Recent posts

#31

Off the Record / Re: The AI dooooooom thread

Last post by The Minsky Moment - January 01, 2026, 03:19:35 PM

Sounds like all of academia.  We're taught  what we already collectively know, which was acquired in the past.  Libraries are full of books that were written in the past.

In academia, at least when it is working properly, books and articles are used as a touchpoint for discussion and further analysis.  The purpose is not to train people to just reproduce back what is written but to spark ideas, to build upon existing knowledge and push further.  That is very different from building a probability engine to predict the next set of characters based on a matrix of how those characters have been used in past publications.

#32

Off the Record / Re: The Off Topic Topic

Last post by The Brain - January 01, 2026, 02:25:19 PM

Happy New Year!

#33

Off the Record / Re: Are we in the opening scen...

Last post by Sheilbh - January 01, 2026, 01:19:30 PM

But I don't think it's good to lean too far in this  "anti imperialist" direction.
Looking at the big picture global trends are not great this past decade.
And not at all thinking about what is best for me /Britain  here but humanity overall (in which I do think there's a huge overlap in a lot of things except the very particular stuff about me becoming a little bit rich)

I've said before but on a lot of stuff I am basically an old school Third Worldist (Edit: I went on holiday to Indonesia and literally visited Bandung to see the museum of the Bandung Conference and was, weirdly, interviewed by Japanese journalists who were there because it was the 70th anniversary ) But I take your point and I'm not necessarily celebrating this or saying that what's coming is better. I'm saying that the perspective from Europe is of an ending (which I think is happening) and of threat - but I don't think that's the sense everywhere.

But in terms of apocalypse I think do fundamentally fall on the line that it's not apocalypse it's regime change, it's a period of transition which is inevitably destabilising. Part of mourning the loss should also be that we're clear eyed about the iniquities it was built on as that allows us to have a way of approaching the new. I think the big failure of our system was that it was a closed shop - with the unique exception of post-Communist Europe - we never had a development model that could help the poor or the rest of the world and we never democratised power in the institutions we built to manage the world order. It was always 1990 (at best) which in turn reflected the flaws of the previous order (such as Europe's privileged position).

Although FWIW if I was to go full Copernicus (please don't quote this at me in the future ) I actually think the era we're heading into will be one of a fusion of state and corporate power. In some areas, I think that will proceed through the dismantling of state power and subjugation of political power to the economy and corporate interests (who are delivering the objectives of the "state" in its place). In other areas I think it'll take the form of a minimal state delivering needs to a level necessary to maintain some popular consent, accompanied with looting by political-corporate elites. I think in others, primarily the Communist party states like China, there will still be a mid-20th century vision of the state and political power which will subjugate corporate power to political ends but that the top ends of all three will be exceptionally blurred.

My hope is, as ever, popular sovereignty and the assertion of the supremacy of politics (Edit: and building state capacity) - but I'm not sure I see much sign of it happening.

#34

Off the Record / Re: Are we in the opening scen...

Last post by Jacob - January 01, 2026, 01:04:49 PM

Too bad we can't ignore the US impact on climate change.

I saw an article the that claimed that more than 90% of the US' new energy capacity in 2025 was renewable, in spite of Trump's efforts.

#35

Off the Record / Re: Are we in the opening scen...

Last post by Josquius - January 01, 2026, 01:02:52 PM

Sure - that concerns you.

My point was that it's a question of perspective. I ultimately think the perspective that we're in the intro of a post-apocalyptic movie is one that's basically quite limited. I suspect from Africa it looks very much like BAU, from India and China and Asia more generally I think there are reasons for optimism for many.

A lot of Indians too it's worth noting.
And Chinese though not many of them in China for some mysterious reason.

I do get your point that when having food on the table was a concern in the recent past a lot of people will be focussed on the here and now and what's best for them.
The whole Putin deal of selling rights for prosperity and security.

But I don't think it's good to lean too far in this  "anti imperialist" direction.
Looking at the big picture global trends are not great this past decade.
And not at all thinking about what is best for me /Britain  here but humanity overall (in which I do think there's a huge overlap in a lot of things except the very particular stuff about me becoming a little bit rich)

#36

Off the Record / Re: The Off Topic Topic

Last post by Jacob - January 01, 2026, 12:54:17 PM

Happy New Year languishites

#37

Off the Record / Re: Are we in the opening scen...

Last post by The Minsky Moment - January 01, 2026, 12:26:29 PM

Temporary is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. It's been 5 centuries.

Global manufacturing was concentrated in China and India until the late 18th century.  So the ascendancy of the world between California and the Elbe runs from about 1750-2010.  Not an insignificant period, but in the context of millennia, a couple hundred years or so can still fairly be called temporary and anomalous.

#38

Off the Record / Re: Are we in the opening scen...

