Ken Schultz

Gotta say I’m seeing a parallel between

Drop bombs —> ? —> Democracy!

AI —> ? —> New model of academic publishing!

Because

1. Broken institutions can persist surprisingly long

2. Coordination on alternatives is hard

a pack of kittens closes in a a large dog standing on a chair

David Attenborough [whispering]:

“As the predators close in on their helpless prey, we can only watch in silent horror, for it is not man’s role to interfere in the hierarchy of nature.”

Oh, one more thing. It tells me that all my questions are great, my ideas are brilliant, and my projects are revolutionary. I know it's programmed to say that, but in academia, you take praise where you can get it... 😊

3. Every time it tries to offer insight into my results or propose theoretical explanations (which it does without my asking), its ideas are pretty pedestrian. It is not going to replace the need to engage in creative thinking or subtle interpretation of evidence. /end

Researchers who struggle to explicate formal models could use AI agents to improve the quantitative rigor of their work. Those without cutting edge quantitative training might be able to create more robust quantitative work.

This is why I am a bit skeptical of claims like this. Yes, it can help you do things a bit beyond the frontier of your skill set -- which is great! -- but if you are too far beyond what you know, you won't realize that it is doing something wrong.

2. It makes mistakes that are not obvious. Unless you really understand your data and what results are plausible, it can screw things up without your realizing it, either because it made an error or didn't exactly implement what you were hoping for.

1. It is really useful for some tasks, especially coding and data cleaning. Even with mistakes, it can save a lot of time. I have also used it to write some pretty sophisticated python code in spite of the fact I am a novice with python. Overall, it has increased my productivity on some tasks.

I thought this was an interesting and balanced contribution to the AI discussion here. As an old dog trying to learn the new tricks, let me make a few observations from my own experience using Claude (not Claude code, just the chatbot). 🧵

The moon going from full moon to a red moon and starting to go back to a normal full moon, then my camera battery door fell off.

Here's my first edit on the March 3rd Lunar Eclipse. 15 moon shots, 1 foreground. Taken over a 3 hourish period.

If anyone is friends with any Georgian air traffic controllers, buy them a nice bottle of wine. As guardians of pretty much the only narrow gap still available between Europe and Asia that avoids both Iran, the Gulf, Ukraine and Russia, they are under some substantial pressure.

Is oil behind the U.S. attack on Iran? Is oil behind the U.S. attack on Iran? To understand the Trump administration’s military targets, take a closer look at the petrostate pattern.

On Iran, see the larger context.

Five of the seven countries that the Trump admin has militarily attacked since Jan. 2025 are significant oil producers, even though petrostates are rare.

It's not a coincidence. I explain why @goodauth.bsky.social

goodauthority.org/news/is-oil-...

Maybe, but the Pentagon would have said that on day 2 of the Iraq and Afghan wars too. “Endless war” wasn’t the plan going in.

The Misunderstood Roots of International Order—And Why They Matter Again Published in The Washington Quarterly (Vol. 41, No. 3, 2018)

This by @jimgoldgeier.bsky.social is really good (and still relevant even though from 2018)

www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1...

A failed state seems much more likely than a friendlier regime, and it seems like Netanyahu would be happy with that as long as he has a free hand to bomb.

Keep hearing commentators/Hegseth saying a version of "this is not Iraq, we are not doing nation-building, it's a decapitation, the people will handle it."

That's what Iraq 2003 was supposed to be! Nation-building, de-Baathification, disbanding of Iraqi army, it all came *after* things went wrong.

He's just being appropriately cautious about claiming causality. I mean, who's to say what caused the regime to change?

The closest case is Libya, but that was providing air support to organized rebels, not bombing in hopes of a mass uprising. Also, didn’t turn out great.

This is actually genuinely very much not good for stability and not-killing

“Let them eat liver” is a good slogan. They should run with that. 🙄

Some people see “those who forget history are bound to repeat it” as an opportunity.

In a statement to The Crimson, Summers wrote that the decision to leave was “difficult” and that he remained “grateful to the thousands of students and colleagues I have been privileged to teach and work with since coming to Harvard as a graduate student 50 years ago.” “Free of formal responsibility, as President Emeritus and a retired professor, I look forward in time to engaging in research, analysis, and commentary on a range of global economic issues,” he added.

When academia's stars mistreat people, they're "punished" with relief from teaching, mentoring, and service responsibilities. This frees them to spend more time on the more valued work of research. And dumps less valued responsibilities onto colleagues, making it harder for them to become stars.

Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War A statement from our CEO on national security uses of AI

www.anthropic.com/news/stateme... gut

Specifying a limit to the punishment the US is willing to dish out makes it much easier for Tehran to decide if it's worth making the concessions or taking the (limited) blows

If you want to make a national security argument, maybe don’t send the Secretary of the Interior, whose job includes managing resource extraction on public lands.

Three angles on the statue of Carlos III in Madrid’s Puerta del Sol. 📷

Section 8 The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

The tariffs were obviously blatantly unconstitutional from the moment that they were imposed. If the Supreme Court is going to have a shadow docket and make emergency orders, it's absurd that they let these tariffs stand for a year.

Reminder that if Trump thinks tariffs are so important, he could work with Congress to pass legislation authorizing him to impose them.

Keep in mind:

1. You're not getting your money back. The corporations that made you pay tariffs will pocket any refunds.

2. The Supreme Court did not (and cannot) invalidate other countries' tariffs on US products, which they can continue to use.

Trump has unequivocally screwed Americans.

Exclusive | Trump Weighs Initial Limited Strike to Force Iran Into Nuclear Deal The president was considering a range of military options but has said he still prefers diplomacy.

This sounds like the graduated pressure logic that guided the initial U.S. air campaign in Vietnam, Operation Rolling Thunder.

It was tactically impressive, lasted three years, and totally failed to achieve U.S. strategic objectives.
www.wsj.com/world/middle...

“This course does not violate discrimination against students.” 😐