Hadn’t seen that.
Striking F-14s is risky under international law, intentionally destroying historical antiquities is a war crime
Fall of the regime enters the zone of the unknowable for me. You think if there's a split or defection by some big organized armed group? If regime can't communicate internally and just ceases to cohere?
Agreed that Israel likely has clear strategic intentions. These may however not be smart.
Calling your attention to this fascinating article about the surprising Ukrainian real-estate market by @olliecarroll.bsky.social. Rental prices near the front line have shot up due to high soldier pay, leading many to buy instead. www.economist.com/europe/2026/...
Ursula von der Leyen: "Since the beginning of the conflict, gas prices have risen by 50% and oil prices by 27%. If you translate that into euros: 10 days of war have already cost European taxpayers an additional €3 billion in fossil fuels imports. That is the price of our dependence."
100% accurate 🧵
I don’t know nothing about sports and I am caccccckkkling
FT broadens the report last week by VSquare that Russian political technologists are aiding Orban’s campaign. Putin ok’d plan for “the Social Design Agency, a Kremlin-linked media consultancy under western sanctions, to bolster Orbán’s Fidesz party by flooding social media”
I can understand why he has complex feeling about paperwork
🤫 Unconfirmed rumors of paper shredders working overtime in some Orbán government-funded GONGOs, as well as mid-tier bureaucrats of state institutions stocking up on compromising material (on their own bosses) to help save their jobs in case of a government change
omfg
The Lancet spells out the case against RFK Jr so clearly.
www.thelancet.com/journals/lan... (1/4🧵)
Trump: "So now we have low-cost interceptors effectively combating Iranian drones."
I wonder which country with "no cards" gave it to you 🤔
“.. Nearly seven months ago, Ukrainian officials tried to sell the U.S. their battle-proven technology for downing Iranian-made attack drones .. The Trump administration dismissed the Ukrainians ..”
@axios.com
www.axios.com/2026/03/10/u...
www.nytimes.com/2026/03/09/n... A truly bizarre article. Mamdani called the attack "reprehensible", "heinous" and said "we won't tolerate terrorism". The implication that he's equivocating is simply false.
But he didn’t say that *in a bouncy video on TikTok*. This reveals his secret Islamicist sympathies
Interesting point by Robert Armstrong: markets expect TACO but don’t know when. So long term prices stay subdued while short term ones go nuts. And the release of pent up supply will continue to cause gyrations www.ft.com/content/4629...
And where they’ve built out the charging network
Is it that many! Wow
Being in the Netherlands I find there is a great preponderance of "altruistic enforcers" in this culture, and a clear desire to decide that social rules exist and then criticize people for violating them even when they...don't actually exist, or there is no agreement on them.
Anyway now I'm rambling because you got me thinking about this, but thanks very much, this has been extremely stimulating. Hope you feel better. And congratulations on your podcasts.
The artist had grown up in a cult and the whole point of the piece was about unnecessary rules and people's predisposition to create and enforce them, and I had become the embodiment of the cult leaders and followers! Not sure whether the use of museum font was a trick, but it was brilliant.
When I saw someone else enter through a hole, I was a bit off-put, and then when she began moving a panel I said "I think you're not supposed to go through there". She was extremely annoyed and pointed to the floor: "It says 'you can enter here'".
I was at the Stedelijk Museum and there was an art piece with an obvious entry and then various other holes. On the floor next to those holes it said in neutral museum font "You can enter here". I glanced at the labels and assumed they said "Do not enter here", so I went around.
I just realized that yesterday I accidentally performed a version of this experiment in the opposite direction and got it wrong due to an *over*-eagerness to enforce. And I am not at all a rules-enforcing kind of guy!
I think you're right, but I also think this may miss a genuinely informative part of the experimental result that people are so much better at this problem when presented as social enforcement. It feels like that matches humans' sometimes unnecessary eagerness to enforce and punish.
But isn't "badly worded" just another way of saying "human brains are built for social and contextual reasoning, not for abstract propositional logic"?
In effect certainly; I can't remember the specifics atm, was it a per-unit subsidy instead?
Smart man
