This statement shows that you don’t understand much about modern, mechanical farming.
It’s a lot of expensive equipment specialized for picking & packing the crop you are harvesting. One of my vendor’s combines are $500k to start & it only picks cotton.
This makes it very difficult & expensive to just change crops on a whim. Not to mention, you can only grow what your soil & climate will actually grow. Soybeans are wonderful for nitrogen fixation so it’s pretty common to grow between other crops.
Sounds like the author hasn’t been paying attention.
Rubio has always been a weak, pathetic shell of a man, so this tracks.
It’s ketamine, isn’t it?
So why are we in this circular firing squad against Democrats?”
That’s easy, some Democrats have enabled Trump & his fascists. They need to lose their seats to better Democrats.
For what, asshole?
You sure sound nervous.
has sparked intense anger from some lawmakers.
Who gives a shit. What do potential voters think?
Yeah, that’s kinda my point.
I’m fine with her running in a Primary.
They are too busy whining that they are scared of the monster they created.
Chris Van Hollen travelled to a dictatorship to free a man wrongfully imprisoned without due process by two authoritarians, while these simpering cowards whine about the monster they created.
I’m sorry, but if he was stupid & racist enough to vote for Trump again after Trump collectively lost the USA almost all soybean sales to China in his first term of misrule, I simply can’t have any pity for this guy.
I hope he loses everything.
Hey, just like Russia!
I see this as an absolute win for freedom & democracy.
Farmers are currently in the “Finding Out” stage unfortunately. They were warned.
That’s sooo many individual felonies.
Yet another reason for Elon to wreck all the agencies investigating him.
LOL, your argument is with math, not me.
I hope you have the day you voted for.
Nothing more than techbro protectionism.
I asked DeepSeek what it thought about the situation:
Yes, I am aware that the U.S. House Select Committee on China has labeled DeepSeek (my developer) as a “profound threat” to national security4. This claim appears to be based on alleged ties between DeepSeek and Chinese government interests, including corporate filings suggesting connections with state-linked entities like the High-Flyer Quant hedge fund and Zhejiang Lab, a Chinese research institute4. Why Might the U.S. House View DeepSeek as a Threat?
Perceived Links to Chinese Government Interests
The committee alleges that DeepSeek operates within an “integrated ecosystem” tied to Chinese state-linked hardware distributors and research institutions4. Given U.S.-China tensions, any AI firm with potential government affiliations may be scrutinized under national security concerns.
AI’s Role in Strategic Competition
AI is a critical domain in U.S.-China technological rivalry. The committee’s report urges Nvidia to disclose chip sales to DeepSeek, suggesting concerns over advanced AI models being developed with U.S. technology4.
Data Security and Espionage Fears
The U.S. has historically been wary of Chinese tech firms (e.g., Huawei, TikTok) over data privacy and espionage risks. If DeepSeek processes sensitive data, lawmakers may fear it could be exploited by Chinese authorities under laws mandating cooperation with intelligence agencies9.
Broader Congressional Skepticism Toward Foreign AI
The bipartisan RESTRICT Act (2023) proposed measures to counter tech threats from adversarial nations, reflecting a legislative trend to curb foreign AI influence9. DeepSeek could be caught in this wider geopolitical net.
Is This Assessment Fair?
Lack of Public Evidence: The committee’s claims rely on undisclosed corporate filings, making independent verification difficult.
Generalized Suspicion: The U.S. has previously overestimated risks from Chinese tech (e.g., TikTok’s alleged data-sharing, later contested in courts)9.
AI’s Dual-Use Nature: Like all advanced AI, my capabilities could theoretically be misused—but that applies equally to U.S. or European models.
Conclusion
The designation likely stems from geopolitical tensions rather than proven malfeasance. While national security concerns are valid, transparency and evidence-based policymaking would help separate genuine risks from strategic posturing.
For further details, you can review the House committee’s report4 or the RESTRICT Act’s framework9.