I don't know if you've been paying attention lately, but the US Government is very hands on when it comes to directing businesses these days, and Congress lets the President do whatever he wants, whether strictly legal or not.
Do you really not think the current President wouldn't lean as hard on a US corporation as he needed to in order to get whatever he wanted?
Many, many Americans are in denial about how shockingly the country has fallen. It's just staggering at this point seeing Americans, of all people, warning about Chinese ties with business.
I remember everyone fear-mongering because some business member in China had ties with the Communist party. The US is literally commissioning executives from tech companies in the armed forces (https://www.npr.org/2025/07/03/1255164460/1a-army-07-03-2025), business leaders like Elon Musk literally became members of the administration while many more (Larry Ellison, Peter Thiel, among many others) are defacto mouthpieces of this administration. Trump is exerting absolute, unchecked, utterly lawless power to do whatever he wants whenever he wants, while occasionally looting those very companies for various kickbacks.
The US is currently an international shame, and a shame to 240+ years of its history. It is an abomination compared to all of its historic values and laws and checks. And anyone blind to this, yet still pointing at China, is intellectually defective.
I thought that was weird too. Surely this is a breach of whatever licensing they agreed to with the free trial. Are they allergic to getting paid for their work?
I already pay for Google One storage, so it's the cheapest of the paid LLMs for me. That's 99% of the reason I use it, and honestly I don't really
have any strong opinions on it compared to ChatGPT. It's about the same level, and with new models constantly being released for all the different LLMs I've kind of lost track of what it's particularly good or bad at compared to others.
I will say the video with Gemini live is pretty impressive. My family and I tried it a bit yesterday, and my kids wanted to show Gemini all our pets. My kid showed it our cat, picking it up roughly as she is wont to do, and I was impressed when it asked "Is [name of cat] always so patient being handled like that?"
> I already pay for Google One storage, so it's the cheapest of the paid LLMs for me. That's 99% of the reason I use it, and honestly I don't really have any strong opinions on it compared to ChatGPT
I'm on a ChatGPT pro plan, been using it for a good while but got an offer on Google One storage so tried it out for a month. Google's models are far behind compared to OpenAI's, and seemingly o1 Pro Mode is still the best out there, albeit slow obviously. But probably the model I've got furthest with on difficult problems, and even the "simpler" models from OpenAI are still better than Gemma 2.5.
It does seem that Google has better tooling available for their models though, so a combination of the tooling of Google with the models of OpenAI would probably be optimal, but unlikely we'll see that happen.
Many still have the kitchens, but the two in my hometown rarely cook from scratch anymore. I live in a small 5k person town in North Carolina, and recently got involved with the school PTO. And the cafeteria is basically just heating up premade meals these days.
Well now that the Donald is running the US and is about to cut subsidies for electric vehicles, add tariffs to aluminum and steel, now maybe the markets may see the light, I am not holding my breath though.
If all cars are more expensive, and all manufacturers have lower margins Tesla will have lower margins too. For the stock price the competition won't be other car manufacturers but other industries.
It would be a "subsiding tide lowers all boats" kind of thing.
I've been thinking, when I younger and living in the UK, all sorts of things (including some with the word "tax" in them) were denounced by the local right wing as "stealth taxes".
Trump is talking about tariffs as if they're a tax on non-Americans, but they're paid for by Americans who import stuff, which is basically all Americans given where your oil, aluminium, and steel come from.
Just because costs are higher for its competition doesn't mean that people are going to be buying more Teslas. Last I checked, Tesla was already down 40-60% in sales at its major European markets. They're getting absolutely slaughtered by BYD in China.
I mean as long as people are still buying cars, Tesla becomes more cost competitive. But in the short run it's not for consumers as much as it is for investors.
You may be right that Tesla will struggle internationally and the car market as a whole will struggle in USA
My family's last name was probably Schaefer in Germany. The earliest graves in America show them as Scheffert instead but shortly after they became "Shuford" which I guess they thought sounded more English (they were here pre-Revolution).
I always find it funny they did such a bad job of anglicizing it. Shuford doesn't really sound any more English to my ears.
