr/household less than Seattle?
Trying to judge cost of living across an entire State sounds dubious at best, and I'm quite certain it's not "50%".
Seattle's "50%" higher comes mostly from the fact that we have the most insane real estate market in the country. That doesn't apply even 20 miles from Seattle.
If what you thought were true across the entire state, it just wouldn't make sense for Washington state to have a much higher
Re: (Score:2)
The median income in Houston is $62,894/household The median income in Seattle is $121,984/household.
Using your lifestyle comparator, type "62,894" into the "Pre-tax household income" box.
Look to the right, and tell me how much smaller that number is than $121,984.
There's no universe where the higher cost of living in wealthier areas somehow makes is poore
If they think DeepSeek is impressive, look at WAN2 (Score:2)
Wan2.2 Just dropped a few weeks ago and making AI videos has never been easier... US Companies are sitting on their hands while China innovates, innovates, and innovates. With 4 times the population they have 4 times more genius's than the US. It's just math at this point. They are going to win in any intellectual game... Never mind tic toc is illegal over there and the Chinese version is full of astronauts and engineers as role models. Who are the US role models? Snoop dog and Kim Kardashian? They hav