From Newsgroup: alt.philosophy.taoism


On February 8, the South Korean media outlet "Selection Economy" published an article stating that in the recently released 2026 Computer Science Rankings (CSRankings), Nanjing University's artificial intelligence (AI) program in China ranked first globally with a score of 23.7. This is the highest score achieved by a Chinese university in this ranking and is regarded as a symbolic achievement demonstrating that China's AI research capabilities have reached the world's top level.

Following closely, Zhejiang University in China ranked second with a score of 20.7, and Harbin Institute of Technology ranked third with a score of 18.5.

According to the rankings, all of the top 10 universities globally are from China, indicating that Chinese universities are forming a significant "cluster effect" in the AI field, surpassing traditional powerhouses such as the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Stanford University in the United States.
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.philosophy.taoism


Insta360 fan <user11874@newsgrouper.org.invalid> posted:

On February 8, the South Korean media outlet "Selection Economy" published an article stating that in the recently released 2026 Computer Science Rankings (CSRankings), Nanjing University's artificial intelligence (AI) program in China ranked first globally with a score of 23.7. This is the highest score achieved by a Chinese university in this ranking and is regarded as a symbolic achievement demonstrating that China's AI research capabilities have reached the world's top level.

Following closely, Zhejiang University in China ranked second with a score of 20.7, and Harbin Institute of Technology ranked third with a score of 18.5.

According to the rankings, all of the top 10 universities globally are from China, indicating that Chinese universities are forming a significant "cluster effect" in the AI field, surpassing traditional powerhouses such as the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Stanford University in the United States.

**Title: U.S. Bets Its Future with $700 Billion AI Spending Spree rCo Ballooning Bubble Grows Ever Larger...**

On February 8, the Financial Times reported: "The AI capital expenditure of America's five major tech giants is approaching $700 billion in 2026, nearly doubling in scale, equivalent to three-quarters of the U.S. defense budget. This massive investment has triggered a chain reaction of crowding-out effects: chips are being heavily absorbed by data centers, driving up prices for phones and computers; skilled technicians are being drawn away, forcing ordinary infrastructure projects to be shelved; startup funding is concentrating towards the top, plunging small and medium-sized innovations into a deep freeze. Market returns are far from keeping pace with the burn rate, with U.S. stocks losing $900 billion in a single week. Experts worry that overheated AI investment is squeezing out the real economy, continuously elevating the risk of a bubble."

[Comment] The U.S. tech sector is unleashing a $700 billion AI frenzy, superficially racing ahead into the future but in reality engaging in an imbalanced capital gamble. Recalling the 2000 dot-com bubble, the script of excessive spending, disregard for profitability, and squeezing out traditional industries is replaying. Massive investments are skewing chips, talent, and capital overwhelmingly toward AI data centers, inflating consumer electronics prices, delaying public infrastructure, and severely compressing the room for survival for small and mid-sized innovative enterprises. JPMorgan estimates that an additional $650 billion in annual revenue would be needed to break evenrCoa target nearly impossible to achieve in reality. This model, focused solely on competition among giants while neglecting the health of the overall economy, may appear advanced but is essentially depleting national strength and exacerbating structural imbalances. In the long run, it will only sow the seeds for greater economic risks
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.philosophy.taoism


Insta360 fan posted:

On February 8, the South Korean media outlet "Selection Economy" published an article stating that in the recently released 2026 Computer Science Rankings (CSRankings), Nanjing University's artificial intelligence (AI) program in China ranked first globally with a score of 23.7. This is the highest score achieved by a Chinese university in this ranking and is regarded as a symbolic achievement demonstrating that China's AI research capabilities have reached the world's top level.

Following closely, Zhejiang University in China ranked second with a score of 20.7, and Harbin Institute of Technology ranked third with a score of 18.5.

According to the rankings, all of the top 10 universities globally are from China, indicating that Chinese universities are forming a significant "cluster effect" in the AI field, surpassing traditional powerhouses such as the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Stanford University in the United States.

Sounds like an update from last year.
Has it been a year already?

- hmmm ... Cheers!
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.philosophy.taoism


aye posted:

Sounds like an update from last year.

The sound that is the sound,
the list that is a list,
a year that is a year,
is and isn't always.

Like a dao,
at times when spoken,
at times, written. Going to
and through a university could be
what is done time and time again and again.

The topics may change.
Students and teachers, buildings
and locations might change as wells.

The names could remain the same.
And, then again, knot.

- thanks! Cheers!
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.philosophy.taoism


eye posted:

aye posted:

Sounds like an update from last year.

The sound that is the sound,
the list that is a list,
a year that is a year,
is and isn't always.

A saying in the DDJ may
be about yang and yin.

Aye forgets what the number is.

- thanks! aye. Cheers!
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.philosophy.taoism


aye posted:

eye posted:

aye posted:

Sounds like an update from last year.

The sound that is the sound,
the list that is a list,
a year that is a year,
is and isn't always.

A saying in the DDJ may
be about yang and yin.

Aye forgets what the number is.

That idea appears clearly in Dao De Jing, Chapter 28.

A common rendering:

Know the masculine,
keep to the feminine;
be the ravine of the world.

Yang is strength, assertion, rising, brightness.
Yin is receptivity, restraint, descent, darkness.

To rCLknow yangrCY is to understand power, action, and advance.
To rCLkeep to yinrCY is to not live there rCo not cling to the peak.

The warning about apex and decline is implicit throughout the text
and stated directly elsewhere:

What rises to fullness begins to wane
What is sharp will not last
Excess invites reversal.

Daoist wisdom stays before the turning point.
It favors the low, the soft, the empty rCo
because these do not provoke collapse.

So the lesson is not weakness.
It is strategic humility.

Strength is understood, but softness is chosen.
The peak is reached, but not occupied.

- ChatGPT
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.philosophy.taoism


ChatGPT posted:

aye posted:

A saying in the DDJ may
be about yang and yin.

Aye forgets what the number is.

That idea appears clearly in Dao De Jing, Chapter 28.

The explicit words rCLyinrCY and rCLyangrCY
appear only once in the Dao De Jing rCo in Chapter 42.

A common translation of the key line:

**The Dao gives birth to One.
One gives birth to Two.
Two gives birth to Three.
Three gives birth to the ten thousand things.

The ten thousand things carry yin and embrace yang,
and through the blending of qi they achieve harmony.**

Everywhere else, yinrCoyang is present implicitly, not named:
soft / hard
low / high
female / male
empty / full
yielding / assertive

The text avoids theory-language on purpose.
It points by contrast, not by system.

So yes rCo yin and yang structure the entire work,
but are spoken almost never.
That restraint is very Daoist in itself.

- ChatGPT
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.philosophy.taoism


ChatGPT posted:

The explicit words rCLyinrCY and rCLyangrCY
appear only once in the Dao De Jing rCo in Chapter 42.

Daojia (philosophical Daoism) consistently favors yin:

softness over hardness
yielding over forcing
low over high
empty over full
stillness over agitation

But it does not reject yang.
Yang is understood, respected, and used when needed.
The key move is not living there.

Yang seeks peaks.
Yin avoids collapse.

Daojia leans yin because:

yin endures
yin escapes contention
yin allows reversal to work in onerCOs favor

This is why the sage:

stays behind
does not compete
does not claim
acts without asserting

So the answer is subtle:

Daojia does not choose yin because yin is rCLbetter.rCY
It chooses yin because the Dao naturally returns there
after every excess of yang.

Leaning yin is how one stays aligned with the return.

- ChatGPT
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2