Janeway on þe political economy of technology; costs of electricity from solar; electrifying long-haul trucking; very briefly noted; Krugman on debt, Yastreblyansky on David Brooks's inability to...
Regarding the new technology, this paragraph strikes me the most:
“We should pause, here, to recognize just how far Acemoglu and Johnson have departed from a central proposition of neoclassical economics.”
It’s a different day today in which many in the public domain were able to capitalize on the computer and then the dot com revolution from their own basement. Not so much anymore in the real world of today’s AI, rocketry revolution or neurological cognitive processing (as in Neuralink). Even if you were granted the technical package, the capital entry is extraordinarily steep. Last I checked for LLM work, to have a training database (minus the compute power) was at least $5000/mo. Not exactly a hobby with a promise.
I am queasy that governments can choose which and how new technologies are implemented. But many specific policy recommendations seem on target (better antitrust, re-balance taxes on cap-ex and labor, tax on internet ads) and should be amplified.
I fear that expectations of AI (LLM) are inflated this decade, and they will mostly be felt in the labor market by replacing customer service reps with stochastic parrots who infuriate customers. Many of those service reps will be in developing nations. And the CEO's won't care, because they jumped on the AI bandwagon just like they jumped on virtual reality, crypto, China, and dot-com. Their objective is to always tell equity analysts they are on the latest bandwagon, not to implement it wisely or profitably. I don't see the government's role in this malinvestment however.
Regarding the new technology, this paragraph strikes me the most:
“We should pause, here, to recognize just how far Acemoglu and Johnson have departed from a central proposition of neoclassical economics.”
It’s a different day today in which many in the public domain were able to capitalize on the computer and then the dot com revolution from their own basement. Not so much anymore in the real world of today’s AI, rocketry revolution or neurological cognitive processing (as in Neuralink). Even if you were granted the technical package, the capital entry is extraordinarily steep. Last I checked for LLM work, to have a training database (minus the compute power) was at least $5000/mo. Not exactly a hobby with a promise.
I am queasy that governments can choose which and how new technologies are implemented. But many specific policy recommendations seem on target (better antitrust, re-balance taxes on cap-ex and labor, tax on internet ads) and should be amplified.
I fear that expectations of AI (LLM) are inflated this decade, and they will mostly be felt in the labor market by replacing customer service reps with stochastic parrots who infuriate customers. Many of those service reps will be in developing nations. And the CEO's won't care, because they jumped on the AI bandwagon just like they jumped on virtual reality, crypto, China, and dot-com. Their objective is to always tell equity analysts they are on the latest bandwagon, not to implement it wisely or profitably. I don't see the government's role in this malinvestment however.
Seth Cotlar #9...What exactly is the point? Weinberger and Bush were both Tri members as far as I can tell.
Are the "Price of Electricity from New Power Plants" numbers adjusted for inflation? I couldn't tell from the chart.
I believe you...
Sorry: I believe so. DAMN YOU AUTOCORRECT!!