To everyone in the world's media
I will provide the missing materials so please request by email.
2025-02-19: Weekday edition,
US media: "This is the Sputnik shock of the AI race." It was a huge shock to the American people. An AI with performance exceeding that of "Chat GPT" was devel-oped at less than one-tenth the cost. America's "monopoly" has disappeared again.
The Sputnik shock was the world's first successful launch of the artificial satellite Sputnik by the former Soviet Union in 1957 during the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union, which came as a huge shock to the American people who believed in their own country's technological superiority.
"DeepSeek," developed by a Chinese startup, has developed an AI with perfor-mance that is said to exceed that of Open AI's "Chat GPT" at less than one-tenth the cost. Amazing! All I can say is that it's amazing!
"It's comparable to Chat GPT, but the cost is less than one-tenth." This news changed the rules of AI development and sent a huge shock to Washington, Wall Street, and Silicon Valley.
The "rules of the game" have changed! The myth that "AI development is expen-sive. Therefore, America's superiority, which can raise funds from all over the world, is unshakable" has been shattered.
In the United States, "AI development requires a large amount of learning, which requires a large number of data centers, which take money and time. Therefore, there was pride that only America can do it.
Efficient learning requires a semiconductor called a GPU made by NVIDIA, which can perform simultaneous parallel processing. Therefore, Americans believed that China could not do it.
The Wall Street Journal reported that China's Deepseek made full use of 2,048 "H800" chips that were collected at the time when they were importable. How did they come up with such an idea?
Rather than attacking China, I think we should pay attention to the "thinking ability" behind the development of Deepseek. Why don't Americans think like this?
Why don't developers in allied countries think like this? There is a man in the United States who has an idea that is just as good as the Chinese.
Musk was born in South Africa and acquired Canadian citizenship through his moth-er. He studied at the University of Pennsylvania in 1992. He acquired American citi-zenship 10 years later. He holds South African, Canadian, and American citizenship. Musk co-founded PayPal, SpaceX, Tesla, The Boring Company, OpenAI, xAI, and others.
Was Elon Musk working illegally? It is said. Rather, China seems to be influenced by Musk's ideas.
Tesla, led by Musk, has done things that go against the common sense of the in-dustry. Musk: "Why are you making the frame separately? 70 parts? Wouldn't it be better to make it one piece?" He makes the impossible possible.
Musk says he was an "illegal immigrant." The United States should create a "spe-cial zone on the Mexican border" and accept illegal immigrants from Central and South America with "temporary immigrant status."
The Trump administration also seems "stubborn." Musk, who became a successful "American Dream" with his free thinking, should assist President Trump and make the United States a "country of free thinking" that can compete with China.
Part 1 Citations and References
The impact of Chinese AI "DeepSeek"! Why is high performance and low cost pos-sible? https://newsdig.tbs.co.jp/articles/withbloomberg/1701658?display=1
I'll write again tomorrow.
Part 2. "Immigration Control Act Violation Cases" "Weekday Edition".
"Everyone" in the "international community" please help!
First, please read about the "false accusation" of "aiding and abetting violation of immigration law" in 2010.
"Chapter 1". The summary of the incident is as follows.
In the fall of 2008, my company (I am the president) promised to hire "Chinese people studying abroad on student visas". I "issued" them "employment contracts" stating that "LEFCO" would "employ" them when they graduated from university the following spring.
However, after that, the "Lehman Shock" occurred in 2008.
As a result, orders for "system development" from the following year onwards were "cancelled".
As a result, "LEFCO" "cancelled" the "employment" of "those who were scheduled to join the company" in 2009.
Therefore, "they" continued to work at the restaurants where they had worked part-time as students even after graduating in 2009.
In May 2010, the Chinese were arrested for "violating Article 70 of the Immigration Control Act" by "activities outside of the status of residence".
In June 2010, after their arrest, I and the Chinese person in charge of recruitment (KingGungaku) were also arrested.
The reason was "crime of aiding and abetting" the Chinese for "violating Article 70 of the Immigration Control Act (activities outside the status of residence)".
<Reason for arrest> The prosecution said that I and KingGungaku giving the Chinese a "false employment contract" constituted "crime of aiding and abetting" under the Criminal Code.
"Chapter 2". Crimes in the judgment: (arbitrary and ridiculous)
The charges in the indictment are "the very provisions" of "Article 22-4-4 of the Immigration Control Act".
If a "status of residence" is obtained by submitting false documents, the Minister of Justice can revoke the "status of residence" at his "discretion". (And the person will be deported).
Therefore, even if a Chinese person submits "false documents," it is not a crime. It is not a crime to "aid" an innocent act.
