runsWphotons

The Rosenbergs were executed for espionage under the Espionage Act 1917, not for acting as unregistered foreign agents under FARA. They were exfiltrating classified nuclear secrets. This is an entirely different thing.

Unregistered foreign agents tend to receive a fine, if they are charged at all. Before the past decade even this was very rare, now maybe there is one per year. The maximum punishment is like 5 years in jail, and no one has ever been hung for this. The directive to conflate these only traces to Pam Bondi.

Most of your post is like this in that you speak authoritatively but fumble premises. For instance you clearly don't understand free speech law. Yelling fire in a crowded theatre IS protected speech. The Schenck case your quote comes from was overturned in Brandenberg 60 years ago and is considered a national judicial embarrassment.

Name one person ever hung for being an unregistered foreign agent in the US.

This seems like it would be way too dangerous for all sorts of security reasons.

Our survival as a civilization? I cannot follow at all what you are talking about. What threat?

I read the article as claiming that the Administration is implying it will harass or prosecute people for speaking or protesting against AI/data centers by deeming this to be "in support of China". I hope everyone agrees that would be a truly absurd breach of the first amendment, if it happened.

Letting the executive branch decide on a whim that certain speech is illegal because it would "further the goals of enemy X" would surely be a civilizational threat to America (if it actually happened), but that doesn't seem to be what you mean?

All the specific people mentioned in the article seem to be American [except arguably the three businessmen arguing for data centers--O'leary, Musk, Sacks], so I can't tell what the other guy is talking about either? Non-Americans do not generally have American speech protections unless in America legally (and then with some caveats). That's not America's decision!

What is your point? You agree people have the right to act on their beliefs to effect democratic change, right? Surely that includes making up their own minds about information.

linking .gov as a source for a claim the government is making lol

Absolutely? I don't think it does so much. People speaking different languages seem to have very similar thoughts. It's true that fluency is a wholistic performance, but I don't think there are any particular thoughts that can't be translated.

What does mind mean for you? Would you use the word for something not conscious?

Fwiw, I interpret poster above as referring to root of the word. The English root for mind has a strong connotation of requiring memory (and commonly in other IE languages).

In western philosophy, say in aquinas, the mind is something that can discern moral truths and reason about morality. It is "soulful".

I think it is good people are talking but there seems to be a lot of "forced optimism", especially by people obviously hoping to keep a channel open between themselves and the labs.

I think it isn't true that no one imminent is considering (1). Tsimmerman said he thought the job of math researcher was over as soon as he announced he was leaving the field.

I think the question is so far still open, but it is easy to imagine Tsimmerman was right. I haven't been impressed with the calls for "human understanding" as the really important thing. It seems to miss the point of why math has been funded (not exactly problems, but certainly not to ensure every theorem is understood either).

As a scifi comment, it is now possible to start thinking about some future AI system which decides if it will need to explain certain math to humans and to pick and train young people for that purpose.

Flamebait I guess but I think it is good we have several options to choose from already. If you don't like Elon there are several other models, and each can pick the one controlled by her favourite supervillain.

This is completely a figment of your imagination.

It benefits a few corporations in the short term but not America in general. And if the oil prices rise and stay high, there will be demand destruction. US sits on top of the capital food chain and will be hurt.

Hawaii is rife with ethnic tensions, not some exception.

No, we don't.

Also the officer should believe this threat is imminent.