Last post by Sheilbh - January 01, 2026, 12:24:47 PM

It's less than half China's and has been consistently falling for twenty years. It's two thirds of its peak which was about 2005. The signs are that is accelerating and a significant part of that is because of Chinese tech and manufacturing increasing the roll-out of solar. China's making energy transition possible at scale and cheap.

Also to be kind of blunt the laggard in the G7 is Canada The UK, France and Germany all peaked in the 70s. Italy peaked around 2005 (like the US and Japan) and all of those countries have been on strong downward trajectories since then (some from a higher starting point than others). For example just to look at the last twenty years as I say the US has cut emissions to about two thirds of 2005, so has Germany and France, Japan's at about three quarters of where it was and Italy and the UK are at or below 60% of 2005 levels. Canada is still at between 90-95% of 2005 emissions.

But the bigger point is in that period China's emissions more than doubled - it is currently emitting more than the entire OECD. So, yeah, I think focusing there is important - and there are big positive signs.

Edit: Again I think this is the de-centring to an extent. On climate - which I think is a canary in the coal mine to an extent - the most important decisions for the planet will be from Beijing and Delhi, not Brussels and DC. It's the first issue where that's really clear but it won't be the last.

#39

Off the Record / Re: Are we in the opening scen...

Last post by crazy canuck - January 01, 2026, 12:08:08 PM

Too bad we can't ignore the US impact on climate change.

#40

Off the Record / Re: Are we in the opening scen...

Last post by Sheilbh - January 01, 2026, 12:05:50 PM

Temporary is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. It's been 5 centuries.

Fair

But I think in part I'd put it like that because I think that is an/the epochal shift that's happening right now and is driving a lot of the other disruption as change. The post Cold War settlement was always likely to be temporary and it has lasted about 20-30 years depending on your view. Its ending is being experienced I think in some areas (I think particularly for the leadership class) as quite a wrenching shift and almost a trauma. I think part of that is possibly because it hints at this wider, far bigger shift. I think there's a degree of averting our eyes from that big change to focus on, to nick MacMillan's phrase, "little local difficulties".

FWIW I wasn't really thinking of "world leader" stuff but the orientation of Europe so I totally agree wiht you. Power is absolutely part of that. But I'd argue that basically until the 18th century Europe was Eurasian. It was oriented to the Medterranean and the Near East with an Atlantic fringe. From the 18th century to the current point I think we've been primarily oriented to the Atlantic with an accompanying marginalisation/peripherisation of the Med and South East Europe. I think that era is over. I don't think we'll all suddenly ping back, it'll be a process - and my suspicion is Europe may actually end up splitting between those still oriented around the Atlantic and those looking more to Eurasia. I also slightly suspect that the states that basically arbitrage/connect Europe with those wider networks may be ones that do quite well. For example, like Hungary and Turkiye.

On the "world leader" point thought it's not totally what I meant I do think there'll be a jarring experience for Europe as we are peripherised. In my view we've already been since 1990 a priileged periphery of American power, but as I say I suspect we'll divide but I think in both cases Europe will become more and more clearly the periphery (as it historically was - to the "world leader" thing - for much of its history) rather than the core. With all the symptoms that produces and that we've anatomised in other societies. I suspect we are at the start of a period that will de-centre Europe quite radically.

I don't doubt qualify of life has improved a lot in those countries and that is a good thing.
What concerns me about them is their slide into fascism.
This happening in one country is bad enough.
But happening everywhere.... Real 1984 level potential.

Sure - that concerns you.

My point was that it's a question of perspective. I ultimately think the perspective that we're in the intro of a post-apocalyptic movie is one that's basically quite limited. I suspect from Africa it looks very much like BAU, from India and China and Asia more generally I think there are reasons for optimism for many.

I think this is even the case on climate. The signs are thre that China's fossil fuel use has peaked (it fell this year). Over three quarters of the world's clean energy patent applications are from China. 25% of emerging markets are now ahead of the US on electrification (end use) and solar generation - overwhelmingly driven by cheap "overproduced" Chinese poducts. And China's solar manufacturing capacity in 2025 was 65% ahead of where it needed to be by 2030 to meet the IEA's Net Zero Roadmap. As I say the key question is whether India grows as China did with a heavy, dirty phase (in which case we're all screwed) or if they can jump straight to where China are now (possibly using their tech) and grow through renewables. The linking of climate and the lifting of hundreds of millions out of poverty is the great challenge we have.

If your frame is Europe unwinding climate commitments or Trump then things look bad. I think if you look more widely then the picture's actually better than anticipated at this stage (the biggest polluter peaking earlier, manufacturing more than expected for less and being able to export that tech and knowledge). Of course the state doing that is one that is revisionist, aggressive, oppressive and damanging to Western interests. But I think we have to kind of hold both of those ideas together or at least in tension.