> At the heart of this deal is Amazon’s custom chips: Graviton (a low-power CPU) and Trainium (an Nvidia competitor and AI accelerator chip). The Anthropic deal ...
Yeah, totally not desperately seeking investment to keep the party going ...
Because also look at the bond market... It's all coming to a crescendo including the global economic recession indicators which will be a cold sprinkler on the whole party.
Gemma4 being able to run on commodity hardware I think is the real win out of this. Pop the bubble. Settle the craziness and the claws. Let scientists and engineers tinker and improve in the background. Hopefully we can have GPUs be affordable for gaming again although I'm starting to think that will never happen.
Roughly, trying to keep it with minimal judgement, as hard as it is:
- since 79 Iran is marking the US and Israel as enemy countries. (The US due to the 50s revolution, Israel because of the Palestinian problem?)
- Iran has been developing nuclear weapons, and using dangerous rhetoric threatening those counties, form Iran perspective this is a defensive measure.
- after recent happenings in the Middle East Iran directly attacked Israel (non direct attacks have been commonplace for a while now) making Israel stand to w 12 day war.
- the conclusion of this war put both sides in an arms race.
- finally, the Iranian protests ending in supposedly 30k dead citizens within about a week changed the perspective of western intelligence about the risk of Iran. A regime willing to kill so many of its citizens and building nuclear weapons is a problem hard to ignore.
Negotiations were clearly
Stuck between the sides, forcing the obvious next stage.
This is simplified. But I think touches the core events.
The US examples you just gave happened decades (and in some cases hundreds) of years ago. The difference is that it's happening in China right now, and nobody cares.
No. This will get worse. A LOT worse. Remember all the discussion about how no human contact was a big improvement in the Waymo/Tesla/robotaxi discussions?
I wonder what political and trade consequences can be expected when oil actually does start seeing real decreased usage.
I mean one obvious thing has already started: governments taxing the sun (well, solar panels) pretty heavily (meaning above VAT), which I imagine will increase, and what the result will be. It's weird to say this, but solar panel smuggling is actually already a thing now. I used to have a Louis XIV painting somewhere ...
Oil appears to be 33% of total energy usage, and if you count all fossil fuels (oil, coal, nat. gas) it's 81%. What happens when that starts dropping.
Just to add to your point; The final energy demand is much less than the primary energy we produce due to the energy costs of extraction, refining, transportation, and inefficient end use.
According to Kingsmill Bond (great name btw) on Dave Roberts' Volts podcast if we magically could replace all fossil energy with renewables today the final energy use would only be ~30% of today's final energy use.
"We’re pouring, from our calculations, two thirds of the primary energy into the air and wasting it." - Kingsmill Bond
I'd argue that the decreased usage of oil has -to some degree- already started, e.g. Chinas crude imports have dropped the last two years in a row and yet they're still adding ever more EVs at a spectacular rate. There's practically no way but down for those numbers. It's mostly similar for the EU, though they're not as aggressive re EVs.
A pretty big one is the hollowing out of the international power oil producers have over the life of fossil importers; the middle east becomes pretty irrelevant for Latin America if you don't need their oil, and maybe Lebanon will avoid an US invasion if the newly discovered gas cannot find buyers anyway.
WOW. EU paper authorship is also back to 1980 levels. But still. I mean, I get that this is still better than the US, but wtf.
I wish Krugman had included that total papers has gone up spectacularly, and would not hide the absolute numbers. Plus I don't like that he's not being very clear on the distinction of social vs "hard" (positivist) sciences.
You could just have said "sane". I mean does anyone who thinks about it for 5 seconds seriously conclude Iran achieving anything in this war would be good for anyone?
What one wonders when seeing this ... when choosing between Iran and the US, are there really people dumb enough to pretend Iran winning is good for anyone?
Yeah, totally not desperately seeking investment to keep the party going ...
reply