James Rosen-Birch

Great piece in FT on the crisis of humanitarianism.

archive.is/OBSGt

re: polls, this the most recent data from this summer

things have changed a lot recently, kevin. these were in our elite paper in the past couple days.

more importantly, there’s a deep conceit to dismissing an entire country’s growing concerns about threats to their sovereignty from an increasingly aggressive neighbour

like under what threat model is it not possible, DoD has been writing plans for decades on how they’d take every country on the planet

I think you have your head in the sand, assume there’s even remotely force parity, and assume the risk of a handful of Americans being captured in Canada is equivalent to senior Canadian staff being taken in the US.

also, the moment troops start moving around it is way too late to do anything.

I also think where you see 4D chess and deliberate distraction, we see an extended effort to shift the overton window, normalize the possibility of seizing new territory, and warm the population to the prospect over time

I don’t think you grasp the seriousness here, or how little telegraphing matters, or how joint command makes Canadian officers easy to seize and capture

for us it was never about the imminence of an invasion so much as it was about the need to respond to a very significant change in US posture and global security architecture that could easily escalate to acting on stated claims, for which we need to massively alter our economy and society

I don’t think any targeted military action would involve conscripting academics, no

I am sure as an American it is very nice to be able to just say “nah he doesn’t mean it” but that’s just not a stance you can reasonably take when you’re on the receiving side

by the time there aren’t it will be too late to prepare, which is what we’re doing

we have substantive reason to be concerned up here, kevin

truly we have an object permanence problem

the crypto bubble taught a bunch of people that if they just plug their ears and yell ‘fake’ for long enough, things they don’t like will just go away

(even if those things are still very much still around and the people behind it are funding a superpac of unprecedented size)

Context Widows or, of GPUs, LPUs, and Goal Displacement

Nature would do well to publish more content like this thoughtful piece from @kevinbaker.bsky.social and fewer Buzzfeed listicles gussied up as career advice "Five productivity hacks for using AI in your scientific workflow"

It is an amazing piece!

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