Not necessarily, commoditize your complement is a common strategy USA & Europe are more services heavy than China which seems to have advantage at manufacturing these days if AI trained on everybody data can replace some of it than it reduce China depend on others, increase demands from other countries to china's manufacturing and reduce their dependence on USA & Europe and reduce USA & Europe bargaining chip in any future negotiate.
False trichotomy
4. Small amount of people make sure to look and echo everything that paint Israel in bad light and this work, we know this work because this entire post is about a company (small amount of people) influencing New York and Scotland votes.
Seeing as billions upon billions of dollars goes into Israel's lobbying operations (including countless more from non-affiliated but pro-Israeli groups), that must be the least successful industry ever to be outclassed by a small number of random guys online.
Your inability to distinguish "Small amount of people make sure to look and echo everything" and "All the reporting is controlled by the antisemitic media conglomerates" is noted
> Yet, listen to Zionists and I’m practically living in Weimar Germany. That dog won’t hunt.
Yeah this is so detached from reality I have to ask how you arrived at this conclusion and consider reexamining the way you consume information. Both in my own personal impression and according ADL global index USA's antisemitism is a low. Because "Zionists" have pro-Israel bias they will perceive any one who support Israel positively, and no one support Israel more than USA, so they will likely view USA as positive further lessening negtive views.
Remilk is an Israeli food-tech startup using yeasts to produce milk proteins. Frankly I find your comment rather odd, why should a startup be more loud because other people are biased? Diplomacy is the job of the state. We have innovative index on which Israel does well and large number of unicorn per capita.
> why should a startup be more loud because other people are biased? Diplomacy is the job of the state.
I agree with you that it is the job of the state to do diplomacy, I would argue that the Israeli state has done an extremely poor job at that, so it may be left to some of its greener industry to pick up the slack, unfortunately.
Not because they 'have to' but because they would want to if they want to expand abroad and not get overshadowed by the bad PR the Israeli state is so good at putting out.
I disagree with you that 'other people are biased'.
One of the reasons Israeli soft power is so weak at the moment is precisely because its diplomats always insist everyone is just simply biased against Israel, often invoking some thousands year old hatred of its people etc. rather than for one second introspecting on the fact that the actions of the state may indeed have something to do with that perceived bias.
It should indeed be the job of Israeli diplomats to work and promote Israel in the best light possible
> but this was a huge deal for me living in Israel.
I lived in Israel my whole life and I don't remember ever encountering the notion that 'speaking with your hands is lacking "class"' or that ' It's generally seen as "proper" to not use your hands.'. I just looked and easily found two videos with Israel's Prime Minister where he used hand gestures while talking.
> In the military, especially in basic training, that would probably send you doing pushups.
Here's about the Israeli PM, and why he's allowed not to wear a tie:
> One day, Netanyahu shows up to the Knesset not wearing a tie. The speaker then reminds him about the decorum, to which Netanyahu replies that the queen of England allowed him not to wear one. The speaker then inquires about the circumstances, to which Netanyahu replies that he didn't wear a tie to Buckingham either, and that the queen told him "perhaps back in Israel, you might not wear a tie, but you must remember to wear one here."
In other words, Netanyahu is, by no means an example of what anyone would consider to be "classy". He's not the worst example, but he certainly fits the stereotype of obnoxious, loud, poorly dressed and otherwise poorly mannered.
> No, I don't think so, why would it?
Absolutely. It's kind of ridiculous to watch a typical Israeli recruit struggle with it. There's a practical reason for it: you have to speak clearly when you are on comms, and nobody can you see swing your hands to explain yourself. But, military being military, this is just a rule that's applied to everyone. Another reason is that you have to stand at attention ("amod be dom matuakh") when you are talking to an officer. Again, this applies to basic training ("tironut") only, since during your regular service you rarely stand at attention in general, let alone when talking to an officer.
No, there were efforts to ban TikTok well before Oct 7th 2023 in 2020-2021 by the first Trump Admin, and there was ongoing effort in 2022-2023 during Biden Admin.
There were National Security ghouls pushing a TikTok ban as far back as 2020 because of the "China bad" angle, but it didn't really become a widespread and bipartisan concern until after the latest round of massacres amped up in Gaza and USAians started seeing atrocities on TikTok.
China is bad. It's a hyper authoritarian state using information collected from accounts for nefarious purposes, including informing their influence campaigns, targeting and they were censoring for specific issues.
It's unthinkable that any free nation would allow a fairly oppressive and powerful entity to have that kind of power.
China had (has) it's own police force in Canada, monitoring ex-pats and students, and very actively monitors nationals and ex-nationals, they us research funding to leverage acquiescence on those kinds of things on campus etc..
Media, Finance and other 'core industries' are protected everywhere, the only place it's less visible is the US, because they haven't needed to - the nation is huge relative to it's peers.
Instead of being TikTok specific, most nations should have foreign surveillance rules and they should be applied much more severely to the extent that those nations are authoritarian / totalitarian etc..
China should not be allowed to own any media entities in the West, full stop.
Most nations should definitely ban US Social Media companies from hosting certain kinds of data, have some domiciling rules that protect form CLOUD act etc..
All of that proportional to the risk and general concerns; obviously the US represents a risk vector of greater proportion than in 2008, so rules need to adjust.
> It's a hyper authoritarian state using information collected from accounts for nefarious purposes, including informing their influence campaigns, targeting and they were censoring for specific issues.
As an american, I'm already used to that from my own government.
You made a vacuous comment, lacking any reason or principle.
The 'National Security Ghouls' are those arresting people for comments such as yours, putting them into camps, cutting access to information, disabling travel or access to services, shutting down expression and dissent, intervening in judicial affairs, arresting journalists, telling students what they cannot say, threatening and intimidating ex-pats etc..
Are you gaslighting Israel has been committing a genocide long before Oct 7th. Reactions of people after the shock of Oct 7th wore off made Israel to actually do something about tiktok using its Israel lobby. The only one that can get both US parties do what it wants without much debate
I wasn't actually trying to distinguish away from states but rather from nations. I understand "nation" to have a specific meaning centered around sovereignty within indigenous scholarship. I should've just used "state" but I didn't think it'd sound as edgy
reply