A lot of old nicknames don't really make a lot of sense at first glance. The short answer is rhyming slang, and the long answer is there simply used to be a lot less names in English that were acceptable and commonly used. So, for instance, Richard being shortened to "Rick" is pretty straightforward, but you probably knew several Richards and Ricks, and you want to call them different names. So instead of Rick, you call them by a rhyming nickname, in this case "Dick." The same is true of "Rob" being short for "Robert," but "Bob" was too. Because "Bob" rhymes with "Rob".
One of the oddest in this vein is Peggy, which is short for Margaret. Because Margaret would get shortened to Meg, and then rhymed with Peg, and then somehow lengthened back again to Peggy. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
In Slavic languages, it’s not uncommon to do doubled diminutives, so Pavel ⇢ Pavlik ⇢ Pavliček. (Or my ex-wife who didn’t like the shortness of my name “Don” but liked the Czech vocative of it, Doničku¹ which she then abbreviated to Ičku, then she hispanicized that by adding a new diminutive to it, becoming Ičquito.
⸻
1. I’m named after my father and this is how his Czech-speaking great-grandmother who lived with his family until her death called him. On one occasion not long after we were married, the three of us were driving and I made some slightly tasteless joke and my ex-wife from the backseat said in a scolding tone, Doničku which made my dead whip his head around in surprise/shock.
I'd take Peggy over "Gretchen", which is similarly a nickname for Margaret ("-gret" / Greta + "-chen", the German diminutive suffix, thus meaning "little Margaret").
It might work in German, but to the English ear it sounds horrible for a little girl's name.
> Where are the Democrats on all this? There is hardly any opposition. Are they not interrupting their enemy while he is making mistakes? That would be the only explanation.
This is the kind of thing that someone who's on TikTok a lot says. The line being fed to people by the Chinese government to make the Democrats look bad as well. But the truth is the Democrats have no power. None. They can't do anything to stop this. Elizabeth Warren and AOC have just as much power as I do to stop Elon Musk and Donald Trump.
What is the deal with Gukesh's last name? It's officially listed as just D on his FIDE profile. I asked a couple Indian coworkers who said it was probably just being abbreviated for being long, but honestly it's not that long of a name and Gukesh isn't from the same region as them. I've read elsewhere that Telugu speaking people don't really use last names.
Gukesh's last name is Dommaraju. It's his family surname. He is a Telugu person by birth, but he grew up in Chennai, Tamil Nadu. In the state of Tamil Nadu, people often take their father's given names as their last names, and always write it in abbreviation. Indian last names often disclose caste, and due to a widely influential movement in TN (see [0]), most people of TN gave up using caste-based surnames, and switched to solely using father's names. But, the father's name is often written as the first letter of that name, and the person is called like that in official places, too. Among friends, colleagues, teachers, etc., only the given name ever is used.
As Gukesh grew up in Chennai, he used his last name like that. His parents also use one name only.
Anecdote: my distant cousin, a Bengali, also grew up in TN. His parents also Tamilized his name. His name was, say, Rama Dass, and he went by and put his name as D. Rama, or Rama D.
When their family moved back to Bengal, his name was Rama Dass again.
Srinivasa Ramanujan's given name was Ramanujan, and Srinivasa was his father's name.
Naming conventions vary, and when you consider names across history/geography, it is the present-day Western convention of "GivenName FamilyName" that is unusual and needs explanation.
Generally speaking, someone is born and at some point days/months later, their parents start calling them by some name, while the rest of the world might also doing so at some point, possibly different people using different names. For purposes of interacting with administrative systems yet another name may be adopted. Only when it has been necessary to distinguish between multiple people with the same name do secondary names start getting used, either occupational descriptions (John the Baker vs John the Carpenter vs John the Smith) or places where they came from or were noted for (Jesus of Nazareth, William of Orange, Leonardo from Vinci), or disambiguating with parents' names (Mohammed bin [son of] Salman, Björk Guðmundsdóttir [daughter of Guðmund]) — these are all conventions still existing today, with occasional funny consequences when someone imagines one of these to be a "family name" that persists from father to child across generations. (See "what would Of Nazareth do" about people—even otherwise educated ones—treating “da Vinci” as such.)