The "reason for punishment" in the judgment:
1. The Chinese person obtained "resident status" by submitting a "false employment contract."
2. And they violated the Immigration Control Act (activities outside of their status of residence).
3. The Chinese person obtained "resident status" because "we" provided the Chinese person with a "false employment contract."
4. The Chinese person was able to "reside" in Japan because he obtained "resident status."
5. Because of that, the Chinese person was able to "work illegally."
6. Therefore, "we" who "provided" the Chinese person with a "false employment contract" were punished for "aiding" the Chinese person's "activities outside of their status of residence."
This is an "error" in the arbitrary "logic of law."
This reasoning is the "argument" that "when the wind blows, the barrel maker (profits)." This goes against "legal logic" even internationally.
The "criminal reason" in the indictment cannot be a crime because the provisions of the "Immigration Control Act," which is a "special law," take precedence over the "Criminal Code," which is a "general law."
My argument:
"1": The Immigration Control Act stipulates that the Minister of Justice will revoke the act of a foreigner who has obtained a residence status by submitting false documents (Immigration Control Act: Article 22-4-4, cancellation of residence status) through "administrative disposition." That's all.
"2": The Chinese who engaged in "unqualified work activities" are not guilty. The reason is that their "employers" have not been punished for the "crime of aiding and abetting illegal employment" under Article 73-2 of the Immigration Control Act.
Therefore, under the principle of "equality under the law," the Chinese are not guilty.
The Japanese government has punished "diplomats and Philippine embassy staff" for the exact same "criminal reason."
However, like the Chinese government, the Philippine government is also silent.
The rest will be published in the Saturday edition.
Part 3. Special Zone Construction. A new business model.
Special Zones accept refugees and immigrants as temporary immigrant workers and limit their residence to the special zone.
Developed countries use them as low-wage workers and achieve high economic growth again.
Refugees and immigrants can get jobs and live a hopeful, humane life.
Temporary immigrants are low-wage, but "food, clothing, shelter, medical expenses, and education are free."
NO2: https://world-special-zone.seesaa.net/
NO1: https://naganoopinion.blog.jp/
For NO4: to NO10:, please see the Sunday edition.
Thank you.
Yasuhiro Nagano
Past articles can be viewed at the blog below.
https://toworldmedia.blogspot.com/
I will provide the missing materials so please request by email.
2025-02-19: Weekday edition,
US media: "This is the Sputnik shock of the AI race." It was a huge shock to the American people. An AI with performance exceeding that of "Chat GPT" was devel-oped at less than one-tenth the cost. America's "monopoly" has disappeared again.
The Sputnik shock was the world's first successful launch of the artificial satellite Sputnik by the former Soviet Union in 1957 during the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union, which came as a huge shock to the American people who believed in their own country's technological superiority.
"DeepSeek," developed by a Chinese startup, has developed an AI with perfor-mance that is said to exceed that of Open AI's "Chat GPT" at less than one-tenth the cost. Amazing! All I can say is that it's amazing!
"It's comparable to Chat GPT, but the cost is less than one-tenth." This news changed the rules of AI development and sent a huge shock to Washington, Wall Street, and Silicon Valley.
The "rules of the game" have changed! The myth that "AI development is expen-sive. Therefore, America's superiority, which can raise funds from all over the world, is unshakable" has been shattered.
In the United States, "AI development requires a large amount of learning, which requires a large number of data centers, which take money and time. Therefore, there was pride that only America can do it.
Efficient learning requires a semiconductor called a GPU made by NVIDIA, which can perform simultaneous parallel processing. Therefore, Americans believed that China could not do it.
The Wall Street Journal reported that China's Deepseek made full use of 2,048 "H800" chips that were collected at the time when they were importable. How did they come up with such an idea?
Rather than attacking China, I think we should pay attention to the "thinking ability" behind the development of Deepseek. Why don't Americans think like this?
Why don't developers in allied countries think like this? There is a man in the United States who has an idea that is just as good as the Chinese.
Musk was born in South Africa and acquired Canadian citizenship through his moth-er. He studied at the University of Pennsylvania in 1992. He acquired American citi-zenship 10 years later. He holds South African, Canadian, and American citizenship. Musk co-founded PayPal, SpaceX, Tesla, The Boring Company, OpenAI, xAI, and others.
Was Elon Musk working illegally? It is said. Rather, China seems to be influenced by Musk's ideas.
Tesla, led by Musk, has done things that go against the common sense of the in-dustry. Musk: "Why are you making the frame separately? 70 parts? Wouldn't it be better to make it one piece?" He makes the impossible possible.
