Seems related to the explore/exploit problem, where the standard answer is related to the answer to the Secretary Problem[0], with the important caveat that it depends on whether "passing" on an opportunity legitimately makes it unavailable in future.
But another good answer is to open the door and trust the audience. The people who show up to the garage practice are perhaps not people who show up to buy tickets.
Adopting a scarcity mindset, generally, is a bad idea.
> The transition Apple and Tim Cook announced today is entirely different. No one’s hand was forced. There is nothing unpleasant.
Tim Cook is a master of supply chain logistics and was the perfect choice to scale Apple into global production.
As global supply chains collapse; as Apple fights for fab space with Nvidia, and loses; and as Apple releases products like the five-core Neo, which can monetize a stock of six-core phone chips with single-core faults, and they're still stocking out; transitioning to a CEO with a hardware background will enable a different set of strategic choices.
Mr. Cook is jumping before Apple is pushed, but that's not the same thing as a move being unforced.
No, if you ran Openclaw using Anthropic API as a provider, or had it use the ‘claude -p’ cli interface, you got an email from Anthropic threatening a ban unless you upgraded billing.
This was widely reported, and happened to me. You probably can’t reproduce it or see it in docs because they seem to have changed the policy.
2) I don't understand how you do what you claim with those. Like I have zero idea how one achieves "economic freedom for my family and community" with LLCs.
1) The argument in the article is that he will join the fight against AI when he wins the fight against LLCs.
2) You start an LLC and use it to build and sell a product customers want. Then you, your family, and your community, can economically untether from, for example, bosses who don’t care you’re autistic and need you to smile in meetings.
[1]: "That five per cent figure is somewhat deceptive, since just 3.5 per cent of that will go to core defence needs, while 1.5 per cent is to cover spending loosely related to national security — such as funding for maritime ports, airports and other infrastructure." - https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/article/pm-carney-declares-u...
Canada and America are neighbours. It is far cheaper for Canada to ship things south into a giant market than to ship east and west into our own, smaller markets. Trading with anyone else in the world entails much larger shipping expenses. This is structural, and applies to something exceeding 90% of our trade.
Carney is wrong, but he's not a fool. I read this as high-level virtue signalling to two audiences: Canadian left-patriots, who love to hate America while (unknowingly) free-riding on the benefits of the relationship. He has a vulnerable majority and is smart enough to plan ahead for the next election. Over half of Boomers support the Liberals, so he is playing to their emotions. He doesn't need to play to their pocket books, because they're mostly as rich as they're going to get, so he can trade economics for votes.
Second: he's signalling to China, and other international trade partners, that we are open for business. Carney has been struggling with pro-China (former) members of his caucus also being pro-slave-labour[0]. This is a message that, as he indicated in his Davos speech[1], he is willing to be flexible on Human Rights if the price is right.
America hasn't changed. When Trump is gone the American export market will remain.
Carney is wrong, but he's not a fool. He's amoral.
CAN rail to port to transPac/Asia is cheaper than rail/truck to US post tariff (most commodities now). Also it's ~75% of CAN exports goes to US, and it was only structurally cheaper under pre-Trump trade arrangements, now it's structurally more expensive.
Carney's just pointing out the obvious, structurally building economy around US integration/dependency has backfired and will continue to even after Trump for the simple reason VZ oil now challenges WCS, and (preferential/discounted crude to US) basically accounts for all CAN-US surplus. CAN would be in massive goods and services deficit otherwise - like 80B deficit. Canada was always massive real political economy loser in US-CAN trade, would have more favorite trade ledger with 100% domestic goods/service (i.e. 0 goods/service trade with US) and 100% global energy.
Reality for CAN is export to US is half commodity, half goods. Of the goods, US has strangled/killed CAN tech, aviation and soon auto and general braindrain. The commodity half, we've send them discount energy because we hedged on integration even though we could have structurally build infra to ship finished products to global markets (at higher margins). Like goods that CAN use to be competitive in, US lobbying / behind scenes shenanigans killed a lot commodity diversification efforts. Meanwhile, again, we have massive non energy goods and service deficit vs US. Goods+Service balance still in CAN favour ONLY because of energy pricing, which again US is getting discount on for CAN being retarded with pipleines not developing refined petro for decades. CAN now getting double fucked for acceding to US gas station arrangement, post VZ, that arrangement is expendable and again, VZ oil not going away after Trump.
>he is willing to be flexible on Human Rights if the price is right
Or Canada no longer needs toe line with US propaganda on human rights, that was always predicated on happy vassal privileges. Canada was always (A)moral, as in morals was always subject to highest bidder. US no longer wants to pay for LIOtard morals so no choice but look elsewhere and adopt next most profitable morals.
> CAN rail to port to transPac/Asia is cheaper than rail/truck to US post tariff (most commodities now). Also it's ~75% of CAN exports goes to US, and it was only structurally cheaper under pre-Trump trade arrangements, now it's structurally more expensive.
The Port of Vancouver’s sulphur export capacity is prebooked for several years. Even with the sulphur boom caused by the Hormuz blockage we are unable to ship it out, but we can rail it out (sorta — cars are booked up too). Many such cases.
Shipping logistics are cheaper _when they work_, and we just went through a shipping demand destruction cycle in 2020 _and_ shipping insurance rates are going up because of naval conflict.
> half commodities half goods
Strong agree. We need secondary processing. The decades-long Liberal push for a postindustrial economy has completely failed.
But another good answer is to open the door and trust the audience. The people who show up to the garage practice are perhaps not people who show up to buy tickets.
Adopting a scarcity mindset, generally, is a bad idea.
[0]:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secretary_problem
reply