Yup, they said thank you and took action only because this was a US-based researcher. Had any Indian dared to do this they'd be in for a world of pain. Not through a lawsuit, but criminal charges.
NYTimes in 4 days: "Analysts mention that the radical forestry has military applications for Chinese forces training for a potential Western European conflict."
Wasn't there already a report that stated Microsoft and OpenAI understand AGI as something like 100 billion dollars in revenue for the purpose of their agreements? Even that seems like a pipe dream at the moment.
How is there not a contradiction between 1 and 2? If 1 is true then the jobs are offered to non-white candidates who are undeserving. If 2 is true then the jobs are offered to non-white candidates who are deserving.
I don't understand what you're trying to say. It's obviously possible for the extremely weak claim made by statement 2 to be true (i.e. for some non-zero number of "deserving" nonwhites to exist and for existing hiring to not be a perfect meritocracy) in the same universe where the sort of programs typically labelled "DEI" tend to have anti-meritocratic effects. You seem to be suggesting that if competent nonwhites exist, then anything labelled DEI will automatically have the effect of causing orgs to hire more competent people, but... why? There's zero reason that should logically follow.
reply