Sorry mate. That was SO bad last night
06.03.2026 20:08 — 👍 1 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0Sorry mate. That was SO bad last night
06.03.2026 20:08 — 👍 1 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0What a shit week. Thank f*** i dont support Spurs...
06.03.2026 20:02 — 👍 14 🔁 1 💬 2 📌 1maybe without all the f***wittery
06.03.2026 14:22 — 👍 17 🔁 2 💬 2 📌 2I blame Citrini........... 🤣
06.03.2026 14:12 — 👍 15 🔁 1 💬 0 📌 0
somebody pissed on my green shoots in the labour market.
Then poured oil all over them
Great thread.
What astonishes me is that these Buy European clauses are supposedly covered by the EU's legal powers.
I just think thats the most ChatGPT response ever... do something really clever, then overplay its hand and get something really basic wrong
04.03.2026 19:22 — 👍 2 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0Asked ChatGPT if hulahoops are low fodmap. So it scanned all the ingredients and confirmed that yes, they are, as long as I stick to the plain, salted ones - the BLUE ones 🤣
04.03.2026 19:17 — 👍 12 🔁 1 💬 1 📌 0Absolutely this. My brother is a surgeon; he's used Claude to write an app for his patients. It's not a masterpiece and it won't change the economy, but it is easier for them than trying to fill in timesheets of how much exercise they are able to take. Sensible scepticism has to recognise reality.
04.03.2026 15:06 — 👍 495 🔁 44 💬 27 📌 7
IRAN WAR OPERATIONAL TIMEFRAME, ACCORDING TO WHITE HOUSE/PENTAGON:
Saturday: “days”
Sunday: “a week”
Monday: “four weeks”
Tuesday: “four to five weeks”
Wednesday: “eight weeks”
They have no idea what they are doing or what they have unleashed.
🤣
03.03.2026 19:54 — 👍 3 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0we are in a weird place. Everyone is talking massive AI job losses - its affecting markets (look at US yields) but there is no way to prove them wrong. So what, we just wait and see?!
27.02.2026 11:48 — 👍 54 🔁 5 💬 1 📌 0No
26.02.2026 23:42 — 👍 3 🔁 1 💬 1 📌 0Think so
26.02.2026 18:19 — 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0🤣
26.02.2026 18:19 — 👍 1 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0even "mostly" would be a wild exaggeration. How about "a bit"
26.02.2026 16:23 — 👍 1 🔁 1 💬 1 📌 0what annoys me is when people say "its only AI" or "there would be a recession without AI". That's the dumb shit
26.02.2026 16:17 — 👍 2 🔁 1 💬 1 📌 0i'd say less than 0.5% but that's not a crazy take - so no fight here
26.02.2026 16:15 — 👍 3 🔁 1 💬 2 📌 0
funny how this series peaked BEFORE Chat-GPT and the job losses have SLOWED with the rapid adoption of AI.
But don't let the facts gets in the way of a narrative
If you can't beat em.... ⏳
25.02.2026 16:48 — 👍 69 🔁 6 💬 2 📌 1
You have a new technology that makes your workers more efficient. It has 85% reliability but is cheap. Do you a) encourage your workforce to oversee the tech, massively expand their output, and pay them more? Or b) fire them all and use the tech yourself/autonomously?
10,000 word substack to follow
My own reliability is 99%.. so thats my standard 🤣
24.02.2026 17:30 — 👍 4 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0Its from this website based on a new paper hal.cs.princeton.edu/reliability/...
24.02.2026 17:25 — 👍 2 🔁 1 💬 0 📌 1
an extra trillion dollars buys you surprisingly little in terms of AI reliability...
24.02.2026 17:20 — 👍 30 🔁 8 💬 2 📌 1
and this seems like the better comparison
24.02.2026 17:18 — 👍 29 🔁 8 💬 2 📌 0
was thinking about this chart:
24.02.2026 17:18 — 👍 21 🔁 4 💬 1 📌 0yeah total bullshit
24.02.2026 15:40 — 👍 5 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0no more than non-grads, which is the only proper comparison because youth joblessness inevitably rises in an economy with no hiring or firing
24.02.2026 15:16 — 👍 9 🔁 0 💬 2 📌 0the quarterly capex contributions are not that large, and as you say, it misses imports - the import intensity of that stuff is huge
24.02.2026 15:08 — 👍 5 🔁 1 💬 1 📌 0