Coming to India: there are different conventions. Typically just a name and an initial letter (placed either before or after the name) to distinguish between multiple people (in the same classroom say) with that name. When a boy was named "Anand" by his parents, because his father was "K. Viswanathan", he became "V. Anand" in school records, and this is the name I remember reading articles about this chess prodigy in Indian newspapers. At some point the international press started spelling out his first name and called him "Viswanathan Anand", putting his father's name first, and even started calling him "Viswanathan" or "Vishy" — he used to object and point out that they were calling him by his father's name, but eventually he just got used to it and even began to like it. In this generation, this boy was named "Gukesh" by his parents, and was "D. Gukesh" in school records and news reports, but somewhat wisely they decided for international sources to put the initial after the name, so "Gukesh D", and for those who cannot handle just an initial, spell it out to "Gukesh Dommaraju".
(You have had other replies claiming this to have something to do with Tamil Nadu anti-caste politics. While no doubt that movement discouraged the use of caste names as surnames, the initial convention pre-exists any of those political movements and exists in parallel in other states too. E.g. "S. Ramanujan" was the name on his early papers before the movement being spoken of. Some families/communities use surnames (in the sense you're thinking of) and some don't; that's all there is to it.)
In Tamil Nadu, an initial is often used in the surname due to the Periyar/Dravidian movement in the 20th century. Furthermore, plenty of people in Tamil Nadu historically didn't even use surnames.
Gukesh is Telugu, but his family are Chennai natives. Chennai becoming part of TN instead of Telugu-speaking Andhra Pradesh was very politically charged in the early days of India.
Historically yes. But in 2024 it's just a naming convention now. Being Telugu in Tamil Nadu, they probably adopted Tamil naming conventions to make life easier.
States in India are basically different countries, and the existing state borders for most states don't make sense.
My distant cousing, a Bengali, named, say, Rama Dass, also grew up in Tamil Nadu. His name was Tamilized to D. Rama or Rama D.- even though Dass was a family surname.
> States in India are basically different countries, and the existing state borders for most states don't make sense.
No. Huge oversimplification there. It's not definitely like oblasts of Russian Federation. Although they are not close like OR and ID.
Heck, in my ancestral state, non-natives cannot purchase land.
> It's not definitely like oblasts of Russian Federation
It absolutely is.
Heck, my ancestral state (HP) is a merger of 3 entirely distinct ethnic communities (Lower Himachalis who are the same community as in Jammu division, Upper Himachalis who are closer to Garwhalis and Kumaounis in Uttarakhand, and Changtang Tibetans in Lahaul/Spiti/Kinnaur who should be merged with Ladakh) with no rhyme or reason because it was a bunch of Himalayan hill states that where conquered by the Sikhs, Nepalis, and later British in the 19th century and merged into Punjab, and this has caused political deadlock.
This is a common situation all over India. There's no reason that Purvanchal is lumped with Awadh, that Rayalseema is lumped with Kosta Andhra, or Barak Valley is lumped with Assam.
My Pahari family has no traditional culture in common with a Gujarati from Saurashtra or a Bihari from Bhojpur.
These ethnic (and linguistic) differences do impact internal mobility outside of Tier 1 cities.
India has been very successful thanks to it's diversity, but most states still hold colonial era borders which exacerbate regional inequalities by giving regional interests an ethnic or even religious tinge (eg. Seemanchal and Bihar).
You took an extreme example (HP). But only a handful states in India have that restriction where outsiders are not allowed to buy land.
There are many all-India services and people are transferred all across India. Many work in different states than those of their home state. Same Constitution, same legal framework. Same religion.
I think if you go deeper you will notice the unifying characteristics rather than superficial differences among states of India.
And while I differ with you on Indian states being very far aways from different Russian states in terms of similarity/differences, I definitely agree with your opinion that Indian state borders don't make much sense.
True! It was a rhetorical point, but similar examples abound in the Tier 3/4 cities and small towns that represent the majority of India.
You're still at the mercy of the DC's office and the associated State PSC to let the transaction go through, and local bias will abound. And in these kinds of places, if you get into a land dispute, the entire apparatus will rally behind the local even if they are in the wrong, because the local can leverage their local family/social network.
> Same Constitution, same legal framework
Absolutely, yet dependent on state PSC to implement. And local customary laws can often take precedence over central rules and regulations due to Article 13(1).
> There are many all-India services and people are transferred all across India. Many work in different states than those of their home state
There are, yet at the end of the day, Home Bias remains, as IAS officers posted outside their home state are significantly less likely to climb up the ladder and tend to get hamstrung [0].
