Профиль

As has monopoly capital.

But also is the small entrepreneur a consumer or producer? Again, Marx had things to say.

Marx and his followers might disagree.

It is a sort of competition — as I understand it that’s how capitalism is supposed to work — but I agree that a single big winner is unlikely.

But I’m unconvinced by “the little guy will be the big winner from big tech” as a working hypothesis.

I think that’s debatable. I guess also the quote is vague enough — “much of … “ — that it can cover a wide range of outcomes. It’s not that different to “some of”, which I wouldn’t argue against. “Most of” I’m more sceptical about.

It would go against the general pattern of capitalism for the last several decades. The question could be turned around: why would this happen? The article doesn’t give a strong argument or present evidence in favour of the thesis beyond ‘AI makes setting up a small business easier’.

It could, but is it likely? I suspect not.

Spending too much time with this thing is going to rewire our brains in subtle and possible unpleasant ways.

That settles it: the use of “the distinction matters” is a clear marker of Claude’s language use. This is a genuine step forward.

70% at 5AM. Might get up for it.

Checking this hourly.

It’s a pretty stacked opening paragraph.

Must be at least three days since I last saw a chart of debt/wealth/assets to GDP.

Financialisation: rarely discussed.

Only facts from the Economist.

I don’t think that’s quite right. There is flexibility under PSNFL to increase borrowing for investment, with a bit of creativity around balance sheets.

I suppose we should be thankful that the rise in gilt yields is not attributed to Burnham and Healey themselves.

Good if not very encouraging lunch with the FT, with the head of the Met Office. www.ft.com/content/bde8...

There’s an interesting tension between “there’s no way Grok can catch up and compete with Claude” and “Chinese/open source models are not far from the frontier and are much cheaper”.