James Rosen-Birch

the most striking part is America is pursuing something whole-hog it hasn’t even clearly defined

at least Star Wars was deliberate in the 80s, but now? oof.

the fact China seems to have a much clearer idea of the state of AI and where present tech is on the innovation curve than their American counterparts (who are still wholly consumed by the hype machine) is profoundly concerning, even in the event they *are* a little behind

the cuts to basic research — including in science and engineering — in favour of going all-in on commercial R&D, will prove catastrophic once the limits of existing techniques make themselves clear, and no new foundational work is ready to bump up and take its place

Just heard that the main differentiator between the US and Chinese gov’t’s approaches to AI is that

the US (and US defence establishment) want AGI

and China wants AI 100% integrated across their economy by 2035.

big AI’s marketing fantasy will have huge natsec implications

There is a gap between a current technology and its (presumed) potential Economic contractions cause capital to evaporate Capital is needed for R&D to close the gap Speculative bubble begins Investors have less capital to invest Investors put in money on the basis of the new (increased) expectations Hype is created around the technology to spur investment Gap between expectations and reality becomes clear Investors become more risk averse and demanding of near-term ROI The gap between the technology's current performance and its (assumed) potential increases Hype increases expectations around the technology Innovators are forced to commercialize prematurely in exchange for capital Innovation Hype Loop (3)

this then feeds back and further reduces the availability of capital needed to further drive advancement of the tech

risking a winter

Economic contractions cause capital to evaporate Speculative bubble begins to deflate Investors have less capital to invest Gap between expectations and reality becomes clear Investors become more risk averse and demanding of near-term ROI Innovators are forced to commercialize prematurely in exchange for capital Innovation Hype Loop (2)

this has forced premature commercialization and therefore a direct market confrontation with the gap between the promise of the technology and its current capabilities and implementations

causing the hype cycle to start to collapse

unfortunately, capital did not stay cheap

tariffs, inflation, and broader uncertainty caused billions of dollars to evaporate overnight, and collapsed the risk appetite of investors

in short, the bar needs to pay its rent, the tab is closing, and the bill is coming due

this created a gradual increase in innovation debt, but was tolerable as long as capital was cheap enough that companies could keep throwing engineers and resources at the problem and (hopefully) reach a breakthrough that would allow the gap to start closing

There is a gap between a current technology and its (presumed) potential Capital is needed for R&D to close the gap Investors put in money on the basis of the new (increased) expectations Hype is created around the technology to spur investment The gap between the technology's current performance and its (assumed) potential increases Hype increases expectations around the technology Innovation Hype Loop (1)

re: AI

we are in a feedback loop where hype is used to attract capital (which is needed to further develop the tech), but each increase in hype raises expectations, growing the delta between current performance and market expectations

L’esprit de l’escalier if small

someone who self-presents as the national scion of the progressive movement and expressly has ambitions for the presidency has, completely by their own choice, expanded the scope of their image, mandate, and constituency beyond their district borders.

that’s why you see this response.

I’m not the one freaking out at a politician being criticized, dude

cults of personality are wild

the purpose of politicians in a representative democracy is to listen to constituents, aggregate their demands, and convert them into policy.

unfortunately, we’re instead besieged by narcissists who believe the job is to echo lobbyists and condescend to constituents about how good they have it.

It’s profoundly disingenuous to say she’s the only target.

at least when she voted “present” on Iron Dome funding in 2021, she apologized to her angry constituents and committed to growth (crocodile tears notwithstanding). now it’s just belligerence.

the issue here is that AOC’s record on Palestine *does* speak for itself, and it doesn’t say what she wants it to.

The final slide deck, titled "The Great Trust: From a Demolished Iranian Proxy to a Prosperous Abrahamic Ally" has been shared with members of the current and former US administrations, according to people familiar with the project, along with other governments and stakeholders in the Middle East. "Great" is short for Gaza Reconstitution, Economic Acceleration and Transformation. It envisaged all Gaza's public land being put into a trust for development, whose assets could be sold to investors via digital tokens traded on a blockchain. Gazans would be offered the chance to contribute their privately owned land to the trust in return for a token that gave them the right to a permanent housing unit. Advanced Manufacturing Example: EV Industrial Zone American electric vehicle companios build factories ant facilities for employees in northern Gaza and Southern Israol Minerais and Matorials shipped from KSA and UAE Assembled into batteries and cars by skilled (low-cost) personnel in factories powered by Gas from Gaza- Marine and PV energy Cars delivered in Europe with low shipping costs via El-Arish Port and 0% tax (free trade zone) - competing with Chinese EVs EV Companies gain profits - while giving a better future for Palestinians and Israelis One of the slides from the Great Trust deck showing an idea for postwar Gaza's industrial sector

In just a few short years, we went from “Facebook for dogs” to “ethnic cleansing on the blockchain”.

new york times is gonna new york times

but did you see the systems diagrams on the screens behind them

The New Hork Times 20,000 NAZI FRIENDS AT A RALLY HERE DENOUNCE BOYCOTT; Throng in Madison Sq. Garden Appeals to Roosevelt to Stop 'Illegal' Movement. UNTERMYER'S NAME BOOED 750 Police Hold Off 1,000 Red Marchers - 'Storm Troops' in Uniform Clear Lobbies. THE "FRIENDS OF NEW GERMANY" AT THEIR RALLY IN THE GARDEN. 20,000 NAZI ALLIES DENOUNCE BOYCOTT i Share full article May 18, 1934

The Times has always been The Times

plus ça change

funny how this part always gets cut out of America’s self-narrative about WW2

“Students at American universities were caught in the middle of academic freedom battles as anti-Nazi faculty were forced off campus and pro-Nazi groups spread hateful propaganda.”

there was a Nazi rally at Madison Square Gardens

American politicians proudly spouted their support for the Nazis and their policies

Lindbergh and his America First movement were everywhere

but sure, *now* is the most dangerous time for American Jews in a century 🙄

someone please tell this dumbass about the literal holocaust

“Prime but with human beings” is trafficking.

Often when people use “tech company but for x” they don’t understand the implications, but they know exactly what they are saying here.

I keep coming back to the fact these guys all public gloated that they were going to cause shocks and economic hardship before they came to power.

Similar to Mussolini’s economic policy, the intent here really is corporatist — to get government out of the provision of goods and services, hand that over to the private sector, but thuggishly control that private sector to do the state’s bidding (or else).

It comes across that the goal is as much to punish American businesses for offshoring as it is to punish other nations for outcompeting America in the global market. And that’s where it really comes through that the goal is to force the American market under gov’t control.

On the political front, Miran frames this essentially as an economic war declared on the world (and American businesses). Since money can move and factories can’t, people who’ve built factories overseas will lose out when tariffs force capital to withdraw from offshore.