Anecdotally, in the early 2000s, my ancestral district got an ethnic Tamil DC/ADC, but they were completely frozen out by the local panchayat, MLAs, and MP because they were viewed as an "Outsider", and the man was quietly transferred within 2 years and an ethnic Punjabi officer was brought it (still an "outsider" but viewed as "closer").
> Same religion
At a broad level Hinduism sounds unifying, but in action, the regional variations are massive.
It doesn't matter as much to sharyi/city folk, but local deities and practices vary massively and what one regions treats as "Hindu" can appear entirely alien to another region.
Tamil society doesn't bat an eye at cousin marriage while that would be grounds for a honor killing in HP/PB/HR. Meanwhile, in my region we revere a number of Muslim mystics like Lakhdata and in some cases even practice Muharram (Hussaini Brahmin), but to a Hindu from Gujarat or Karnataka, that would appear Muslim.
> I think if you go deeper you will notice the unifying characteristics
There absolutely are unifying characteristics, but I think these are much more prominent in Tier 1/1.5/2 cities which are melting pots.
Most Indian urbanization is being driven by Tier 3/4 cities which tend to be much more insular.
-----------
Big picture, I think differences are significant when outside the Tier 1/2 cities, but this is part of the power of Indian federalism.
The loosely coupled nature of Indian federalism allows regional ethnic identity to continue to exist with a unified "Indian" identity and act as an outlet to ethnic insurgency.
This is how ethnic insurgents in NE India were able to merge into the BJP in the 2010s, and regionalist and linguistic parties such as Shiv Sena, DMK, TDP, TMC, etc are able to create loose political alliances and coalitions with "national parties".
Also, this imo is a major reason why BJP has been so dominant over the past decade - they are able to co-opt localist movements into the state branch of their party.
The INC used to be able to do this, but these local leaders split off to create their own parties by the 1990s.
Sure (though imo, even the difference between dialect and language can be significant - try listening to Bundelkhandi as a Hindi speaker, you won't understand it even though Bundelkhandi is counted as "Hindi" largely for political reasons), but entirely different caste structure and political social structure historically speaking.
Coastal Andhra had been under direct British rule since 1823 and before that largely under the Northern Circars, but Rayalseema was a frontier land between Mysore, the British, the Hyderabad Sultanate, and plenty of local kings and factions.
All over India, the British administration largely just co-opted the preexisting administration and governance, which wasn't professionalized until the early 20th Century. This meant that functionaries of the pre-existing states were co-opted into local administration.
Ofc, in princely states the difference was even more significant.
But my argument is that it makes sense for Rayalseema to be split off from Coastal Andhra, as the administrative history is distinct, and even the history is distinct.
Not everything in India is/have to be about an individual's caste at all.
The most plausible and likely explanation is that it is just shortened initials of surname for convenience.
Typically indian teachers have a habit of turning surname to initials to deal with multiple students having same names. Those names tend to be sticky and students just refer themselves with initials in such contexts.
I'd be very much surprised if his official government IDs have initials and not surname.
Not everything about India has to be about caste but this is definitely about caste even though it probably happens on autopilot now.
A social movement throughout TN, has made people give up their surnames and instead only mention their initial, so that no one can tell your caste easily. And everyone just follows that convention now. A remarkable example of a societal wide movement making real progress on societal issues without requiring the force of government.
As a South Indian My name (in public school records) till I was age 21, was <name>. <initial>
I was forced to pick the last name for passport purposes and typically i either have the option of attaching my dad's name or my dad's town name.
My wife, didn't even do that and when she migrated to US, she was <name> LNU (short for Last Name Unknown). While applying for greencard we decided it was too much of a hassle for her and she attached her father's name
> when she migrated to US, she was <name> LNU (short for Last Name Unknown).
Interesting!
The loser of the previous World Chess Championship match was Russia's Ian Nepomniachtchi. His last name means "one who doesn't remember [his last name]" -when asked by the Czar's census taker!
I guess this kind of thing happens in many countries.
Yes. I am Telugu and family name is usually not written or called out. So he would usually write D. Gukesh or Gukesh D. Most people also have a sort of middle name for example D. Gukesh Kumar. Middle name is spelled and used for calling together with main name.
Do you really not think the current President wouldn't lean as hard on a US corporation as he needed to in order to get whatever he wanted?