Musk says he was an "illegal immigrant." The United States should create a "spe-cial zone on the Mexican border" and accept illegal immigrants from Central and South America with "temporary immigrant status."
The Trump administration also seems "stubborn." Musk, who became a successful "American Dream" with his free thinking, should assist President Trump and make the United States a "country of free thinking" that can compete with China.
Part 1 Citations and References
The impact of Chinese AI "DeepSeek"! Why is high performance and low cost pos-sible? https://newsdig.tbs.co.jp/articles/withbloomberg/1701658?display=1
I'll write again tomorrow.
Part 2. "Immigration Control Act Violation Cases" "Weekday Edition".
"Everyone" in the "international community" please help!
First, please read about the "false accusation" of "aiding and abetting violation of immigration law" in 2010.
"Chapter 1". The summary of the incident is as follows.
In the fall of 2008, my company (I am the president) promised to hire "Chinese people studying abroad on student visas". I "issued" them "employment contracts" stating that "LEFCO" would "employ" them when they graduated from university the following spring.
However, after that, the "Lehman Shock" occurred in 2008.
As a result, orders for "system development" from the following year onwards were "cancelled".
As a result, "LEFCO" "cancelled" the "employment" of "those who were scheduled to join the company" in 2009.
Therefore, "they" continued to work at the restaurants where they had worked part-time as students even after graduating in 2009.
In May 2010, the Chinese were arrested for "violating Article 70 of the Immigration Control Act" by "activities outside of the status of residence".
In June 2010, after their arrest, I and the Chinese person in charge of recruitment (KingGungaku) were also arrested.
The reason was "crime of aiding and abetting" the Chinese for "violating Article 70 of the Immigration Control Act (activities outside the status of residence)".
<Reason for arrest> The prosecution said that I and KingGungaku giving the Chinese a "false employment contract" constituted "crime of aiding and abetting" under the Criminal Code.
"Chapter 2". Crimes in the judgment: (arbitrary and ridiculous)
The charges in the indictment are "the very provisions" of "Article 22-4-4 of the Immigration Control Act".
If a "status of residence" is obtained by submitting false documents, the Minister of Justice can revoke the "status of residence" at his "discretion". (And the person will be deported).
Therefore, even if a Chinese person submits "false documents," it is not a crime. It is not a crime to "aid" an innocent act.
The "reason for punishment" in the judgment:
1. The Chinese person obtained "resident status" by submitting a "false employment contract."
2. And they violated the Immigration Control Act (activities outside of their status of residence).
3. The Chinese person obtained "resident status" because "we" provided the Chinese person with a "false employment contract."
4. The Chinese person was able to "reside" in Japan because he obtained "resident status."
5. Because of that, the Chinese person was able to "work illegally."
6. Therefore, "we" who "provided" the Chinese person with a "false employment contract" were punished for "aiding" the Chinese person's "activities outside of their status of residence."
This is an "error" in the arbitrary "logic of law."
This reasoning is the "argument" that "when the wind blows, the barrel maker (profits)." This goes against "legal logic" even internationally.
The "criminal reason" in the indictment cannot be a crime because the provisions of the "Immigration Control Act," which is a "special law," take precedence over the "Criminal Code," which is a "general law."
My argument:
"1": The Immigration Control Act stipulates that the Minister of Justice will revoke the act of a foreigner who has obtained a residence status by submitting false documents (Immigration Control Act: Article 22-4-4, cancellation of residence status) through "administrative disposition." That's all.
"2": The Chinese who engaged in "unqualified work activities" are not guilty. The reason is that their "employers" have not been punished for the "crime of aiding and abetting illegal employment" under Article 73-2 of the Immigration Control Act.
Therefore, under the principle of "equality under the law," the Chinese are not guilty.
The Japanese government has punished "diplomats and Philippine embassy staff" for the exact same "criminal reason."
However, like the Chinese government, the Philippine government is also silent.
The rest will be published in the Saturday edition.
Part 3. Special Zone Construction. A new business model.
Special Zones accept refugees and immigrants as temporary immigrant workers and limit their residence to the special zone.
Developed countries use them as low-wage workers and achieve high economic growth again.
Refugees and immigrants can get jobs and live a hopeful, humane life.
Temporary immigrants are low-wage, but "food, clothing, shelter, medical expenses, and education are free."
NO2: https://world-special-zone.seesaa.net/
NO1: https://naganoopinion.blog.jp/
For NO4: to NO10:, please see the Sunday edition.
Thank you.
Yasuhiro Nagano
Past articles can be viewed at the blog below.
https://toworldmedia.blogspot.com/
※コメント投稿者のブログIDはブログ作成者のみに通知されます