Of course, this in itself isn't without consequence hence Zelensky asking for evidence, pleading for calm as he tries to reduce the damage being done to Ukraine's economy ->
As Zelensky said “The best friend of our enemies is panic in our country. And all this information is just provoking panic and can’t help us."
X : Two front theory?
Me : Mostly peddled in US to try and convince those who have doubts over action in Ukraine that there is a wider agenda.
X : Role of China?
Me : So far, it talks of "legitimate" concerns over NATO expansion that must be "taken seriously and addressed" ...
... however, China is taking the position of peacemaker with a narrative on "resolve any differences through diplomacy" and emphasis placed on "Stop hyping up the tension".
It shouldn't be forgotten that China has significant economic, strategic and financial interests in Ukraine from agriculture to construction to military.
X : What's going to happen?
Me : No idea. Many paths possible.
X : Guess?
Me : China acts as the mediator for a solution between Russia and Ukraine. Russia benefits from closer defense ties with China, gets to portray the West as expansionist warmongers ...
... Ukraine benefits from further investment from China, a peaceful solution that maintains autonomy. China benefits from economic expansion in Ukraine i.e. the US can't play the Motor Sich card again. The West ends up with egg on its face and the EU is diminished.
X : Will that happen?
Me : As I said, no idea. But China doesn't want a war in the middle of its Olympics ... it wants to be visibly seen as the new global peacemaker / policeman.
"So far, he’s used the crisis to:" - astute by @TomTugendhat ... yep, Putin has already won this act, we've been outplayed and we need to up our game (and no, I don't mean threats of kinetic warfare. This is not about that) ->
X : Why do you think Putin has won this act?
Me : I think (aka I don't know, this is from my perspective on the situation) that he has achieved his goals but his goals are not what many commentators think they are -
X : No conflict?
Me : In competition there are always elements of collaboration, co-operation and conflict ... but I don't see how turning this situation to full scale conflict benefits Russia. Doesn't mean it won't happen but no-one has explained to me the reasons why it should.
X : Did you see "Why Russia Wants Ukraine" - by Peter Zeihan?
Me : Unfortunately and it's too easy for these people to go "Well, Russia is pulling back ... for now" i.e. "war" they state prediction is right, "no war" they claim prediction will be right.
On a completely different scale we've had over five years on this with Brexit ... "the economy will collapse immediately" ... data says it isn't ... "the economy will collapse soon" ... data says it isn't ... "the economy will collapse" ... etc etc.
The problem is that at some point the economy will collapse, at some point wars will occur, at some point ... the art of prediction is not just saying what will happen but more importantly when and why.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
X: Do you think it's possible to create perfect simulation of life, the universe and everything?
Me : Nope.
X : Why?
Me : First problem is uncertainty principles, life is littered with them. Assuming we get beyond that, the second problem is information ...
... if we assume information is finite then we can't create a single system that contains all the information that is out there because information is finite and any simulation must also contain a copy of the simulation which itself must contain a copy of the .... ad infinitum.
X : If information is infinite?
Me : Then we can create a simulation which contains a simulation which contains ... ad infinitum. But that's a bad thing.
X : Why?
Me : An infinite number of perfect simulations and one reality. What's the odds on you being real?
X : ?
Me : Zero.
It is very kind that people would invite me to their events, that is deeply appreciated. However, I'm only doing virtual events ... this isn't a covid thing, it's an environmental cost and the need for us all to adapt to a more virtual world thing. The past is the past.
X : Are you not meeting with people physically?
Me : Of course I am. Family, friends, local activities (shooting, swimming, sailing, restaurrants etc) but I'm not going to events physically when these can easily be done online. I'm certainly not travelling to an event ...
... my physical world has shrunk to the village and the surrounding environment. My virtual world ... well, that's global. I speak every day with people from all over the world.
The problem with the "crypto/web3 is the western version of giving power back to the people" is that it will create far higher levels of inequality (a feudal nightmare) and even undermine our entire system - blog.gardeviance.org/2013/11/a-spoi… - however, it's going to get much worse ...
... as China starts to lead the world in technology and economic power combined with much higher levels of equality ... the very idea of the success caused by our values in our Western collectives will be undermined creating a downward spiral ...
... we are so fscked because people have been playing games of soveriegnty that they don't understand (especially in technical fields) and frankly they are out of their depth -swardley.medium.com/mountains-matt…
I don't understand this. The obvious goal of Russia was to have negotiations with US (cutting Europe out of discussion) and to place itself as the middle man with China. It appears to have successfully achieved all its goals. To move from competition to conflict makes no sense ->
... UK which had the opportunity (as a consequence of brexit) to place itself in that middle man role (with the transition of power from West to East) appears to have reduced itself to irrelevance. This just seems like posturing for an internal audience ...
... so, I don't understand it. Is there something obvious that I'm missing because all I can see is the UK has been outplayed by Russia in pursuit of that middle man role ... or maybe it wasn't a focus for us ... I just don't get it.
X : Did you see the EC is trying to describe natural gas as green - euronews.com/green/2022/02/…
Me : Oh, yes. The hydrogen problem.
X : Eh?
Me : Most auto companies are in a pickle with threats from Tesla and Chinese players who have captured the materials market for batteries ...
Me : ... the unsurprising result is those auto companies are trying to sell a hydrogen story (e.g. fuel cells). Let us ignore the economics of this (not good) and just focus on the sustainability angle. You probably think we get hydrogen from electrolysis of water?
X : And?
Me : Well, last time I looked that was 0.1% of the market. Most of the market for production of hydrogen is natural gas. So, if you're planning an EV story based on sustainability / climate, can't get yourself into batteries (because much of supply chain is captured) then ...
The digital transformation market is estimated by some analysts to be worth $3 trillion by 2025 . At the same time, 84% of these efforts are likely to fail based on historic rates.
That's just total nonsense, not the size of the market but the failure ...
... I know Kotter's HBR review of corporate transformation efforts in 2000 was “huge sums spent and huge rates of failure” but that was 20 years ago. Today transformation is easy ...
... Take a map of any system. It's an imperfect map, you'll have submaps for each of the component and maybe submaps below that. But the lines are interfaces and long ago we all learnt how to do test driven development ...