Idea. They can develop all they want, only the government should be the one buying and selling weapons. That way if a government decides to sell weapons to genocidal maniacs, people can vote that government out.
This is functionally what already happens. The market to sell into for defense is almost entirely B2G, the only exceptions being places where the existing government is not very strong or centralized
A logger working for a company cutting a few trees to make furniture is not the same thing as a logger working for a company shredding the whole forest to circulate money.
Every island is capable of hosting pedophiles, but they don't. The one island that's famous for pedos is the one Musk wanted to be invited to. Find me more pedo islands, I'll dunk on them too very consistently. Whether it's AI with CSAM or islands with pedos, Musk is definitely consistent.
The same way any reasonable person thinks Trump is the government of US of A, regardless of his affinity to scammers, pedophiles or Russia. Wishful thinking does not change facts.
No, I don't think anyone seriously doubts whether or not Trump actually won the elections after which he was appointed president.
The same however is not true of Maduro, where "Maduro did not actually get sufficient votes to win the latest election" is a pretty commonly held view backed by evidence. You might reasonably doubt the veracity of that evidence, but directly comparing Maduro's position with that of Trump is simply ridiculous.
That's what I said. Yes it's a fact and not merely a commonly held view that Trump's campaign had Russian actors, but reasonable people still consider him President, and not a puppet placed by Putin.
So factually proven Russian interference in the United States elections does not invalidate election. Maduro interference, the veracity of which can be reasonably doubted in your very own words, does invalidate the election.
Comically ridiculous reasonable people.
The puppet tows the line of the "elected" dictator, who is famous for killing his opponents. But comically ridiculous reasonable people still consider them both presidents of their respective nations.
You can't be serious, but the nature of the interference differs:
Russians allegedly posted things on twitter that may or may not have helped Trump.
Maduro allegedly just totally lied about the vote counts, did not actually win the election.
The first is at best "meh", the second is circumventing the electoral process completely.
> So factually proven Russian interference in the United States elections does not invalidate election
If you consider Russian interference in the US elections to be factually proven, then I suppose we can safely make that same assumption about the Venezuelan electoral fraud claims. I'd say the public evidence regarding those is even better than the evidence available related to the Russian electoral interference claims.
That's an unfair mischaracterization of their position. Criticism doesn't equal rejection, and skepticism isn't the same as ignorance. Pointing out limitations, failures, or hype doesn't mean they are claiming there's nothing useful or that the entire technology is inherently worthless.
Being critical is not about denying all value—it’s about demanding evidence, accuracy, and clarity amid inflated claims. In fact, responsible critique helps improve technology by identifying where it falls short, so it can evolve into something genuinely useful and reliable.
What you're calling "willful ignorance" is, in reality, a refusal to blindly accept marketing narratives or inflated expectations. That’s not being closed-minded—that’s being discerning.
If there is something truly valuable, it will stand up to scrutiny.
It's amazing how it goes from all the knowledge in the world to ** terms and conditions apply, all answers are subject to market risks, please read the offer documents carefully.........
