Maybe this is incentive to help design data centres that are less power demanding, such as using computers that use ARM and are better with how their code is implemented?

Then combine that with roof top renewables.

This is a hard problem, but if the economic incentive is there, then someone will want to address it.

I think Starlink just really messed up their roadmap with the satellite stuff. I know lots of people who do backcountry trails, and when the iPhone 14 came out with the satellite connectivity, a lot of them were quite excited. My guess is that after proving out the SoS functionality, they would have extended it to a paid service for messaging and then started upgrading it to handle more and more data. In the end you'd have a phone you could use anywhere for a hefty subscription fee. Combined with the whole rugged line (Ultra watches etc) they would have had another revenue earning service to lock in a lucrative customer group.

Starlink and their ability to do direct to cell basically destroys that model, so the satellite stuff ended up not being a key feature they could push.

Apple is in such a tricky place now. They have to drip feed features into the iPhone because they don't exactly have any block-buster things to add to it. It's a mature technology and people are just buying them on upgrade cycles now - which is absurdly lucrative for them, but won't generate massive growth.

I think Cook has been relatively at peace with this strategy - he's near the end of his tenure, and got to overseas massive growth as the market developed - but whoever takes over is unlikely to want to just drip feed out features to keep sales bouncing along. So it will be interesting to see what they do from a strategic point of view when that happens.

The whole quantum AI is pretty obviously going to be the next step in sustaining the insane AI valuations. I bet Elon and Altman will start a quantum computing company once the market gets wobbly enough.

They will then be able to say the **magical stuff will happen** as soon as they get the quantum machine running - which they're really close to doing. Even being able to do press releases around stringing more and more q-bits together, will allow them to keep the hype going for another five years or so until they find the next thing to push the bubble (probably something like making quantum computers in space).

The Supreme Court would consider them less human than corporations.

If air could be owned, then air pollution is the destruction of property. I'm not sure they actually want that.

The largest ships are constrained by the size of the ports that can host them. The Suez Canal is the next biggest constraint. Panama is a distant 3rd.

They use compression ignition engines though (unless there are any gas turbine powered cargo ships...), so it is correct to refer to them as diesel ships.

One of the main motivations for ever larger cargo ships is that the square cube law gives you big savings in fuel efficiency the larger you go. It's why the largest ships are limited by the size of the panama canal - otherwise they'd go even bigger.

But if you don't have fuel costs then this ceases to be a motivation. Sure you get some savings in terms of reduced crew count with a bigger ship vs multiple small ones, but again, automation is dealing with that. There are also costs involved in having big ships, such as not being able to go to as many ports (so require more last mile transport), and the costs of updating the infrastructure they require.

Its entirely possible that a fleet of semi-autonomous sail powered vessels could be competitive with giant fuel powered cargo ships on many routes in the future.

It's not that some some people should be prevented from voting, but rather what they vote on should be significantly simplified. Evaluating the capabilities of a candidate who is significantly smarter than you are is very hard. That's what we're asking voters to do, and as expected, they do very poorly.

A better approach is to only ask questions that people can reliably answer. For example, since almost everyone knows whether their own life is getting better or worse, that should the one and only question on the ballot. If enough people agree that their life is getting worse, then the entire government is thrown out and a new one is randomly chosen.

Inflation is caused by the government's money printer. The government's money goes to the rich and well connected, shielding them from the effects of inflation. You on the other hand is not protected. In this way, the rich unfairly takes a larger slice of the pie than their contributions warrant.

Moreover, you must eat and therefore must acquiesce to the lower wages offered. In a real free market (as defined by economists), you would have the option to say "no" for as long as you'd like.

Waste of time. I'd either:
1. If no cart, jump the gate. It's not very tall.
2. If cart, just ram through the gate. I don't care if it breaks/sets off alarm and it's not my problem if it does.

I'm not scanning my receipt (which I also don't want) to leave just because grocery stores like Safeway have a failing business model that is trying to compensate with unnecessary technology instead of people. It's not my problem they can't/won't hire enough people. It's not my problem they can't design a halfway decent layout to a big store.

My god, you can't see the wood for the trees. What do you think the point of life is? To contribute towards turning humanity into some beige corporate productivity machine that maximises year on year growth rates? Dude, you need to get outside. Go and enjoy some music, some food and drink. Meet some random people and chew the fat.

Life is for discovering. It's like we have access to the most incredible procedurally generated video game, and given about 70 years to explore it, and all you want to do is wipe out 99% of the participants and have everyone sitting in a windowless grey room with a bunch of people who are EXACTLY the same as themselves to wait things out until they're dead.

Yes, you can. It is fairly easy to develop for Apple without using Apple products. You must *pay* Apple for the privilege to develop for them (which is a ridiculous concept) and you can't really do any testing without the Apple hardware, but it can be done.

Look, MMT really annoys me in its attempt to rebrand Keynesian fiscal stimulus as some kind of magical new discovery, but COVID certainly demonstrated that you can boost an economy in freefall if you just pour enormous amount of fiscal stimulus into it.

I mean, even the Neoliberal prophet Friedman was unequivocal about how the govt can create any amount of inflation if it really really wants too (helicopter money).

Now, whether that's what you should do, or the exact details of how you do it, or what the end goal of doing it, are all very debatable. But make no mistake, if the govt wants to go on an 'MMT' money splurge to stimulate the economy they most certainly can.

Fundamentally, you have to realise that having an economy with stable 0% real interest rates is an enormous privilege - it allows you to extend and pretend forever. All those crazy valuations you can just kick down the road because the holding cost of maintaining your position is zero. Personally I think the deregulated financial system requires either a reset (massive crash) or for this situation, and returning to the moribund ZIRP economy is probably the best of the two worst options. So when the AI bubble burst I think you will see a quick return to ZIRP, QE and then they will be able to raise (through QE) whatever level of debt is required to prop things up.

The post GFC was the new normal, and that is where they will try to steer things.

I appreciate that you seem to really care about your children. But as someone who was homeschooled, what are you going to do when you kids eventually have to interact with the shitshow that is the real world? I for sure do not want my children exposed to the bullies and psychopaths of the world, but on the other hand those people are everywhere in life. You have to learn to deal with them. I got burnt extremely badly early in my career because I assumed everyone was inherently decent, and my ability to judge character was limited.

My children now go to a state school with a very diverse and fundamentally decent community. There are still a broad range of people there. I've taught my kids to be generous and share, and for the most part they have very healthy relationships with other children. But they have also already encountered the kid who just takes takes takes. And the kid that manipulates the group emotionally to try to get all the attention. They are learning how to recognise these types of personalities, and how to integrate them into their lives without allowing them to dominate. I think these are really important skills. Even learning that sometimes you have to follow stupid rules that make no sense I think is an important skill (I spent a long time being frustrated about all the idiotic things around working a job).

In the end though we just have to use our best judgement - I won't know for another decade whether I've made the right choice. Anyway, just some things that you might want to consider.